Endill added a comment. In D147920#4258680 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D147920#4258680>, @shafik wrote:
> In D147920#4257369 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D147920#4257369>, @Endill wrote: > >> I think I haven't stressed it enough, but this whole test is copied from >> dr244, which is written by Richard. > > Understood, I appreciate the patience in explaining what I am missing. > Sometimes that means things could be explained better. No worries. Those DRs are involved enough that it could be challenging to understand the context quickly. ================ Comment at: clang/test/CXX/drs/dr3xx.cpp:1492 + // This is technically ill-formed; G is looked up in 'N::' and is not found. + // Rejecting this seems correct, but most compilers accept, so we do also. + f.N::F::~G(); // expected-error {{qualified destructor name only found in lexical scope; omit the qualifier to find this type name by unqualified lookup}} ---------------- shafik wrote: > Endill wrote: > > shafik wrote: > > > You say we accept the next line but it has an `expected-error` on it? > > It's an error because of `-pedantic-errors`. It's a warning by default. > That makes a lot more sense, I was wondering what was I missing. > > Can we note that in the comment b/c it is pretty confusing otherwise. > > I wonder if there is a good reason to not make this ill-formed by default? > Worth a bug report. > Can we note that in the comment b/c it is pretty confusing otherwise. I get where you come from, but all DR testing is done under `-pedantic-errors`. Do you have ideas for a more systematic approach? One of the options is to use `-Wpedantic` instead, but I expect that to require a decent amount of mechanical replacements for existing tests, which LLVM community doesn't appreciate, as far as I know. I'll edit the comment if we won't come up with something better. > I wonder if there is a good reason to not make this ill-formed by default? > Worth a bug report. Does the fact that we accepted such code since (at least) 3.5 through 10 make for a good reason? https://godbolt.org/z/16GYWh3Po Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D147920/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D147920 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
