I'm well into nitpicking mode now; please go ahead and commit after this round.
... and then we can talk about function definitions inside lambdas inside
variable templates. I'm sure that'll make your day =)
================
Comment at: lib/Parse/ParseTemplate.cpp:1266-1270
@@ -1273,10 +1265,7 @@
- DeclaratorDecl *Declarator = dyn_cast<DeclaratorDecl>(FunD);
- const unsigned DeclaratorNumTemplateParameterLists =
- (Declarator ? Declarator->getNumTemplateParameterLists() : 0);
- if (Declarator && DeclaratorNumTemplateParameterLists != 0) {
- Actions.ActOnReenterDeclaratorTemplateScope(getCurScope(), Declarator);
- CurTemplateDepthTracker.addDepth(DeclaratorNumTemplateParameterLists);
+ if (unsigned NumLists = FunD->getNumTemplateParameterLists()) {
+ Actions.ActOnReenterTemplateScope(getCurScope(), FunD);
+ CurTemplateDepthTracker.addDepth(NumLists);
}
Actions.ActOnReenterTemplateScope(getCurScope(), LPT.D);
++CurTemplateDepthTracker;
----------------
Hans Wennborg wrote:
> Richard Smith wrote:
> > Can you push the function template case into `ActOnReenterTemplateScope`
> > too?
> I can make Actions.ActOnReenterTemplateScope(getCurScope(), FunD); be covered
> by the loop above if I make sure not to call Actions.PushDeclContext() on it.
>
> I have no idea why we then do an extra
> Actions.ActOnReenterTemplateScope(getCurScope(), LPT.D); since that should
> have the same effect. But if I remove that, we start failing tests, so I
> guess it needs to be there.
I meant, can you make `ActOnReenterTemplateScope` "do the right thing" when
given the pattern declaration of a function template? That is, call
`getDescribedFunctionTemplate` on it, and handle the template parameter list
from the function template too. (That's why you still need this extra line --
`LPT.D` here is the template, `FunD` is the pattern within the template.)
================
Comment at: lib/Parse/ParseTemplate.cpp:1252
@@ -1251,17 +1251,3 @@
for (; II != DeclContextsToReenter.rend(); ++II) {
- if (ClassTemplatePartialSpecializationDecl *MD =
- dyn_cast_or_null<ClassTemplatePartialSpecializationDecl>(*II)) {
- TemplateParamScopeStack.push_back(
- new ParseScope(this, Scope::TemplateParamScope));
- Actions.ActOnReenterTemplateScope(getCurScope(), MD);
- ++CurTemplateDepthTracker;
- } else if (CXXRecordDecl *MD = dyn_cast_or_null<CXXRecordDecl>(*II)) {
- bool IsClassTemplate = MD->getDescribedClassTemplate() != 0;
- TemplateParamScopeStack.push_back(
- new ParseScope(this, Scope::TemplateParamScope,
- /*ManageScope*/IsClassTemplate));
- Actions.ActOnReenterTemplateScope(getCurScope(),
- MD->getDescribedClassTemplate());
- if (IsClassTemplate)
- ++CurTemplateDepthTracker;
- }
+ Decl *D = cast<Decl>(*II);
+
----------------
Maybe sink this into its only use.
================
Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaDeclCXX.cpp:5987
@@ -5986,13 +5986,3 @@
- int NumParamList = D->getNumTemplateParameterLists();
- for (int i = 0; i < NumParamList; i++) {
- TemplateParameterList* Params = D->getTemplateParameterList(i);
- for (TemplateParameterList::iterator Param = Params->begin(),
- ParamEnd = Params->end();
- Param != ParamEnd; ++Param) {
- NamedDecl *Named = cast<NamedDecl>(*Param);
- if (Named->getDeclName()) {
- S->AddDecl(Named);
- IdResolver.AddDecl(Named);
- }
- }
+ SmallVector<TemplateParameterList *, 4> ParameterLists;
+
----------------
Please add a comment saying that it doesn't matter what order we collect the
template parameter lists in, so future readers don't worry that they're in the
wrong order like I just did =)
================
Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaDeclCXX.cpp:5989-5990
@@ +5988,4 @@
+
+ if (TemplateDecl *TD = dyn_cast<TemplateDecl>(D))
+ ParameterLists.push_back(TD->getTemplateParameters());
+
----------------
Maybe just assert in this case? People shouldn't be passing `TemplateDecl`s in
here.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D3555
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
