royjacobson added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/test/SemaTemplate/constraints-instantiation.cpp:3-8 +// void PR46029::A<1>::f() +// CHECK: define {{.*}} @_ZN7PR460291AILi1EE1fEv +// void PR46029::A<2>::f() +// CHECK: define {{.*}} @_ZN7PR460291AILi2EE1fEv +// void PR46029::A<3>::f() +// CHECK-NOT: define {{.*}} @_ZN7PR460291AILi3EE1fEv ---------------- aaron.ballman wrote: > I think it might be better to test this via an `-ast-dump` test (which lives > in the `AST` test directory) rather than emitting LLVM IR to determine > whether something was instantiated or not. > > Btw, when you convert the test to use `-ast-dump`, be sure to make use of > regexes for things like line, column numbers, pointer values, etc so that the > test is easier to edit without breaking. I tried to look now into doing it in the ast-dump. It seems that we create a new `ClassTemplateSpecializationDecl` in SemaTemplate:9663 (`ActOnExplicitInstantiation`) that is copied from the parent `ClassTemplateDecl` along with all its members and `CXXMethodDecl`s. That means that the member functions with the unsatisfied constraints still appear in the AST. Do you think I should add the constraints checks into the creation of `ClassTemplateSpecializationDecl` instead, so we don't create unnecessary `CXXMethodDecl`? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D120255/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D120255 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits