On 7/18/24 12:45 PM, Patrick Palka wrote:
Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, does thi look
OK for trunk/14?
-- >8 --
As a followup of r15-2047-g7954bb4fcb6fa8, we also need to consider
dependent attributes when recursing into a non-template alias that names
a dependent alias template specialization (and so STF_STRIP_DEPENDENT
is set), otherwise in the first testcase below we undesirably strip B
all the way to T instead of to A<T>.
We also need to move the typedef recursion case of strip_typedefs up to
get checked before the compound type recursion cases. Otherwise for C
below (which ultimately aliases T*) we end up stripping it to T* instead
of to A<T*> because the POINTER_TYPE recursion dominates the typedef
recursion. It also means we issue an unexpected extra error in the
third testcase below.
Ideally we would also want to consider dependent attributes on
non-template aliases, so that we accept the second testcase below, but
making that work correctly would require broader changes to e.g.
spec_hasher which currently assumes all non-template aliases are
stripped and hence it'd conflate the dependent specializations A<T>
and A<B> even if we didn't strip B.
Wouldn't that just be a matter of changing structural_comptypes to
consider dependent attributes as well as dependent specializations?
Or better, adding attributes to dependent_alias_template_spec_p (and
changing its name)? It seems like other callers would also benefit from
that change.
Jason
