[libcxx-commits] [PATCH] D129048: Rewording the "static_assert" to static assertion

[Mark de Wever via Phabricator via libcxx-commits]

Mordante added a comment.

In D129048#3668905 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D129048#3668905>, @aaron.ballman wrote:

> In D129048#3668846 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D129048#3668846>, @ldionne wrote:
>
>> In D129048#3668594 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D129048#3668594>, @philnik wrote:
>>
>>> Also, please wait for #libc <https://reviews.llvm.org/tag/libc/> approval next time.
>>
>> This, x1000.
>>
>> We go through the trouble of having excellent pre-commit testing and automatic review groups assigned to reviews, please don't bypass that.
>
> We certainly will keep this in mind for the future, thanks for pointing it out! However, the precommit CI behavior confused multiple Clang contributors (I also thought the bot was misconfigured because Clang tests are never run against old Clang versions), the output did not clearly identify what was wrong or how to address it, and the difficulties with testing this locally are all things the libc++ maintainers should also keep in mind.

What can we do to make it easier for Clang contributors to understand the libc++ CI?
Maybe we can discuss it on Discord.



================
Comment at: libcxx/test/libcxx/atomics/atomics.types.operations/atomics.types.operations.req/atomic_fetch_add.verify.cpp:49
     volatile std::atomic<void (*)(int)> fun;
-    // expected-error-re at atomic:* {{static_assert failed due to requirement '!is_function<void (int)>::value'{{.*}}Pointer to function isn't allowed}}
+    // expected-error-re at atomic:* {{static assertion failed due to requirement '!is_function<void (int)>::value'{{.*}}Pointer to function isn't allowed}}
     std::atomic_fetch_add(&fun, 0);
----------------
All libc++ tests need a regex accepting both the old and new diagnostic. Since we support older Clang versions.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D129048/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D129048