cjdb added a comment. In D147717#4248989 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D147717#4248989>, @erichkeane wrote:
> @cjdb has been running some GDB test suites against our compiler: I am > wondering if we could ask him to try the consteval ones too before we set > this? A lot of that work is manual because I need to interpret LIT messages to know wether something is a config error (e.g. missing `// expected-no-diagnostics`), a difference in opinion between compilers (e.g. GCC says it's an error and Clang says it's a note, reporting diagnostics on different lines, etc.), or actually an error in Clang. I won't have time to check this week, but perhaps next week if the test set isn't too large (failing that, I'll at least try to get you `// expected-no-diagnostics` for improved confidence). Does this timeframe seem acceptable? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D147717/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D147717 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
