diff options
| author | Richard Smith <richard-llvm@metafoo.co.uk> | 2017-12-14 15:16:18 +0000 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Richard Smith <richard-llvm@metafoo.co.uk> | 2017-12-14 15:16:18 +0000 |
| commit | 96881be75c9092dabbb19ccae56e64af7ad29e90 (patch) | |
| tree | c9b12abbcccd5cf6d47b291289fbf7ba338cbdff /test/SemaTemplate | |
| parent | f19939b529be1bdd8adce0ff0e648ab3ae0faa6a (diff) | |
| download | clang-96881be75c9092dabbb19ccae56e64af7ad29e90.tar.gz | |
[c++20] P0515R3: Parsing support and basic AST construction for operator <=>.
Adding the new enumerator forced a bunch more changes into this patch than I
would have liked. The -Wtautological-compare warning was extended to properly
check the new comparison operator, clang-format needed updating because it uses
precedence levels as weights for determining where to break lines (and several
operators increased their precedence levels with this change), thread-safety
analysis needed changes to build its own IL properly for the new operator.
All "real" semantic checking for this operator has been deferred to a future
patch. For now, we use the relational comparison rules and arbitrarily give
the builtin form of the operator a return type of 'void'.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@320707 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Diffstat (limited to 'test/SemaTemplate')
| -rw-r--r-- | test/SemaTemplate/cxx1z-fold-expressions.cpp | 16 |
1 files changed, 16 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/test/SemaTemplate/cxx1z-fold-expressions.cpp b/test/SemaTemplate/cxx1z-fold-expressions.cpp index aefee92f64..383f51df21 100644 --- a/test/SemaTemplate/cxx1z-fold-expressions.cpp +++ b/test/SemaTemplate/cxx1z-fold-expressions.cpp @@ -1,4 +1,5 @@ // RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++1z -verify %s +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++2a -verify %s template<typename ...T> constexpr auto sum(T ...t) { return (... + t); } template<typename ...T> constexpr auto product(T ...t) { return (t * ...); } @@ -76,3 +77,18 @@ template<typename T, typename ...Ts> constexpr decltype(auto) apply(T &t, Ts ... return (t.*....*ts); } static_assert(&apply(a, &A::b, &A::B::c, &A::B::C::d, &A::B::C::D::e) == &a.b.c.d.e); + +#if __cplusplus > 201703L +// The <=> operator is unique among binary operators in not being a +// fold-operator. +// FIXME: This diagnostic is not great. +template<typename ...T> constexpr auto spaceship1(T ...t) { return (t <=> ...); } // expected-error {{expected expression}} +template<typename ...T> constexpr auto spaceship2(T ...t) { return (... <=> t); } // expected-error {{expected expression}} +template<typename ...T> constexpr auto spaceship3(T ...t) { return (t <=> ... <=> 0); } // expected-error {{expected expression}} +#endif + +// The GNU binary conditional operator ?: is not recognized as a fold-operator. +// FIXME: Why not? This seems like it would be useful. +template<typename ...T> constexpr auto binary_conditional1(T ...t) { return (t ?: ...); } // expected-error {{expected expression}} +template<typename ...T> constexpr auto binary_conditional2(T ...t) { return (... ?: t); } // expected-error {{expected expression}} +template<typename ...T> constexpr auto binary_conditional3(T ...t) { return (t ?: ... ?: 0); } // expected-error {{expected expression}} |