hokein added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/test/SemaCXX/base-class-ambiguity-check.cpp:15
+ // Should not crash on an incomplete-type and dependent base specifier.
+ struct Derived : Base1, Base2 {}; // expected-error {{implicit instantiation
of undefined member 'Foo2<int>::Base1'}} \
+ expected-error {{implicit instantiation
of undefined member 'Foo2<int>::Base2'}}
----------------
The diagnostic is suboptimal (I'd expect it is "invalid use of incomplete
type"), but it is not regression, clang shows the same diagnostics for the
following non-crash case:
```
template <typename T> struct Foo2 {
struct Base1;
struct Derived : Base1 {};
}
```
================
Comment at: clang/test/SemaCXX/ms-interface.cpp:114
+ // Should not crash on an incomplete-type base specifier.
+ __interface Foo : Base {};
+};
----------------
sammccall wrote:
> is there some tricky interaction with __interface here that justifies testing
> this again? If it's testing the same codepath, I'd say one test is enough
They test different paths (this was founded in my previous-and-incomplete fix):
- this tests `isInterface()` on Line 2740 in `SemaDeclCxx.cpp`;
- the above one tests `NoteIndirectBases` (multiple base classes) on Line
2736 in `SemaDeclCXX.cpp`;
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D113474/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D113474
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
