hokein wrote: > @hokein Independently of the direction taken I'd like to see a better > diagnostic than "atomic constraint using an undocumented/cryptic trait that > is not in the code is not satisfied". > So when we try to print atomic constraints, we should do something more user > friendly for is_deducible. (`note_atomic_constraint_evaluated_to_false` in > `diagnoseWellFormedUnsatisfiedConstraintExpr` AFAICT). It might be a bit > ad-hoc, but I think it's worth doing
I agree with you -- having a well-described diagnostic message is better and clearer. I'm happy to improve it once we settle on the final implementation approach (the current diagnostic `because '__is_deducible(AFoo, Foo<int>)' evaluated to false` seems okay to me. GCC also emits similar diagnostics). By the way, other parts of this patch are ready for review. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/89358 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
