================ @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@ +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -verify -std=c++98 %s +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -verify -std=c++11 %s +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -verify -std=c++14 %s +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -verify -std=c++17 %s +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -verify -std=c++20 %s +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -verify -std=c++23 %s +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -verify -std=c++2c %s ---------------- Endilll wrote:
Since newer language modes do not necessarily subsume older ones (think dynamic exception specification), and have disabled code paths, I'm not sure we want to be smart about which language modes to test. If we're going to be smart, then yes, 98, 11, and 2c sounds like a good compromise. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/78898 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
