hokein updated this revision to Diff 462418.
hokein marked 3 inline comments as done.
hokein added a comment.
rebase and address comments.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D123808/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D123808
Files:
clang/lib/Sema/SemaDeclCXX.cpp
clang/test/CXX/temp/temp.deduct.guide/p3.cpp
Index: clang/test/CXX/temp/temp.deduct.guide/p3.cpp
===================================================================
--- clang/test/CXX/temp/temp.deduct.guide/p3.cpp
+++ clang/test/CXX/temp/temp.deduct.guide/p3.cpp
@@ -55,8 +55,6 @@
}
using N::NamedNS1;
NamedNS1(int) -> NamedNS1<int>; // expected-error {{deduction guide must be
declared in the same scope as template}}
- // FIXME: remove the following bogus diagnostic
- // expected-error@-2{{deduction guide is not written as a specialization of
template 'NamedNS1'}}
using namespace N;
NamedNS2(int) -> NamedNS2<int>; // expected-error {{deduction guide must be
declared in the same scope as template}}
Index: clang/lib/Sema/SemaDeclCXX.cpp
===================================================================
--- clang/lib/Sema/SemaDeclCXX.cpp
+++ clang/lib/Sema/SemaDeclCXX.cpp
@@ -11056,6 +11056,7 @@
// Check that the return type is written as a specialization of
// the template specified as the deduction-guide's name.
+ // The template name may not be qualified. [temp.deduct.guide]
ParsedType TrailingReturnType = Chunk.Fun.getTrailingReturnType();
TypeSourceInfo *TSI = nullptr;
QualType RetTy = GetTypeFromParser(TrailingReturnType, &TSI);
@@ -11067,9 +11068,13 @@
TemplateName SpecifiedName = RetTST.getTypePtr()->getTemplateName();
bool TemplateMatches =
Context.hasSameTemplateName(SpecifiedName, GuidedTemplate);
- // FIXME: We should consider other template kinds (using, qualified),
- // otherwise we will emit bogus diagnostics.
- if (SpecifiedName.getKind() == TemplateName::Template && TemplateMatches)
+ auto TKind = SpecifiedName.getKind();
+ // A Using TemplateName can't actually be valid (either it's qualified,
or
+ // we're in the wrong scope). But we have diagnosed these problems
+ // already.
+ bool SimplyWritten = TKind == TemplateName::Template ||
+ TKind == TemplateName::UsingTemplate;
+ if (SimplyWritten && TemplateMatches)
AcceptableReturnType = true;
else {
// This could still instantiate to the right type, unless we know it
Index: clang/test/CXX/temp/temp.deduct.guide/p3.cpp
===================================================================
--- clang/test/CXX/temp/temp.deduct.guide/p3.cpp
+++ clang/test/CXX/temp/temp.deduct.guide/p3.cpp
@@ -55,8 +55,6 @@
}
using N::NamedNS1;
NamedNS1(int) -> NamedNS1<int>; // expected-error {{deduction guide must be declared in the same scope as template}}
- // FIXME: remove the following bogus diagnostic
- // expected-error@-2{{deduction guide is not written as a specialization of template 'NamedNS1'}}
using namespace N;
NamedNS2(int) -> NamedNS2<int>; // expected-error {{deduction guide must be declared in the same scope as template}}
Index: clang/lib/Sema/SemaDeclCXX.cpp
===================================================================
--- clang/lib/Sema/SemaDeclCXX.cpp
+++ clang/lib/Sema/SemaDeclCXX.cpp
@@ -11056,6 +11056,7 @@
// Check that the return type is written as a specialization of
// the template specified as the deduction-guide's name.
+ // The template name may not be qualified. [temp.deduct.guide]
ParsedType TrailingReturnType = Chunk.Fun.getTrailingReturnType();
TypeSourceInfo *TSI = nullptr;
QualType RetTy = GetTypeFromParser(TrailingReturnType, &TSI);
@@ -11067,9 +11068,13 @@
TemplateName SpecifiedName = RetTST.getTypePtr()->getTemplateName();
bool TemplateMatches =
Context.hasSameTemplateName(SpecifiedName, GuidedTemplate);
- // FIXME: We should consider other template kinds (using, qualified),
- // otherwise we will emit bogus diagnostics.
- if (SpecifiedName.getKind() == TemplateName::Template && TemplateMatches)
+ auto TKind = SpecifiedName.getKind();
+ // A Using TemplateName can't actually be valid (either it's qualified, or
+ // we're in the wrong scope). But we have diagnosed these problems
+ // already.
+ bool SimplyWritten = TKind == TemplateName::Template ||
+ TKind == TemplateName::UsingTemplate;
+ if (SimplyWritten && TemplateMatches)
AcceptableReturnType = true;
else {
// This could still instantiate to the right type, unless we know it
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
