aaron.ballman added a comment. In D108211#3748595 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D108211#3748595>, @tbaeder wrote:
> From looking at the output in the test cases, the additional diagnostics > seem unnecessary to me in almost all cases...? +1; my observation is that the extra note repeats information because the new note says what the LHS and the RHS of the expression evaluates to. I could see this new note being more useful in a case like: `static_assert(sizeof(foo) + sizeof(bar) == sizeof(baz) / 12);` where there are multiple `sizeof` expressions involved and we could note what each constituent part evaluates to, but I'm not certain it's worth the extra complexity to go to those lengths (I'd want to see real world code where this would really help). Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D108211/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D108211 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
