<table border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="8">
    <tr>
        <th>Issue</th>
        <td>
            <a href=https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/119413>119413</a>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <th>Summary</th>
        <td>
            [libc++] Test local_info, sys_info and leap_second_info inside constexpr
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
      <th>Labels</th>
      <td>
            libc++,
            chrono
      </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
      <th>Assignees</th>
      <td>
            mordante
      </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
      <th>Reporter</th>
      <td>
          ldionne
      </td>
    </tr>
</table>

<pre>
     Let's also test this inside `constexpr`. If we had a non-constexpr user-defined destructor, I think the test would currently pass but I would argue that it shouldn't.

_Originally posted by @ldionne in https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/90393#discussion_r1679696720_
 
</pre>
<img width="1px" height="1px" alt="" src="http://email.email.llvm.org/o/eJyUUk2LGz0M_jWei9hga752DnPYDwILL7yX3oM9VjJuvXaw5N3m35dJ0m2vBWMbCR7p-bDM4ZSIZtU_K8T3XLxNQgpR9a-NrbLmMkcfckrUuOwvM_xHonBksJEzCLGArIEhJA6eQA16yYmFfp6LGvQO3o7wSbBaDxZSTg9fXahM5cHTMSTy4Iml1EVyUfgCbxtm-gGy0m3EZ67Rw1JLoSTxAmfLDK4KvN1btpwqgaxWIAjwuhWTwlF2Sr8q_XS7D_-XcArJxg0is5AHdwHV6TtFCAlWkTOr9knhXuH-FGStbrfkd4X7GD9-Pw_nkr_TIgr35xqjwv2k26lV2PrAS2UOOR2KGcZpmIYR9eG2ADR-bv3UTrah2Yxt-9hNxvTNOo96GIdhcHRs-8HqSRtDfT8Z546TndqxCTNq7AwabYauN_3O9diNw6N1LTrfHUfVaXq3Ie62_Xa5nJrAXGk2ZupM20TrKPLd6BjcovD5elDhi0Jc1pJTvjtf5itJV0-8qRNY-A-sBInXxPyF0r_Ct82omBcbDyEd8-YjX_j6B5s8RLLnA9OSk78V75H5SkRTS5z_Wf4rSVa4v_P8mPFXAAAA___01-rm">