erichkeane added a comment. In D134128#3813708 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D134128#3813708>, @lime wrote:
> Well, Something happened after rebasing this patch on D126907 > <https://reviews.llvm.org/D126907>. `s41` below was rejected as the constrain > generated from `template <C>` was no longer considered to subsume the > constrain generated from `template <typename T> requires C` in the template > template argument, which is not the case <https://godbolt.org/z/Gq7h58hGb> in > both GCC and MSVC. However, GCC and MSVC also accept the redeclaration for > `S`, which might be ill-formed because of this rule > <https://eel.is/c++draft/temp.decls#temp.over.link-7>. If this kind of > redeclaration happens on `X`, GCC and MSVC will reject it. Rebasing this > patch on D126907 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D126907> will also not make the > both redeclaration valid. > > Personally, I decided to make `s41` valid for Clang, a clue might be making > the `QualType`s the same in the parameters of two generated constrains. > > template <typename T> concept C = T::f(); > > template <typename T> concept C1 = T::f(); > > template <C> struct X {}; > > template <typename T> requires C<T> struct X; // ill-formed for sure > > template <C1> struct Y {}; > > template <template <typename T> requires C<T> class> struct S {}; > > template <template <C> class> struct S; // GCC and MSVC accept this > > S<X> sx; // my target > S<Y> sy; // ill-formed for sure I'm not sure I get the issue here, there are some identifiers you're using that don't make sense to me. I don't see that test in the lit tests either, could you make sure it is reflected there and commented? ALso, can you re-arrange the error messages as I requested? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D134128/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D134128 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
