ychen added a comment. In D111283#3784702 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D111283#3784702>, @mizvekov wrote:
> In D111283#3784663 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D111283#3784663>, @ychen wrote: > >> Thanks for the link. I'm not blocked by any of these patches, instead just >> trying to have a mental model of when to expect the sugared type :-). For >> partial ordering, the `TemplateSpecializationType` could be dependent, since >> the injected template arguments are dependent, I guess that's the reason >> there is the `ElaboratedType`? > > The ElaboratedType is a sort of a `companion node` to other nodes that > represent things in the language which can have (non-dependent) nested name > qualifiers (a NNS for short) and / or an elaborated type specifier (such as > the `struct` in `struct A`). > > It's only purpose is to carry that extra bit of data, like some external > storage really, and it shouldn't affect the semantics of the program once the > source code is parsed into an AST. > > Here, in your example, the ElaboratedType is there, as a companion to that > TemplateSpecializationType, just to say that this template specialization was > written without any name qualifiers nor elaboration. Very helpful explanation :-). Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D111283/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D111283 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
