================
@@ -2393,9 +2413,13 @@ ExprResult
TemplateInstantiator::TransformFunctionParmPackRefExpr(DeclRefExpr *E,
ValueDecl *PD) {
typedef LocalInstantiationScope::DeclArgumentPack DeclArgumentPack;
- llvm::PointerUnion<Decl *, DeclArgumentPack *> *Found
- = getSema().CurrentInstantiationScope->findInstantiationOf(PD);
- assert(Found && "no instantiation for parameter pack");
+ llvm::PointerUnion<Decl *, DeclArgumentPack *> *Found =
+ getSema().CurrentInstantiationScope->getInstantiationOfIfExists(PD);
+
+ // This can happen when instantiating an expansion statement that contains
+ // a pack (e.g. `template for (auto x : {{ts...}})`).
+ if (!Found)
+ return E;
----------------
katzdm wrote:
Oh man, I spent hours debugging the assertions around this...
...I might be misremembering, but this might be to handle something like:
```cpp
template <typename... Ts>
int fn(Ts... ts) {
template for (int i : {1, 2, 3}) {
return (ts, ...);
}
}
```
which, as it turns out, crashes my implementation lol. Speaking of, I have a
_great_ suggestion for a test case! 😄
But the interesting thing about the above is that the expansion statement can
be instantiated even while the function is dependent - my approach was to
instantiate expansion statements as eagerly as possible to facilitate early
diagnosis.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/165195
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
