================
@@ -3553,6 +3553,49 @@ static unsigned getPackIndexForParam(Sema &S,
llvm_unreachable("parameter index would not be produced from template");
}
+// if `Specialization` is a `CXXConstructorDecl` or `CXXConversionDecl`
+// we try to instantiate and update its explicit specifier after constraint
+// checking.
+static Sema::TemplateDeductionResult
+resolveExplicitSpecifier(Sema &S, FunctionDecl *Specialization,
+ const MultiLevelTemplateArgumentList &SubstArgs,
+ TemplateDeductionInfo &Info,
+ FunctionTemplateDecl *FunctionTemplate,
+ ArrayRef<TemplateArgument> DeducedArgs) {
+ auto GetExplicitSpecifier = [](FunctionDecl *D) {
+ return isa<CXXConstructorDecl>(D)
+ ? cast<CXXConstructorDecl>(D)->getExplicitSpecifier()
+ : cast<CXXConversionDecl>(D)->getExplicitSpecifier();
+ };
+ auto SetExplicitSpecifier = [](FunctionDecl *D, ExplicitSpecifier ES) {
+ isa<CXXConstructorDecl>(D)
+ ? cast<CXXConstructorDecl>(D)->setExplicitSpecifier(ES)
+ : cast<CXXConversionDecl>(D)->setExplicitSpecifier(ES);
+ };
+
+ ExplicitSpecifier ES = GetExplicitSpecifier(Specialization);
+ Expr *const Expr = ES.getExpr();
+ if (!Expr) {
+ return Sema::TDK_Success;
+ }
+ if (!Expr->isValueDependent()) {
+ return Sema::TDK_Success;
+ }
+ // TemplateDeclInstantiator::InitFunctionInstantiation set the
+ // ActiveInstType to TemplateInstantiation, but we need
+ // to enable SFINAE when instantiating an explicit specifier.
+ Sema::InstantiatingTemplate Inst(
----------------
erichkeane wrote:
And yet, as soon as I said that, I remembered: a `RecoveryExpr` (or other
attempts at error recovery) can result in an error happening, but a valid
expression being returned.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/70548
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
