libc++ atomics test change request

[Eric Fiselier]

Seems like a reasonable request.
I'll poke my head around in the tests tonight and see what I can do.
Thanks for the link.

/Eric


On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 5:44 PM, Steve MacKenzie <stevemac321 at live.com>
wrote:

> Greetings,
>
> I would like to resume testing MSVC STL using the Libc++ tests.
>
>
>
> Would it be OK to add noexcept specifiers to some of the test structs that
> are used as template params to std::atomic?   I believe this change is
> benign, so I am hoping you don’t care or require conditional blocks.
>
>
>
> Explanation from:
> https://connect.microsoft.com/VisualStudio/feedbackdetail/view/906973
>
>
>
> atomic() noexcept = default", so when the default constructor for
>
> std::atomic<T> is invoked for a type T that has a throwing constructor,
>
> the noexcept version is not found, which causes the compiler to emit
>
> an error message about the deleted function. To work around this,
>
> you need to declare the constructor of test_struct as noexcept.
>
>
>
> The affected tests pass using:
>
> clang version 3.5.0 (trunk 212120)
>
> Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
>
> Thread model: posix
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Steve MacKenzie
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-commits mailing list
> cfe-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20140822/dbbd038f/attachment.html>