Hi! (Again, sorry for the long delay, but I indeed have very few time to work on it)
2011/6/22 Jason Merrill <ja...@redhat.com>:
> On 06/15/2011 01:58 PM, Fabien Chęne wrote:
>>
>> Otherwise, perhaps that it would be better if the second declaration
>> of E1 does not rely on supplement_binding_1.
>> What do you think ?
>
> I agree. We should be using xref_tag for this like we do with classes, so
> we don't try to push the same tag more than once.
Ah, yes it works for the previous testcase, but I can't manage to make
it work for the below example:
template<typename T> struct S1
{
enum E : T; // { dg-error "previous definition" }
enum E : int; // { dg-error "different underlying type" }
};
template struct S1<short>; // { dg-message "required from here" }
I tried various things without success, and I ended up hacking
supplement_binding_1 to handle those ENUMERAL_TYPEs.
I am all ear for another solution ...
Attached is an updated patch that should address most of your previous
comments (except for c++0X enums). Tested x86_64_unknown-linux-gnu
without new regressions.
Is it in better shape ?
gcc/ChangeLog
2011-09-15 Fabien Chêne <fab...@gcc.gnu.org>
PR c++/26256
* dbxout.c (dbxout_type_fields): Ignore using declarations.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
2011-09-15 Fabien Chêne <fab...@gcc.gnu.org>
PR c++/26256
* g++.dg/lookup/using23.C: New.
* g++.dg/lookup/using24.C: New.
* g++.dg/lookup/using25.C: New.
* g++.dg/lookup/using26.C: New.
* g++.dg/lookup/using27.C: New.
* g++.dg/lookup/using28.C: New.
* g++.dg/lookup/using29.C: New.
* g++.dg/lookup/using30.C: New.
* g++.dg/lookup/using31.C: New.
* g++.dg/lookup/using32.C: New.
* g++.dg/lookup/using33.C: New.
* g++.dg/lookup/using34.C: New.
* g++.dg/lookup/using35.C: New.
* g++.dg/debug/using4.C: New.
* g++.dg/debug/using5.C: New.
* g++.dg/cpp0x/forw_enum10.C: New.
* g++.old-deja/g++.other/using1.C: Adjust.
* g++.dg/template/using2.C: Likewise.
gcc/cp/ChangeLog
2011-09-15 Fabien Chêne <fab...@gcc.gnu.org>
PR c++/26256
* search.c (lookup_field_1): Get rid of the comment saying that
USING_DECL should not be returned, and actually return USING_DECL
if appropriate.
* semantics.c (finish_member_declaration): Remove the check that
prevents USING_DECLs from being verified by pushdecl_class_level.
* typeck.c (build_class_member_access_expr): Handle USING_DECLs.
* class.c (check_field_decls): Keep using declarations.
* parser.c (cp_parser_nonclass_name): Handle USING_DECLs.
* decl.c (start_enum): Call xref_tag whenever possible.
* name-lookup.c (strip_using_decl): New function.
(supplement_binding_1): Call strip_using_decl on decl and
bval. Perform most of the checks with USING_DECLs stripped. Also
check that the target decl and the target bval does not refer to
the same declaration. Add a hack for handling ENUMERAL_TYPE.
(push_class_level_binding): Call strip_using_decl on decl and
bval. Perform most of the checks with USING_DECLs stripped. Return
true if both decl and bval refer to USING_DECLs and are dependent.
--
Fabien
pr26256.patch
Description: Binary data
