rsmith added a comment.
Please factor out the fix for `getTemplateInstantiationPattern` and commit it
separately. https://reviews.llvm.org/D25942 has a testcase for that portion of
this change.
================
Comment at: lib/AST/Decl.cpp:1057-1058
+ RD->getTemplateInstantiationPattern();
+ if (!InstantiatedFrom)
+ InstantiatedFrom = RD->getInstantiatedFromMemberClass();
if (InstantiatedFrom)
----------------
This doesn't seem to match GCC; GCC seems to do this for all kinds of member
specialization, not just for member class specialization:
```
template<typename T> struct A {
template<typename U> struct __attribute__((visibility("hidden"))) B;
};
template<> template<typename U> struct A<int>::B { virtual void f() {} };
void g() { A<int>::B<int>().f(); }
```
Here, A<int>::B<int> gets hidden visibility, even though it was instantiated
from the member template specialization `A<int>::B` which had no visibility
attribute.
I don't know what the underlying logic is here -- does GCC look at the
visibility on the enclosing class when computing visibility for a member class?
-- but I don't think this one special case covers it.
================
Comment at: lib/AST/Decl.cpp:1096-1097
+ FunctionDecl *InstantiatedFrom = fn->getTemplateInstantiationPattern();
+ if (!InstantiatedFrom)
+ InstantiatedFrom = fn->getInstantiatedFromMemberFunction();
----------------
Likewise.
================
Comment at: lib/AST/DeclCXX.cpp:1349-1354
+ while (!CTD->isMemberSpecialization()) {
+ auto *NewCTD = CTD->getInstantiatedFromMemberTemplate();
+ if (!NewCTD)
break;
CTD = NewCTD;
}
----------------
The same bug exists in `VarDecl::getTemplateInstantiationPattern`; can you fix
it there too?
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D13419
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
