Anastasia added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/test/SemaOpenCLCXX/members.cl:17
-
-template <class T> struct remove_reference { typedef T type; };
-template <class T> struct remove_reference<T &> { typedef T type; };
----------------
mantognini wrote:
> I wonder, do we lose coverage by removing these templates?
>
> In other words, is the same code for error detection used for templates and
> non-template?
I just think that this pattern has become untestable which means it is also not
customer visible i.e. I used these to create a function pointer type in a
template via template argument that was a reference to function. But now that
we don't have neither pointers nor references to functions I don't think it is
possible to write a template that would have any of those two after the
substitution? I think the error will occur before - either when we specify the
template argument or create a variable of those invalid types to be deduced in
the templates.
================
Comment at: clang/test/SemaOpenCLCXX/references.cl:25
+#endif // FPTREXT
+typedef void (&ref2fct_t)();
+#ifndef FPTREXT
----------------
mantognini wrote:
> This re-uses the same name as above. Could that be an issue?
Not in this case because the type alias has not been created i.e. the parser
just restarts over as if the first line with this type alias has not existed.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D95442/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D95442
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
