On 5/1/24 13:40, Patrick Palka wrote:
On Wed, 1 May 2024, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 5/1/24 12:41, Patrick Palka wrote:
On Fri, 2 Feb 2024, Patrick Palka wrote:
Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-pc-linux, does this look like
an improvement? This is not a bugfix and barely related to the previous
patch, but the previous patch's new use of entering_scope=true motivated
me to submit this patch since it seems like a nice simplification.
Ping, now that stage 1 is open.
Thanks for the ping. The earlier message isn't showing up in Thunderbird for
some reason, though I see it in the gmail web interface...
Ah, weird. No worries, this patch was very much stage 1 material anyway.
@@ -16771,9 +16722,10 @@ tsubst (tree t, tree args, tsubst_flags_t
complain, tree in_decl)
ctx = TREE_VEC_ELT (ctx, 0);
}
else
- ctx = tsubst_aggr_type (ctx, args,
- complain | tf_qualifying_scope,
- in_decl, /*entering_scope=*/1);
+ {
+ ctx = tsubst_scope (ctx, args, complain, in_decl);
Why is this one tsubst_scope while the others are all plain tsubst?
Ah, just because the call to tsubst_aggr_type being replace passes
tf_qualifying_scope already, so we might as well use tsubst_scope
as shorthand.
Do we want a tsubst_entering_scope function?
Which is just shorthand for tsubst + adjust_type_for_entering_scope?
That's what I was thinking.
Sure, though I was wondering if we eventually might want to get rid of
the distinction between the primary template type A<T> and the generic
instantiation A<T>, and we could treat this as an incremental step
towards that (then we'd just eventually remove the
adjust_type_for_entering_scope calls and keep the tsubst calls).
I don't think we want that; having the distinction helps to avoid
wrongly looking up members of the primary template in contexts that
shouldn't be able to.
Jason
