================
@@ -1518,7 +1526,7 @@ NamedDecl *Sema::ActOnNonTypeTemplateParameter(Scope *S,
Declarator &D,
QualType T = CheckNonTypeTemplateParameterType(TInfo, D.getIdentifierLoc());
if (T.isNull()) {
- T = Context.IntTy; // Recover with an 'int' type.
+ T = TInfo->getType();
----------------
offsetof wrote:
> In what sort of context does this matter? Does the effect of this show up in
> any test?
In the newly added section of `test/CXX/temp/temp.decls/temp.mem/p1.cpp`,
without this change we'd fail to match the various `bad` definitions to their
in-class declarations, creating extraneous diagnostics.
More importantly, recovering with `int` in
`RebuildTemplateParamsInCurrentInstantiation` would lead to the first invalid
definition of `good` being accepted without a diagnostic.
> Is it possible we might recover with something strange which will have weird
> effects or crash later, like undeduced auto?
The type ultimately comes from `GetTypeForDeclarator`, after substitution of
`auto` for dependent `auto`, so it can certainly be "strange" as in
semantically invalid in this context (incomplete, non-structural, etc.), but I
think that's fine since we mark the decl as invalid (?)
Note that currently `RebuildTemplateParamsInCurrentInstantiation` does not
perform this check, so it's already possible to end up with such types on
`NonTypeTemplateParmDecl`s that way.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132189
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
