Jason Merrill <[email protected]> writes:
>> + /* This can happen for template parms of a template template
>> + parameter, e.g:
>> +
>> + template<template<class T, class U> class TT> struct S;
>> +
>> + Consider the level of the parms of TT; T and U both have
>> + level 2; TT has no template parm of level 1. So in this case
>> + the first element of full_template_args is NULL_TREE. If we
>> + leave it like this TMPL_ARG_DEPTH on args returns 1 instead
>> + of 2. This will make tsubst wrongly consider that T and U
>> + have level 1. Instead, let's create a dummy vector as the
>> + first element of full_template_args so that TMPL_ARG_DEPTH
>> + returns the correct depth for args. */
>
> Hmm, it seems odd that the parms wouldn't have level 1.
Finally, thinking about this a little more, this situation does not seem
completely crazy to me.
For:
template<class T, template<class U, T> class TT> struct S;
the parms of TT do have a level 1 that contains the parm T. It seems to
me that we need T and U to have different levels here, so both cannot
have level 1.
> I wonder if changing that would also avoid needing to use structural
> equality for template template parameters.
What do you mean exactly by "changing that"? I am getting confused now.
--
Dodji
