tbaeder added a comment. In D155572#4542484 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D155572#4542484>, @aaron.ballman wrote:
> In D155572#4541403 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D155572#4541403>, @tbaeder wrote: > >> In D155572#4539457 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D155572#4539457>, >> @aaron.ballman wrote: >> >>> Is this intended to not handle all the binary operators in this patch? >> >> Yes, just a subset for now. >> >>> And also, is this intended to only impact initializers? >> >> Yes, due to problems with (non-)initializers. This should work after >> https://reviews.llvm.org/D156027 though. > > Okay, thanks for confirmation! The only outstanding thing is adding coverage > for typedef types: > > using Frobble = float; > using Bobble = _Complex float; > using Gobble = _Complex Frobble; > > constexpr _Complex Frobble A = { 13.0, 2.0 }; > constexpr Bobble B = { 2.0, 1.0 }; > constexpr Gobble C = { 3.0, 5.0 }; > constexpr _Complex float D = A - B; > constexpr _Complex float E = C - B; > static_assert(__real(D) == 11.0, ""); > static_assert(__imag(D) == 1.0, ""); > static_assert(__real(E) == 1.0, ""); > static_assert(__imag(E) == 4.0, ""); https://godbolt.org/z/59c8Y4sqz - Is that even supposed to work? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D155572/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D155572 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
