ChuanqiXu added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp:1824-1826
+static bool isUsingDeclAtClassScope(NamedDecl *D) {
+ if (D->getDeclContext()->isFileContext())
+ return false;
----------------
This is the ad-hoc change. Look at the following comment.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp:6375-6378
- // C++ [dcl.meaning]p1:
- // [...] the member shall not merely have been introduced by a
- // using-declaration in the scope of the class or namespace nominated by
- // the nested-name-specifier of the declarator-id.
----------------
I can't find the wording in the existing spec (at least not in current
[dcl.meaning]). But if p8.cpp will be accepted unexpectedly if I remove
`RemoveUsingDecls(Previous);` completely. It would look good to me if we can
remove `RemoveUsingDecls(Previous);` completely.
================
Comment at: clang/test/CXX/special/class.inhctor/p8.cpp:32-33
+// FIMXE: Why should the following line be rejected?
template<typename T> constexpr D::D(T t) : C(t) {} // expected-error {{does
not match any declaration in 'D'}}
----------------
I don't understand why this should be rejected. I tried to read P0136R1 but I
failed to find the related things and I don't find a related wording in the
current spec.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D148506/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D148506
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
