Mordante added a comment. In D152003#4531404 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D152003#4531404>, @Fznamznon wrote:
>> should we try to land that today? > > I'm not sure. It causes failures in libc++ testing: > > Failed Tests (3): > llvm-libc++-shared.cfg.in :: std/ranges/range.access/end.pass.cpp > llvm-libc++-shared.cfg.in :: std/ranges/range.access/rbegin.pass.cpp > llvm-libc++-shared.cfg.in :: std/ranges/range.access/rend.pass.cpp > > I haven't figured out why. Trying to compile: > > #include <ranges> > > using RangeCREndT = decltype(std::ranges::crend); > static_assert(!std::is_invocable_v<RangeCREndT, int (&)[]>); > > fails with this patch only using libc++, libstdc++ is fine. I'm not sure it > is my misunderstanding, bug in the patch or bug in libc++. What do you mean with libstdc++ is fine? The reduced tests passed with libcstd++ https://godbolt.org/z/nh9v8cedr The change seems to break libc++. Based on the bug and this patch I am correct that "transformation" of an array of unknown bounds to anarray of known bounds only happens with an explicit cast and not implicitly? I have a strong suspicion that this patch changes the test to #include <ranges> using RangeCREndT = decltype(std::ranges::crend); static_assert(!std::is_invocable_v<RangeCREndT, int (&)[1]>); // no longer an array of unknown bound so the assert fails Can you look at the AST output of the failed example to verify my hypothesis? When you think libc++ is wrong can you then post this AST? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D152003/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D152003 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
