[libcxx-commits] [PATCH] D105205: [libcxx][ranges] implements dangling, borrowed_iterator_t, borrowed_subrange_t

[Louis Dionne via Phabricator via libcxx-commits]

ldionne added inline comments.


================
Comment at: libcxx/test/std/ranges/range.utility/range.dangling/dangling.compile.pass.cpp:1
+//===----------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+//
----------------
cjdb wrote:
> ldionne wrote:
> > This should be a `.pass.cpp` test, and we should test that we can actually run (not only compile) code that calls the variadic constructor (and the default constructor), since it's defined with an empty body in the Standard. As it stands, I think our tests would pass if we had not defined the constructor at all and only declared it, but we would be non-conforming.
> Does it really need to be a `.pass.cpp`? Surely a bunch of `constexpr` objects should do the trick, no?
We really want to test exactly what the users are going to do, and that includes "running" that empty constructor at runtime. Even though in practice we do know it will be optimized out and all, it's still what we need to check.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D105205/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D105205