As a followup to r12-7656-gffe9c0a0d3564a, this minor patch condenses
the handling of ambiguity and access w.r.t. the value of 'protect' so
that it more clearly matches the function comment.
Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, does this look OK for
trunk?
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
* search.cc (lookup_member): Simplify by handling all values
of protect at once in case of ambiguous lookup. Don't modify
protect.
---
gcc/cp/search.cc | 32 +++++++++++++-------------------
1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/cp/search.cc b/gcc/cp/search.cc
index 85e3e7cb487..b86b3a24080 100644
--- a/gcc/cp/search.cc
+++ b/gcc/cp/search.cc
@@ -1168,27 +1168,21 @@ lookup_member (tree xbasetype, tree name, int protect,
bool want_type,
if (rval_binfo)
type = BINFO_TYPE (rval_binfo);
- /* If we are not interested in ambiguities, don't report them;
- just return NULL_TREE. */
- if (!protect && lfi.ambiguous)
- return NULL_TREE;
-
- if (protect == 2)
- {
- if (lfi.ambiguous)
- return lfi.ambiguous;
- else
- protect = 0;
- }
-
- if (protect == 1 && lfi.ambiguous)
+ if (lfi.ambiguous)
{
- if (complain & tf_error)
+ if (protect == 0)
+ return NULL_TREE;
+ else if (protect == 1)
{
- error ("request for member %qD is ambiguous", name);
- print_candidates (lfi.ambiguous);
+ if (complain & tf_error)
+ {
+ error ("request for member %qD is ambiguous", name);
+ print_candidates (lfi.ambiguous);
+ }
+ return error_mark_node;
}
- return error_mark_node;
+ else if (protect == 2)
+ return lfi.ambiguous;
}
if (!rval)
@@ -1213,7 +1207,7 @@ lookup_member (tree xbasetype, tree name, int protect,
bool want_type,
only the first call to "f" is valid. However, if the function is
static, we can check. */
- if (protect && !really_overloaded_fn (rval))
+ if (protect == 1 && !really_overloaded_fn (rval))
{
tree decl = is_overloaded_fn (rval) ? get_first_fn (rval) : rval;
decl = strip_using_decl (decl);
--
2.35.1.500.gb896f729e2
