Author: David Blaikie Date: 2021-11-14T21:09:11-08:00 New Revision: 50fdd7df827137c8465abafa82a6bae7c87096c5
URL: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/50fdd7df827137c8465abafa82a6bae7c87096c5 DIFF: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/50fdd7df827137c8465abafa82a6bae7c87096c5.diff LOG: Add more test coverage for D77598 Add coverage to demonstrate why including the type of template parameters is necessary to disambiguate function template specializations. Test courtesy of Richard Smith Added: Modified: clang/test/AST/ast-dump-templates.cpp Removed: ################################################################################ diff --git a/clang/test/AST/ast-dump-templates.cpp b/clang/test/AST/ast-dump-templates.cpp index b08bc76ed179..3d26eb917c12 100644 --- a/clang/test/AST/ast-dump-templates.cpp +++ b/clang/test/AST/ast-dump-templates.cpp @@ -93,3 +93,14 @@ void test() { // CHECK1: {{^ }}template<> struct foo<1, 0 + 0L> { template struct foo<1, 0 + 0L>; } + +namespace test5 { +template<long> void f() {} +void (*p)() = f<0>; +template<unsigned = 0> void f() {} +void (*q)() = f<>; +// Not perfect - this code in the dump would be ambiguous, but it's the best we +// can do to diff erentiate these two implicit specializations. +// CHECK1: template<> void f<0L>() +// CHECK1: template<> void f<0U>() +} _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
