mclow.lists closed this revision.
mclow.lists added a comment.
Committed as 337885 after changing `constexpr` -> `TEST_CONSTEXPR_CXX14`
https://reviews.llvm.org/D49773
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
EricWF accepted this revision.
EricWF added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
Otherwise, I'm quite happy with this patch.
The only downside I see is if `testComparisons6` fails, it will report the
source of the failure as being in the header, and not provide
mclow.lists added a comment.
> Can they be non-constexpr in C++11 and still function?
Sure. I'll fix that.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D49773
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
EricWF added a comment.
Some of this stuff is marked `constexpr` despite it requiring C++14 constexpr
semantics. Can they be non-constexpr in C++11 and still function? Or should
the header explicitly require C++14 to be included?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D49773
mclow.lists added a comment.
Usage looks like this:
AssertComparisons6AreNoexcept();
AssertComparisons6ReturnBool();
static_assert(testComparisons6Values( 5U, 5U), "");
static_assert(testComparisons6Values( 5U, 10U), "");
static_assert(testComparisons6Values(10U, 5U), "");
mclow.lists created this revision.
mclow.lists added reviewers: ldionne, EricWF.
As I've been plowing through the `` stuff, I found myself writing tests
to make sure that the comparisons for a bunch of different types are "sane".
So I factored them out into something that can be used over and
