On 2014-03-25 15:48, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 03/18/2014 10:46 PM, Adam Butcher wrote:
+ if (TYPE_BEING_DEFINED (scope->this_entity))
+ if (scope->level_chain == 0
+ || scope->this_entity != scope->level_chain->this_entity)
+ break;
I don't think this is an adequate test; if you have another class
wrapping B, you'll have two levels of context pushed for the
declarator, so the this_entities will compare unequal. I think we
need some way to designate a scope that actually corresponds to a
class-specifier.
I don't follow. Are you suggesting a case like the following?
struct A
{
struct X
{
struct B
{
void foo(auto);
};
};
void X::B::foo(auto) {} // { dg-error "cannot define" }
};
If so, it is handled. The code you are referring to is within a
level_chain traversal loop so handles arbitrary levels of pushed
context. The end result is the same though; we arrive at an 'A::' scope
that is not the defining class scope but has the same 'this_entity' as
it (so TYPE_BEING_DEFINED returns true). The scope chain is as if the
following was used to declare it:
struct A
{
...
void A::X::B::foo(auto);
};
It is the two levels of 'A' entity scopes that caused the ICE due the
previous version of the loop stopping to inject the template parameter
list between the 'A::' and the 'X::', rather than unwinding back to the
scope defining 'A'.
Apologies if I've completely misunderstood your point here. I've got a
feeling that I may have.
Adam
