ilya-biryukov added a comment. In D148924#4320694 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D148924#4320694>, @shafik wrote:
> The paper also uses the term constexpr compatible which has been replaced > with constexpr suitable and not sure if that has any practical effect here. They seem to be different term, `constexpr-suitable` does not actually replace `constexpr-compatible`. The former refers to more basic checks (i.e. "not a coroutine", "not a ctor or dtor for a class with virtual bases"), the latter only pops up in context of defaulted functions. Constexpr-compatible has been removed completely in P2448r2 <https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2022/p2448r2.html>, but I think it's only applicable in C++23 and this change aims to implement C++20. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D148924/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D148924 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
