================
@@ -377,8 +377,12 @@ struct ConvertConstructorToDeductionGuideTransform {
if (NestedPattern)
Args.addOuterRetainedLevels(NestedPattern->getTemplateDepth());
auto [Depth, Index] = getDepthAndIndex(Param);
+ assert(Depth ||
+ cast<ClassTemplateSpecializationDecl>(FTD->getDeclContext())
+ ->isExplicitSpecialization());
NamedDecl *NewParam = transformTemplateParameter(
- SemaRef, DC, Param, Args, Index + Depth1IndexAdjustment, Depth -
1);
+ SemaRef, DC, Param, Args, Index + Depth1IndexAdjustment,
+ Depth ? Depth - 1 : 0);
----------------
zyn0217 wrote:
Hmm interesting question. Afaict, the transform
ConvertConstructorToDeductionGuideTransform only handles class templates nested
no more than one level. So basically:
- For one-level nested cases (e.g., https://godbolt.org/z/x94dzMaeo), the
original template parameter depth is 1, so the new depth would be definitely 0,
which seems correct.
- For multi-level nested cases, we synthesize a CTAD guide with all templates
except the last level being instantiated, effectively reducing it to the
one-level scenario.
So I think that, in the end the depth should always be 0. But I'm happy to use
Depth instead of a literal 0 if that seems more appropriate.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/128704
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
