ChuanqiXu added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaModule.cpp:848-849
+ if (auto *FD = dyn_cast<FunctionDecl>(D)) {
+ if (FD->getTemplateSpecializationKind() == TSK_ExplicitSpecialization)
+ BadExport = true;
+ } else if (auto *VD = dyn_cast<VarDecl>(D)) {
----------------
ChuanqiXu wrote:
> iains wrote:
> > ChuanqiXu wrote:
> > > Given P2615R1 doesn't allow explicit-instantiation in export block too.
> > I think I must be missing something - I do not see that in the paper -
> > please could you expand your comment?
> See the proposed change in #[module.interface]p1 in the paper, it changed:
>
> ```
> export declaration
> ```
>
> to
>
>
> ```
> export named-declaration
> ```
>
> And the change between the old declaration and the new named declaration is
> in the proposed change in #[dcl.pre]p1. So it shows the special declarations
> shouldn't be allowed after `export`.
>
> Also I noted it is allowed to write `export { declaration-seq_opt }` where
> the `declaration-seq` may contain special declarations. It looks weird to me.
> I'll try to check it and ask WG21 when necessary.
I checked the record. And it shows that the current wording reflects the
intention. I mean
```
export template<> class A<int>;
```
is not allowed. But,
```
export { template<> class A<int> };
```
is allowed.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D153542/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D153542
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
