================
@@ -1185,7 +1154,7 @@ static bool CheckConstraintSatisfaction(
return false;
}
- if (TemplateArgsLists.isAnyArgInstantiationDependent(S.Context)) {
+ if (TemplateArgsLists.isAnyArgDependent(S.Context)) {
----------------
cor3ntin wrote:
The first example (parameter unused) is conforming. I believe all of the other
examples are IFNDR.
So we should make some effort to diagnose, but not doing it is still, strictly
speaking, conforming, afaict.
However the original regression... we are just failing to compile relatively
trivial standard conforming code.
No not fixing the original regression is, imo, definitively worse.
It seemed that @zygoloid had some idea for an alternative solution to the
original PR.
I'm not sure any of us actually understood the suggestion though.
Maybe just `C.getCanonicalTemplateArgument(TA).isDependent()` (which would
works for expressions, expression canonicalization just returns the expression).
But it is possible I misunderstood. In particular this does not address
Matheus' examples.
But I think these examples are unrelated as they are incorrectly compiled with
or without the patches Younan has been working on.
These are symptoms of not preserving sugar in the mapping - the goal being to
improve caching and minimize the performance concerns. I feel we are between a
rock and a hard place here.
Either way, I'd still like to see the original issue resolved independently of
the issue of undiagnosed incorrect substitution in aliases.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/185608
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
