vasilito
cb424d7448
verify-patch-sanity.py validates every active recipe .patch has internally- consistent hunk line counts — catching the 'malformed patch at line N' failure at commit/CI/preflight time instead of hours into a cook. This cycle hit that class three times (qtwaylandscanner, sddm, xwayland), each only discovered when cookbook tried to apply the patch. Running it across the repo found 29 latent malformed patches (validated against GNU patch: e.g. relibc/P3-sysv-ipc reproduces 'malformed patch at line 22'). They were harmless only because they sit in vendored recipes (baked, not re- applied) — but would fail on any version-bump re-derivation. --fix recounts the hunk headers (body untouched) and repaired all 29. Wired into build-preflight.sh (Phase 1.0D) and redbear-ci.yml, with a unit test (test-patch-sanity.sh). Skips archived/legacy trees and unvalidatable formats (empty placeholders, bare-@@ git hunks).
86 lines
2.4 KiB
C++
86 lines
2.4 KiB
C++
// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++20 -fsyntax-only -verify %s
|
|
|
|
// expected-no-diagnostics
|
|
|
|
template <class T, class U> constexpr bool is_same_v = false;
|
|
template <class T> constexpr bool is_same_v<T, T> = true;
|
|
template <class T, class U>
|
|
concept is_same = is_same_v<T, U>;
|
|
|
|
template <class T> struct X {};
|
|
template <class T, class U>
|
|
concept C1 = is_same<T, X<U>>;
|
|
|
|
template <class T1> X<X<X<T1>>> t1() {
|
|
return []<class T2>(T2) -> X<X<T2>> {
|
|
struct S {
|
|
static X<X<T2>> f() {
|
|
return []<class T3>(T3) -> X<T3> {
|
|
static_assert(is_same<T2, X<T1>>);
|
|
static_assert(is_same<T3, X<T2>>);
|
|
return X<T3>();
|
|
}(X<T2>());
|
|
}
|
|
};
|
|
return S::f();
|
|
}(X<T1>());
|
|
};
|
|
template X<X<X<int>>> t1<int>();
|
|
|
|
#if 0 // FIXME: crashes
|
|
template<class T1> auto t2() {
|
|
return []<class T2>(T2) {
|
|
struct S {
|
|
static auto f() {
|
|
return []<class T3>(T3) {
|
|
static_assert(is_same<T2, X<T1>>);
|
|
static_assert(is_same<T3, X<T2>>);
|
|
return X<T3>();
|
|
}(X<T2>());
|
|
}
|
|
};
|
|
return S::f();
|
|
}(X<T1>());
|
|
};
|
|
template auto t2<int>();
|
|
static_assert(is_same<decltype(t2<int>()), X<X<X<int>>>>);
|
|
|
|
template<class T1> C1<X<X<T1>>> auto t3() {
|
|
return []<C1<T1> T2>(T2) -> C1<X<T2>> auto {
|
|
struct S {
|
|
static auto f() {
|
|
return []<C1<T2> T3>(T3) -> C1<T3> auto {
|
|
return X<T3>();
|
|
}(X<T2>());
|
|
}
|
|
};
|
|
return S::f();
|
|
}(X<T1>());
|
|
};
|
|
template C1<X<X<int>>> auto t3<int>();
|
|
static_assert(is_same<decltype(t3<int>()), X<X<X<int>>>>);
|
|
#endif
|
|
|
|
namespace GH95735 {
|
|
|
|
int g(int fn) {
|
|
return [f = fn](auto tpl) noexcept(noexcept(f)) { return f; }(0);
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
int foo(auto... fn) {
|
|
// FIXME: This one hits the assertion "if the exception specification is dependent,
|
|
// then the noexcept expression should be value-dependent" in the constructor of
|
|
// FunctionProtoType.
|
|
// One possible solution is to update Sema::canThrow() to consider expressions
|
|
// (e.g. DeclRefExpr/FunctionParmPackExpr) involving unexpanded parameters as Dependent.
|
|
// This would effectively add an extra value-dependent flag to the noexcept expression.
|
|
// However, I'm afraid that would also cause ABI breakage.
|
|
// [...f = fn](auto tpl) noexcept(noexcept(f)) { return 0; }(0);
|
|
[...f = fn](auto tpl) noexcept(noexcept(g(fn...))) { return 0; }(0);
|
|
return [...f = fn](auto tpl) noexcept(noexcept(g(f...))) { return 0; }(0);
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
int v = foo(42);
|
|
|
|
} // namespace GH95735
|