alexander-shaposhnikov added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaCXXScopeSpec.cpp:141 + ClassTemplate->getInjectedClassNameSpecialization(); + if (Context.hasSameType(Injected, ContextType)) + return ClassTemplate->getTemplatedDecl(); ---------------- rsmith wrote: > alexander-shaposhnikov wrote: > > rsmith wrote: > > > This should also be guarded by a check that > > > `TemplateParameterListsAreEqual` between > > > `ClassTemplate->getTemplateParameters()` and the template parameter list > > > we picked out of the given array of template parameter lists. > > > > > > (With that check in place, we can move this back before the search for > > > partial specializations.) > > The problem is that currently the template parameter list (the one which we > > are supposed to pick above) is not always present, > > thus the fallback and this check are both still necessary. It happens e.g. > > for invalid code and if i remove the fallback it triggers more changes to > > the diagnostic output, other than that there might be more cases where we > > currently don't set TemplateParamLists for CXXScopeSpec, i kinda wanted to > > move incrementally. > OK. Can we do the check in the case where we do have a list of template > parameter lists, at least, or does that also cause more diagnostic disruption > than you'd like to deal with in this change? heh, unfortunately it does, in particular, the examples in the namespace "bad" in CXX/drs/dr5xx.cpp would be disrupted Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D145034/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D145034 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
