ilya-biryukov wrote: Other than the test, the idea of the change does seem correct, here's the relevant comment from `Sema.h`: ```cpp /// The current index into pack expansion arguments that will be /// used for substitution of parameter packs. /// /// The pack expansion index will be -1 to indicate that parameter packs /// should be instantiated as themselves. Otherwise, the index specifies /// which argument within the parameter pack will be used for substitution. int ArgumentPackSubstitutionIndex; ```
It looks clear that when `RetainExpansion == true`, we would like the behavior that `ArgumentPackSubstitutionIndex == -1` produces. And given that we already forget the particular partially substituted pack, it's no surprise that using `ArgumentPackSubstitutionIndex` gives us an out-of-bounds access. Maybe there are certain intricacies I am not getting, but I believe your direction to put this into `ForgetPartiallySubstitutedPackRAII` is the right way forward. cc @zygoloid @shafik @cor3ntin in case they want to chime in. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108197 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
