rsmith added inline comments.

================
Comment at: clang/lib/AST/ExprConstant.cpp:5615-5627
+    if (canEvalMSConstexpr || isMSConstexpr) {
+      // Diagnose invalid usage of [[msvc::constexpr]] function
+      bool isConstructor = isa<CXXConstructorDecl>(Definition);
+      if (canEvalMSConstexpr) { // !isMSConstexpr
+        Info.FFDiag(CallLoc, diag::note_constexpr_invalid_function, 1)
+            << /*IsConstexpr*/ 0 << isConstructor << Definition;
+        Info.Note(Definition->getLocation(), diag::note_declared_at);
----------------
Given that the intended use case is for usage behind the scenes in the standard 
library, I don't think we should be changing our diagnostic output at all here. 
If the library, as an implementation detail, marks a non-`constexpr` function 
as `[[msvc::constexpr]]`, we shouldn't tell the user to add 
`[[msvc::constexpr]]` to their code to allow it to be called, after all, the 
annotation is an implementation detail of the MS standard library.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D134475/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D134475

_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to