[PATCH] D53417: [Clang][Sema][PowerPC] Choose a better candidate in overload function call if there is a compatible vector conversion instead of ambiguous call error

[Hubert Tong via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

hubert.reinterpretcast added inline comments.


================
Comment at: clang/test/CodeGen/altivec-generic-overload.c:74
+  convert1(gv1);
+  // CHECK: call void @_Z8convert1Dv16_a(<16 x i8> %{{[0-9]+}})
+  convert1(gv2);
----------------
wuzish wrote:
> hubert.reinterpretcast wrote:
> > Checking that the call is to the expected target in terms of overload 
> > resolution can be achieved by having a distinct return types for each 
> > member of the overload set.
> What's meaning of `having a distinct return types for each member of the 
> overload set`?
> 
> Could you please give a example to show your expect?
This can be done with `-fsyntax-only`:
```
typedef signed char __v16sc __attribute__((__vector_size__(16)));
typedef unsigned char __v16uc __attribute__((__vector_size__(16)));

__v16sc *__attribute__((__overloadable__)) convert1(vector signed char);
__v16uc *__attribute__((__overloadable__)) convert1(vector unsigned char);

void test()
{
  __v16sc gv1;
  __v16uc gv2;
  _Generic(convert1(gv1), __v16sc *: (void)0);
  _Generic(convert1(gv2), __v16uc *: (void)0);
}
```


================
Comment at: clang/test/SemaCXX/vector.cpp:26
   float &fr1 = f1(ll16);
-  f1(c16e); // expected-error{{call to 'f1' is ambiguous}}
-  f1(ll16e); // expected-error{{call to 'f1' is ambiguous}}
+  f1(c16e);
+  f1(ll16e);
----------------
Check the return types here like with the two lines above.


https://reviews.llvm.org/D53417



_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits