aaron.ballman added a comment.
In D146376#4244355 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D146376#4244355>,
@Krishna-13-cyber wrote:
> - Updated with release note
> - I had tried adding more text to the `expected-error` but it already gives a
> diagnostic of `static assertion failed due to requirement` currently. If I
> try additions to `{{failed}}` then we get **error diagnostics expected but
> not seen**.
Ah, sorry for being unclear! We didn't mean add an additional `expected-error`
comment, but to modify the ones you have. e.g.,
Currently:
static_assert(true && false, ""); // expected-error {{failed}}
Changes to:
static_assert(true && false, ""); // expected-error {{static assertion failed
due to requirement 'true && false'}}
(or whatever the actual expected full text of the diagnostic is.)
This helps the reviewers to make sure that the diagnostic behavior isn't
regressing in surprising ways but pass all our tests because we're only looking
for the word `failed` and considering that passing.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D146376/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D146376
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
