[PATCH] D41217: [Concepts] Concept Specialization Expressions

[Saar Raz via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

saar.raz added inline comments.


================
Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaConcept.cpp:34
+      Diag(ConstraintExpression->getExprLoc(),
+           diag::err_non_bool_atomic_constraint)
+              << ConstraintExpression << ConstraintExpression->getType();
----------------
saar.raz wrote:
> rsmith wrote:
> > What justifies rejecting this prior to any use of the concept that would result in a satisfaction check?
> > 
> > (I think checking this is a good thing; what I'm wondering is whether we need to file a core issue to get the wording updated to allow us to reject such bogus concepts even if they're never used.)
> I guess this is already justified, if awkwardly (NDR) by [temp.res]p8.2
Correction - it says that IFNDR occurs when no substitution would result in a valid expression, so maybe this is well formed after all.
In this case it is a valid expression but not a valid constraint expression, maybe that's the missing word here?


Repository:
  rC Clang

https://reviews.llvm.org/D41217