Hi,
On 24/10/18 22:41, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 10/15/18 12:45 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
&& ((TREE_CODE (declspecs->type) != TYPENAME_TYPE
+ && TREE_CODE (declspecs->type) != DECLTYPE_TYPE
&& MAYBE_CLASS_TYPE_P (declspecs->type))
I would think that the MAYBE_CLASS_TYPE_P here should be CLASS_TYPE_P,
and then we can remove the TYPENAME_TYPE check. Or do we want to
allow template type parameters for some reason?
Indeed, it would be nice to just use OVERLOAD_TYPE_P. However it seems
we at least want to let through TEMPLATE_TYPE_PARMs representing 'auto'
- otherwise Dodji's check a few lines below which fixed c++/51473
doesn't work anymore - and also BOUND_TEMPLATE_TEMPLATE_PARM, otherwise
we regress on template/spec32.C and template/ttp22.C because we don't
diagnose the shadowing anymore. Thus, I would say either we keep on
using MAYBE_CLASS_TYPE_P or we pick what we need, possibly we add a comment?
Thanks, Paolo.
