================
@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ constexpr wrap_int add(wrap_int a, wrap_int b) {
}
constexpr no_trap_int sub(no_trap_int a, no_trap_int b) {
- return a - b; // expected-note {{-2147483649 is outside the range of
representable values}}
+ return a - b; // expected-note {{overflow on type 'no_trap_int' (aka
'__ob_trap int') would trap at runtime}}
----------------
mizvekov wrote:
Maybe explain why that's not valid in constexpr evaluation, instead of saying
what would happen at runtime.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/183826
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
