[clang] 4a6a4f8 - [clang][Interp] Add a failing test case

[Timm Bäder via cfe-commits]

Author: Timm Bäder
Date: 2023-04-13T15:55:57+02:00
New Revision: 4a6a4f84a7af7212d36aea9c34a1a8b9bb05d733

URL: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/4a6a4f84a7af7212d36aea9c34a1a8b9bb05d733
DIFF: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/4a6a4f84a7af7212d36aea9c34a1a8b9bb05d733.diff

LOG: [clang][Interp] Add a failing test case

Added: 
    

Modified: 
    clang/test/AST/Interp/records.cpp

Removed: 
    


################################################################################
diff  --git a/clang/test/AST/Interp/records.cpp b/clang/test/AST/Interp/records.cpp
index 745a30bec33b..a874bf378150 100644
--- a/clang/test/AST/Interp/records.cpp
+++ b/clang/test/AST/Interp/records.cpp
@@ -451,3 +451,40 @@ namespace ConditionalInit {
   static_assert(getS(true).a == 12, "");
   static_assert(getS(false).a == 13, "");
 };
+/// FIXME: The following tests are broken.
+///   They are using CXXDefaultInitExprs which contain a CXXThisExpr. The This pointer
+///   in those refers to the declaration we are currently initializing, *not* the
+///   This pointer of the current stack frame. This is something we haven't
+///   implemented in the new interpreter yet.
+namespace DeclRefs {
+  struct A{ int m; const int &f = m; }; // expected-note {{implicit use of 'this'}}
+
+  constexpr A a{10}; // expected-error {{must be initialized by a constant expression}}
+  static_assert(a.m == 10, "");
+  static_assert(a.f == 10, ""); // expected-error {{not an integral constant expression}} \
+                                // expected-note {{read of object outside its lifetime}}
+
+  class Foo {
+  public:
+    int z = 1337;
+    constexpr int a() const {
+      A b{this->z};
+
+      return b.f;
+    }
+  };
+  constexpr Foo f;
+  static_assert(f.a() == 1337, "");
+
+
+  struct B {
+    A a = A{100};
+  };
+  constexpr B b;
+  /// FIXME: The following two lines don't work because we don't get the
+  ///   pointers on the LHS correct. They make us run into an assertion
+  ///   in CheckEvaluationResult. However, this may just be caused by the
+  ///   problems in the previous examples.
+  //static_assert(b.a.m == 100, "");
+  //static_assert(b.a.f == 100, "");
+}