thakis added a comment.
Cool, lgtm. Maybe we'll have to downgrade this to a warning eventually since cl
allows it, but for now let's see how this goes.
================
Comment at: test/SemaCXX/dllimport.cpp:1269
@@ +1268,3 @@
+ virtual ~PR26506_test2() {}
+ constexpr PR26506_test2() {} // expected-error{{constructor cannot be marked
constexpr}}
+};
----------------
majnemer wrote:
> thakis wrote:
> > nit: I feel diagnostics are easier to understand if their text is
> > stand-alone and not spread across diag and its note. That is "dllimported
> > constructors cannot be marked constexpr" "note: dllimported here" or
> > something like this (this also helps with the mythical localization of
> > diagnostics).
> I chose this style because it is most consistent with our diagnostic for a
> `constexpr` constructor for a class with virtual bases.
Hm, I suppose I feel we should change those too then :-) (but that's a
discussion for somewhere else then)
http://reviews.llvm.org/D16951
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
