================
@@ -6,20 +6,20 @@ struct A {
};
static_assert(A{1, 2, 3, 4, 5} == A{1, 2, 3, 4, 5});
-static_assert(A{1, 2, 3, 4, 5} == A{0, 2, 3, 4, 5}); // expected-error
{{failed}}
-static_assert(A{1, 2, 3, 4, 5} == A{1, 0, 3, 4, 5}); // expected-error
{{failed}}
-static_assert(A{1, 2, 3, 4, 5} == A{1, 2, 0, 4, 5}); // expected-error
{{failed}}
-static_assert(A{1, 2, 3, 4, 5} == A{1, 2, 3, 0, 5}); // expected-error
{{failed}}
-static_assert(A{1, 2, 3, 4, 5} == A{1, 2, 3, 4, 0}); // expected-error
{{failed}}
+static_assert(A{1, 2, 3, 4, 5} == A{0, 2, 3, 4, 5}); // expected-error
{{failed}} expected-note {{evaluates to}}
----------------
sethp wrote:
Actually, on second thought, I think I'd prefer to leave these under-specified
(since they're really checking the behavior of the default `operator==`).
I did go ahead and add a test specifically for some more complicated types in
[2fd5fc4](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/74852/commits/2fd5fc464868a682cb4b66ea4e97a6a7100ab120)
, though, to give us a few specific examples to focus on for discussion
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/74852
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
