tahonermann added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/test/Lexer/cxx1z-trigraphs.cpp:24
// expected-error@11 {{}} expected-warning@11 {{trigraph ignored}}
-// expected-error@13 {{failed}} expected-warning@13 {{trigraph ignored}}
expected-note@13 {{evaluates to ''?' == '#''}}
+// expected-error@13 {{failed}} expected-warning@13 {{trigraph ignored}}
expected-note@13 {{evaluates to '63 == 35'}}
// expected-error@16 {{}}
----------------
aaron.ballman wrote:
> I think the original diagnostic was actually more understandable as it
> relates more closely to what's written in the static assertion. I could
> imagine something like `evaluates to '?' (63) == '#' (35)` would also be
> reasonable.
I agree. I would also be ok with printing the integer value as primary with the
character as secondary:
evaluates to 63 ('?') == 35 ('#')
There are two kinds of non-printable characters:
# Control characters (including new-line)
# character values that don't correspond to a character (e.g., lone trailing
characters or invalid code unit values).
For the first case, I would support printing them as either C escapes or
universal-character-names. e.g.,
evaluates to 0 ('\0') == 1 (\u0001)
For the second case, I would support printing them as C hex escapes. e.g,
evaluates to -128 ('\x80') == -123 ('\x85')
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D155610/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D155610
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
