[clang] Add test for CWG1350

[Endilll]

Test is based on P0136R1 wording instead of proposed resolution in the issue itself.

This patch also expands related CWG1573 test with an additional test case. Existing 3.9 status of 1573 is still relevant even with this new test case.

[llvmbot]

@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang

Author: Vlad Serebrennikov (Endilll)

Changes

Test is based on P0136R1 wording instead of proposed resolution in the issue itself.

This patch also expands related CWG1573 test with an additional test case. Existing 3.9 status of 1573 is still relevant even with this new test case.

---

Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/78040.diff

3 Files Affected:

• (modified) clang/test/CXX/drs/dr13xx.cpp (+42)
• (modified) clang/test/CXX/drs/dr15xx.cpp (+7)
• (modified) clang/www/cxx_dr_status.html (+1-1)

diff --git a/clang/test/CXX/drs/dr13xx.cpp b/clang/test/CXX/drs/dr13xx.cpp
index 359c04b3e0f3d4..6a4a1f52383c04 100644
--- a/clang/test/CXX/drs/dr13xx.cpp
+++ b/clang/test/CXX/drs/dr13xx.cpp
@@ -379,6 +379,48 @@ namespace dr1347 { // dr1347: 3.1
 #endif
 }
 
+namespace dr1350 { // dr1350: 3.5
+#if __cplusplus >= 201103L
+struct NoexceptCtor {
+  NoexceptCtor(int) noexcept {}
+};
+
+struct ThrowingNSDMI : NoexceptCtor {
+  int a = []() noexcept(false) { return 0; }();
+  using NoexceptCtor::NoexceptCtor;
+};
+
+static_assert(!__is_nothrow_constructible(ThrowingNSDMI, int), "");
+
+struct ThrowingCtor {
+  ThrowingCtor() noexcept(false) {}
+};
+
+struct ThrowingNSDM : NoexceptCtor {
+  ThrowingCtor c;
+  using NoexceptCtor::NoexceptCtor;
+};
+
+static_assert(!__is_nothrow_constructible(ThrowingNSDM, int), "");
+
+struct D : NoexceptCtor, ThrowingCtor {
+  using NoexceptCtor::NoexceptCtor;
+};
+
+static_assert(!__is_nothrow_constructible(D, int), "");
+
+struct ThrowingDefaultArg {
+  ThrowingDefaultArg(ThrowingCtor = {}) {}
+};
+
+struct D2 : NoexceptCtor, ThrowingDefaultArg {
+  using NoexceptCtor::NoexceptCtor;
+};
+
+static_assert(!__is_nothrow_constructible(D2, int), "");
+#endif
+} // namespace dr1350
+
 namespace dr1358 { // dr1358: 3.1
 #if __cplusplus >= 201103L
   struct Lit { constexpr operator int() const { return 0; } };
diff --git a/clang/test/CXX/drs/dr15xx.cpp b/clang/test/CXX/drs/dr15xx.cpp
index 007b42c74affb1..3d4050a5713f92 100644
--- a/clang/test/CXX/drs/dr15xx.cpp
+++ b/clang/test/CXX/drs/dr15xx.cpp
@@ -390,6 +390,13 @@ namespace dr1573 { // dr1573: 3.9
   H h(0);
   // since-cxx11-error@-1 {{constructor inherited by 'H' from base class 'G' is implicitly deleted}}
   //   since-cxx11-note@#dr1573-H {{constructor inherited by 'H' is implicitly deleted because field 'g' has no default constructor}}
+
+  // deleted definition of constructor is inherited
+  struct I { I(int) = delete; }; // #dr1573-I
+  struct J : I { using I::I; };
+  J j(0);
+  // since-cxx11-error@-1 {{call to deleted constructor of 'J'}}
+  //   since-cxx11-note@#dr1573-I {{'I' has been explicitly marked deleted here}}
 #endif
 }
 
diff --git a/clang/www/cxx_dr_status.html b/clang/www/cxx_dr_status.html
index 4a3ed19161f9a5..5acc72dcf54b2d 100755
--- a/clang/www/cxx_dr_status.html
+++ b/clang/www/cxx_dr_status.html
@@ -7908,7 +7908,7 @@ <h2 id="cxxdr">C++ defect report implementation status</h2>
     <td><a href="https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/1350.html">1350</a></td>
     <td>CD3</td>
     <td>Incorrect exception specification for inherited constructors</td>
-    <td class="unknown" align="center">Unknown</td>
+    <td class="full" align="center">Clang 3.5</td>
   </tr>
   <tr id="1351">
     <td><a href="https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/1351.html">1351</a></td>

[Endilll]

I was way too deep into P0136R1 Rewording inheriting constructors (core issue 1941 et al) when I realized Richard has written tests for all issues covered there long ago. So I decided to carry on and check whether those tests would benefit from additional test cases. That's how I came up with a new test case for CWG1573, and came about its related issue 1350, which was lacking a test.

[cor3ntin]

For completeness, can you add a couple of tests covering the note (ie, template case?)
Otherwise, LGTM

[cor3ntin]

LGTM

[shafik]

LGTM