aaron.ballman accepted this revision.
aaron.ballman added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
LGTM
================
Comment at: clang/test/SemaCXX/source_location.cpp:796
+static_assert(S(0).i == S{0}.i);
+static_assert(S(0).j == S{0}.i);
+}
----------------
cor3ntin wrote:
> tbaeder wrote:
> > aaron.ballman wrote:
> > > cor3ntin wrote:
> > > > aaron.ballman wrote:
> > > > > Shouldn't this test fail because `i != j`?
> > > > >
> > > > > Can you add a test that demonstrates we've corrected the source
> > > > > location information for diagnostics?
> > > > They should all be equal!
> > > >
> > > > > Can you add a test that demonstrates we've corrected the source
> > > > > location information for diagnostics?
> > > >
> > > > Hum, i was planning to do that in https://reviews.llvm.org/D155175. I
> > > > can try to think of something there!
> > > > They should all be equal!
> > >
> > > Whaaaaa? Shouldn't `i == 790 && j == 791`?
> > IIUC, they are evaluated as part of the constructor, so the values should
> > be 795 or 796. Maybe that can be changed to
> > ```
> > static_assert(S(0).i == S{0}.i == 796);
> > ```
> > ?
> This is https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/2631.html
Oh yeah! Thank you for the reminder, that makes sense now. A comment reminding
other readers might not be a bad idea.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D155573/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D155573
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
