erichkeane added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaTemplateDeduction.cpp:3598
+ FD->isDefined(FDFriend, true) &&
+ FDFriend->getFriendObjectKind() != Decl::FriendObjectKind::FOK_None) {
+ // if Function defined by inline friend, use inline fried as DeclContext
----------------
HerrCai0907 wrote:
> erichkeane wrote:
> > So in what case would the currently-instantiated definition NOT also be a
> > friend? I would think this last condition should be able to be an assert
> > instead.
> Last condition cannot be an assert, define and declare in difference place is
> common case, what we need to identifier in here is inlined friend define.
Can you be more clear here? WHEN can a definition and declaration NOT have the
same friend object kind? THAT is probably incorrect a bug.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaTemplateDeduction.cpp:3601
+ FD = const_cast<FunctionDecl *>(FDFriend);
+ Owner = FD->getDescribedFunctionTemplate()->getLexicalDeclContext();
+ }
----------------
HerrCai0907 wrote:
> erichkeane wrote:
> > I THINK this should just be:
> > `Owner = FD->getLexicalDeclContext()` here.
> The old `Owner` is `FunctionTemplate->getLexicalDeclContext()`. So I think we
> should use same level owner.
Its not a question of "SameLevel", its that it was the accessible one based on
what was around. IN this case, we have a 'better' alternative, which is the
FunctionDecl.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D149009/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D149009
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
