just the extremely specific case of a trailing array element that couldn't be
initialized because the default constructor for the element type is deleted.
Also reword the diagnostic to better match our other context diagnostics and to
prepare for the implementation of core issue 1070.
llvm-svn: 210083
new, is well-formed with defined semantics of throwing (a type which can be
caught by a handler for) std::bad_array_new_length, unlike in C++98 where it is
somewhere nebulous between undefined behavior and ill-formed.
If the array size is an integral constant expression and satisfies one of these
criteria, we would previous the array new expression, but now in C++11 mode, we
merely issue a warning (the code is still rejected in C++98 mode, naturally).
We don't yet implement new C++11 semantics correctly (see PR11644), but we do
implement the overflow checking, and (for the default operator new) convert such
expressions to an exception, so accepting such code now does not seem especially
unsafe.
llvm-svn: 149767
Richard Smith