hubert.reinterpretcast added a comment.
This does not work for friend declarations.
template
struct A {
friend T::S::~S();
private:
static constexpr int secret = 42;
};
struct Q {
struct S { ~S(); };
};
Q::S::~S() {
void foo(int);
foo(A::secret);
}
Rep
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rG508c431ed9ab: [SemaCXX] Validate destructor is valid for
dependent classes (authored by royjacobson).
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D130936/ne
royjacobson updated this revision to Diff 449344.
royjacobson edited the summary of this revision.
royjacobson added a comment.
Add newline and release notes.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D130936/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D13093
erichkeane accepted this revision.
erichkeane added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
Hmm... I'm a little shocked that didn't error before, while we did the 2nd pass
through the destructor. A little shocking this made it this far...
The fix looks fine to me, I wish I k
shafik added a comment.
LGTM but let's have Erich take a look.
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp:11499
- // FIXME: Shouldn't we be able to perform this check even when the class
- // type is dependent? Both gcc and edg can handle that.
The FIX
royjacobson created this revision.
Herald added a project: All.
royjacobson updated this revision to Diff 449130.
royjacobson added a comment.
royjacobson retitled this revision from "[SemaCXX] Fix destructor name
accepts-invalid bug." to "[SemaCXX] Validate destructor is valid for dependent
clas
