yichi170 added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/test/SemaCXX/offsetof.cpp:106 +int x3[__builtin_offsetof(struct X2, X2::static_a) == 0 ? 1 : -1]; // expected-error{{no member named 'static_a'}} +int x4[__builtin_offsetof(struct X2, X2::X2) == 0 ? 1 : -1]; // expected-error{{no member named 'X2'}} + ---------------- hubert.reinterpretcast wrote: > aaron.ballman wrote: > > yichi170 wrote: > > > aaron.ballman wrote: > > > > There's one more test I'd like to see: > > > > ``` > > > > struct S { > > > > int Foo; > > > > }; > > > > > > > > template <typename Ty> > > > > void func() { > > > > static_assert(__builtin_offsetof(Ty, Ty::Foo) == 0, ""); > > > > } > > > > > > > > void inst() { > > > > func<S>(); > > > > } > > > > ``` > > > It would get the compile error in the current patch, but I think it > > > should be compiled without any error, right? > > Correct, that should be accepted: https://godbolt.org/z/1f6a9Yaxa > Should expect this to pass too: > ``` > template <typename T> > struct Z { > static_assert(!__builtin_offsetof(T, template Q<T>::x)); > }; > > struct A { > template <typename T> using Q = T; > int x; > }; > > Z<A> za; > ``` Wow. Does it mean we cannot simply parse the identifier, `::`, `.` and brackets in `__builtin_offsetof`? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D157201/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D157201 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits