https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40995
Bug ID: 40995
Summary: Unavailable function incorrectly marked as deleted
from within a scoped marked as unavailable
Product: clang
Version: trunk
Hardware: PC
OS: All
Status: NEW
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P
Component: Frontend
Assignee: unassignedclangb...@nondot.org
Reporter: ldio...@apple.com
CC: llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org, neeil...@live.com,
richard-l...@metafoo.co.uk
Functions marked as unavailable appear as being deleted even when from a scope
that is unavailable too:
$ cat <<EOF | clang++ -xc++ - -fsyntax-only -std=c++11
#include <type_traits>
#define UNAVAILABLE
__attribute__((availability(macosx,strict,introduced=99.99)))
struct Bar { UNAVAILABLE Bar(int, int) { } };
struct UNAVAILABLE Foo {
// this is performed in a scope marked as unavailable
static_assert(std::is_constructible<Bar, int, int>::value, ""); // this
fires
};
EOF
I think the static_assert fires because the code is equivalent to marking
`Bar(int,int) = delete`, which would then fail the static_assert. However,
since `Bar(int, int)` is used (in std::is_constructible) from a context that is
transitively unavailable (because Foo is unavailable), I would expect `Bar(int,
int)` not to be marked deleted in that context.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug._______________________________________________
llvm-bugs mailing list
llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
