cor3ntin marked 4 inline comments as done.
cor3ntin added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/test/SemaCXX/cxx2b-deducing-this.cpp:19
+
+ void g(this auto) const; // expected-error{{a function with an explicit
object parameter cannot be const}}
+ void h(this auto) &; // expected-error{{a function with an explicit object
parameter cannot be reference-qualified}}
----------------
cor3ntin wrote:
> aaron.ballman wrote:
> > We've got an inconsistency with our diagnostic wording; this one says
> > `const` explicitly, but the other ones say `have qualifiers`. Should these
> > be unified?
> You prefer "const-qualified"?
I'm now reusing the same code path we had for static, and same diagnostic
message
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D140828/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D140828
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
