================
@@ -8627,12 +8627,12 @@ void Sema::CheckShadow(NamedDecl *D, NamedDecl
*ShadowedDecl,
DeclContext *NewDC = D->getDeclContext();
if (FieldDecl *FD = dyn_cast<FieldDecl>(ShadowedDecl)) {
- if (const auto *MD =
- dyn_cast<CXXMethodDecl>(getFunctionLevelDeclContext())) {
- // Fields aren't shadowed in C++ static members or in member functions
- // with an explicit object parameter.
+ DeclContext *FnDC = getFunctionLevelDeclContext();
+ if (const auto *MD = dyn_cast<CXXMethodDecl>(FnDC)) {
if (MD->isStatic() || MD->isExplicitObjectMemberFunction())
return;
+ } else if (isa<FunctionDecl>(FnDC)) {
+ return;
----------------
AhmedKamel10 wrote:
> There should be a comment to explain which case you intend to catch here
I added a comment explaining what that `else if ` catches.
> Even better would be if you can test explicitly for an inline-defined friend
> function here (but I don't know how to do that myself).
I went back and forth on this one. Currently doing something like
`FnDC->getFriendObjectKind() != Decl::FOK_None` produces identical results, the
reason is that the **only way** to get a plain `FunctionDecl` (not a
`CXXMethodDecl`) via `getFunctionLevelDeclContext()` starting from something
declared inside a class body is an inline-defined friend function. I kept
`isa<FunctionDecl>` since it checks the real reason shadowing is impossible (no
implicit this), rather than friend-ness specifically, so it'd still be correct
if some other non-member case ever got developed in the future. The downside is
it's less obvious from the code alone that friends are what's being caught,
which is why I added the comment. Happy to switch to the explicit check if you
think it is better tho.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/221249
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
