Thanks for your suggestions. I will apply them in the upcoming patch (v3).
On Mon, May 6, 2024 at 7:46 PM Patrick Palka wrote:
> We could also/instead consider defining
>
> int want = TEMPLATE_TYPE_ORIG_LEVEL (auto_node);
> int have = TMPL_ARGS_DEPTH (full_targs);
>
> and express the logic in
On Sat, 4 May 2024, Seyed Sajad Kahani wrote:
> The limitations of the initial patch (checking specializiation template
> usage), have been discussed.
>
> > I realized that for the case where we have a member function template
> > of a class template, and a specialization of the enclosing class
The limitations of the initial patch (checking specializiation template usage),
have been discussed.
> I realized that for the case where we have a member function template
> of a class template, and a specialization of the enclosing class only
> (like below),
>
> template <>
> template
> void
