Rakete1111 marked an inline comment as done.
Rakete1111 added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaTemplate.cpp:3377-3379
// FIXME: This is not quite correct recovery as we don't transform SS
// into the corresponding dependent form (and we don't diagnose missing
// 'template' keywords within SS as a result).
----------------
rsmith wrote:
> Rakete1111 wrote:
> > Rakete1111 wrote:
> > > rsmith wrote:
> > > > This FIXME is concerning. Is this a problem with this patch? (Is the
> > > > FIXME wrong now?)
> > > Yes you're right, I believe it not longer applies due to the change in
> > > ParseDecl.cpp in ParseDeclarationSpecifiers.
> > Although I'm not that sure I fully understand what that comments alludes to.
> The example would be something like this:
>
> ```
> template<typename T> struct X {
> template<typename U> struct Y { Y(); using V = int; };
> template<typename U> typename Y<U>::V f();
> };
> template<typename T> template<typename U>
> X<T>::Y<U>::V X<T>::f() {}
> ```
>
> Clang trunk today points out that the `typename` keyword is missing on the
> final line, but fails to point out that the `template` keyword is also
> missing. The reason is that in the case where that construct is valid:
>
> ```
> template<typename T> template<typename U>
> X<T>::Y<U>::Y() {}
> ```
>
> ... we are "entering the context" of the //nested-name-specifier//, which
> means we don't need a `template` keyword.
>
> If the FIXME is fixed, then we should diagnose the missing `template` in the
> above program.
>
> Also, because we don't rebuild the //nested-name-specifier// as a dependent
> nested name specifier in this case, we fail to match it against the
> declaration in the class, so in my example above, we also produce an
> "out-of-line definition does not match" error.
>
>
> A closely-related issue can be seen in an example such as:
>
> ```
> template<typename T> struct X {
> template<typename U> struct Y { Y(); typedef void V; };
> template<typename U> typename Y<U>::V::W f();
> };
> template<typename T> template<typename U>
> X<T>::template Y<U>::V::W X<T>::f() { return 0; }
> ```
>
> Here, we produce a completely bogus error:
>
> ```
> <stdin>:6:13: error: 'X::Y::V' (aka 'void') is not a class, namespace, or
> enumeration
> X<T>::template Y<U>::V::W X<T>::f() { return 0; }
> ^
> ```
>
> ... because we parse this in "entering context" mode and so resolve
> `X<T>::Y<U>::V` to the type in the primary template (that is, `void`). That's
> wrong: we should defer resolving this name to a type until we know what `T`
> and `U` are, or until we know that we're *actually* entering the context.
> Specifically, the above program can be extended as follows:
>
> ```
> template<> template<> struct X<int>::Y<int> {
> struct V { using W = int; };
> };
> void call(X<int> x) { x.f<int>(); } // OK, f returns int
> ```
>
> The above program should be accepted by this patch, if the FIXME is indeed
> now fixed. Please add it as a testcase :)
Oh ok, got it thanks. So no, the program is still not accepted in clang, and a
pretty dumb side effect of it is that
```
template<typename T> struct X {
template<typename U> struct Y { Y(); using V = int; };
template<typename U> typename Y<U>::V f();
};
template<typename T> template<typename U>
X<T>::Y<U>::V X<T>::f() {}
```
is accepted without the diagnostic for the missing `template`. :(
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D53847/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D53847
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
