Hi Alp, This change doesn't look correct.
On Fri Jan 17 2014 at 5:04:31 AM, Alp Toker <[email protected]> wrote: > Author: alp > Date: Fri Jan 17 06:57:21 2014 > New Revision: 199490 > > URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=199490&view=rev > Log: > Permit redeclaration of tags introduced by using decls > > This valid construct appears in MSVC headers where it's used to provide a > definition for the '::type_info' compiler builtin type. > > Modified: > cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp > cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/using-decl-1.cpp > > Modified: cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp > URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/ > SemaDecl.cpp?rev=199490&r1=199489&r2=199490&view=diff > ============================================================ > ================== > --- cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp (original) > +++ cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp Fri Jan 17 06:57:21 2014 > @@ -10681,7 +10681,8 @@ Decl *Sema::ActOnTag(Scope *S, unsigned > } > > if (!Previous.empty()) { > - NamedDecl *PrevDecl = (*Previous.begin())->getUnderlyingDecl(); > + NamedDecl *DirectPrevDecl = *Previous.begin(); > + NamedDecl *PrevDecl = DirectPrevDecl->getUnderlyingDecl(); > > // It's okay to have a tag decl in the same scope as a typedef > // which hides a tag decl in the same scope. Finding this > @@ -10713,7 +10714,7 @@ Decl *Sema::ActOnTag(Scope *S, unsigned > // in the same scope (so that the definition/declaration completes > or > // rementions the tag), reuse the decl. > if (TUK == TUK_Reference || TUK == TUK_Friend || > - isDeclInScope(PrevDecl, SearchDC, S, > + isDeclInScope(DirectPrevDecl, SearchDC, S, > SS.isNotEmpty() || isExplicitSpecialization)) { > // Make sure that this wasn't declared as an enum and now used as > a > // struct or something similar. > > Modified: cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/using-decl-1.cpp > URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/ > SemaCXX/using-decl-1.cpp?rev=199490&r1=199489&r2=199490&view=diff > ============================================================ > ================== > --- cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/using-decl-1.cpp (original) > +++ cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/using-decl-1.cpp Fri Jan 17 06:57:21 2014 > @@ -119,6 +119,27 @@ namespace foo > }; > } > > +namespace using_tag_redeclaration > +{ > + struct S; > + namespace N { > + using ::using_tag_redeclaration::S; > + struct S {}; // expected-note {{previous definition is here}} > This is ill-formed, by 3.3.1/4. It appears that your change makes the second declaration into a redeclaration of ::using_tag_redeclaration::S; that's incorrect. (Our previous handling of this case was also incorrect, albeit in a different way, since we didn't enforce the 3.3.1/4 rule here.) If we need to handle something of this form for MSVC compatibility, we'll need to put it behind MSVCCompat. + } > + void f() { > + N::S s1; + S s2; > + } > + void g() { > + struct S; // expected-note {{forward declaration of 'S'}} > + S s3; // expected-error {{variable has incomplete type 'S'}} > + } > + void h() { > + using ::using_tag_redeclaration::S; > + struct S {}; // expected-error {{redefinition of 'S'}} > + } > +} > + > // Don't suggest non-typenames for positions requiring typenames. > namespace using_suggestion_tyname_val { > namespace N { void FFF() {} } > > > _______________________________________________ > cfe-commits mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
