return NoDiag();
case Expr::CallExprClass:
case Expr::CXXOperatorCallExprClass: {
+ // C99 6.6/3 allows function calls within unevaluated subexpressions of
+ // constant expressions, but they can never be ICEs because an ICE cannot
+ // contain an operand of (pointer to) function type.
const CallExpr *CE = cast<CallExpr>(E);
if (CE->isBuiltinCall(Ctx))
return CheckEvalInICE(E, Ctx);
case UO_PreDec:
case UO_AddrOf:
case UO_Deref:
+ // C99 6.6/3 allows increment and decrement within unevaluated
+ // subexpressions of constant expressions, but they can never be ICEs
+ // because an ICE cannot contain an lvalue operand.
return ICEDiag(2, E->getLocStart());
case UO_Extension:
case UO_LNot:
case Expr::OffsetOfExprClass: {
// Note that per C99, offsetof must be an ICE. And AFAIK, using
// Evaluate matches the proposed gcc behavior for cases like
- // "offsetof(struct s{int x[4];}, x[!.0])". This doesn't affect
+ // "offsetof(struct s{int x[4];}, x[1.0])". This doesn't affect
// compliance: we should warn earlier for offsetof expressions with
// array subscripts that aren't ICEs, and if the array subscripts
// are ICEs, the value of the offsetof must be an integer constant.
case BO_AndAssign:
case BO_XorAssign:
case BO_OrAssign:
+ // C99 6.6/3 allows assignments within unevaluated subexpressions of
+ // constant expressions, but they can never be ICEs because an ICE cannot
+ // contain an lvalue operand.
return ICEDiag(2, E->getLocStart());
case BO_Mul: