erichkeane added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaTemplateInstantiateDecl.cpp:2431-2439
+ //if (TrailingRequiresClause) {
+ // Sema::CXXThisScopeRAII ThisScope(SemaRef, Record,
D->getMethodQualifiers());
+ // ExprResult Rebuilt =
+ // SemaRef.RebuildExprInCurrentInstantiation(TrailingRequiresClause);
+ // if (Rebuilt.isInvalid())
+ // return nullptr;
+ // TrailingRequiresClause = Rebuilt.get();
----------------
ChuanqiXu wrote:
> The failing test case could be fixed by the above change. The change above is
> just a hack instead of a suggestion.
> The rationale is that we need to record some information when we traverse the
> template decl. The bugs now looks like we forget to do something which would
> be done at the first time. And we meet in problems due to the missed
> information (we couldn't find the member in the class).
So this would un-do the 'deferred constraint checking', because that woudl
cause us to immediately instantiate the template, so I don't think we want to
do that.
================
Comment at: clang/test/SemaTemplate/concepts.cpp:386-388
+ []()
+ requires(constraint<decltype(Local)>)
+ {}();
----------------
ChuanqiXu wrote:
> We might need more negative tests.
> Now it would pass even if I write:
> ```
> []()
> requires(false)
> {}();
> ```
Ouch! I'll have to see if I can find where we're missing that check!
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D119544/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D119544
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
