On 11/29/23 10:45, Marek Polacek wrote:
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk?
Now that I'm posting this patch, I think you'll probably want me to use
ba_any unconditionally. That works too; g++.dg/tc1/dr52.C just needs
a trivial testsuite tweak:
'C' is not an accessible base of 'X'
v.
'C' is an inaccessible base of 'X'
We should probably unify those messages...
Hmm, won't using ba_any unconditionally break ambiguous base checking
for non-static data members?
@@ -3493,9 +3493,24 @@ finish_class_member_access_expr (cp_expr object, tree
name, bool template_p,
return error_mark_node;
}
+ /* NAME may refer to a static data member, in which case there is
+ one copy of the data member that is shared by all the objects of
+ the class. So NAME can be unambiguously referred to even if
+ there are multiple indirect base classes containing NAME. */
+ const base_access ba = [scope, name] ()
Why a lambda?
+ {
+ if (identifier_p (name))
+ {
+ tree m = lookup_member (scope, name, /*protect=*/0,
+ /*want_type=*/false, tf_none);
+ if (!m || VAR_P (m))
Do you want shared_member_p here?
Jason
