================
Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaOverload.cpp:5860-5861
@@ -5857,3 +5859,4 @@
     if (FunctionDecl *FD = dyn_cast<FunctionDecl>(D)) {
-      if (isa<CXXMethodDecl>(FD) && !cast<CXXMethodDecl>(FD)->isStatic())
+      if (isa<CXXMethodDecl>(FD) && !cast<CXXMethodDecl>(FD)->isStatic() &&
+          !isa<CXXConstructorDecl>(FD))
         AddMethodCandidate(cast<CXXMethodDecl>(FD), F.getPair(),
----------------
klimek wrote:
> francisco.lopes wrote:
> > klimek wrote:
> > > Here and elsewhere: this looks like it actually changes overload 
> > > resolution, but I didn't see a description about that change in the 
> > > change comment - what am I missing?
> > This change is not required in truth (originally I was using it in 
> > `CodeCompleteConstructor` too), I've left it for a good reason. 
> > `AddFunctionCandidates` looks like a function that was added much later 
> > than the ones it calls, and it's being called in few places in the 
> > codebase, none involving constructors, hence no issue has been raised 
> > before. If you check inside `AddMethodCandidate` there's an assertion 
> > telling it shouldn't be called for constructors, and that this is a job for 
> > `AddOverloadCandidate`. The way `AddFunctionCandidates` was before would do 
> > exactly that: if `Fns` contained a constructor, `AddMethodCandidate` would 
> > be called for them, with also the added risk of accessing `Args[0]` when 
> > `Args` is empty.
> If it's not required, could you perhaps split up the CL into 2 changes: 
> 1. the code completion change
> 2. the overload resolution change
> That would make it much easier for me to review the change and make sure each 
> part has sufficient tests.
What you have in mind for how do this the best way? I'm not sure how to 
proceed, I'm thinking of doing a rebase that would take this overload 
resolution change from the middle of the commit history and push it to the tip 
as a commit of its own.

http://reviews.llvm.org/D6880

EMAIL PREFERENCES
  http://reviews.llvm.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/



_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to