[PATCH] D120255: [Concepts] Check constraints for explicit template instantiations

This revision was landed with ongoing or failed builds. This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rG5aeaabf35ead: [Concepts] Check constraints for explicit template instantiations (authored by royjacobson, committed by erichkeane). Repository: rG

[PATCH] D120255: [Concepts] Check constraints for explicit template instantiations

royjacobson added a comment. In D120255#3357007 , @erichkeane wrote: > Do you have push rights, or do you need someone to push for you? If you need > someone to push for you, please post the name and email address you'd like > the commit under. Thank

[PATCH] D120255: [Concepts] Check constraints for explicit template instantiations

erichkeane accepted this revision. erichkeane added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Do you have push rights, or do you need someone to push for you? If you need someone to push for you, please post the name and email address you'd like the commit under. Repository:

[PATCH] D120255: [Concepts] Check constraints for explicit template instantiations

royjacobson updated this revision to Diff 412557. royjacobson added a comment. Thanks for the quick feedback :) I looked again at the AST and found out that there is a difference between instantiated and non-instantiated functions I missed - the instantiated functions have actual code AST. I ha

[PATCH] D120255: [Concepts] Check constraints for explicit template instantiations

erichkeane added inline comments. Comment at: clang/test/SemaTemplate/constraints-instantiation.cpp:3-8 +// void PR46029::A<1>::f() +// CHECK: define {{.*}} @_ZN7PR460291AILi1EE1fEv +// void PR46029::A<2>::f() +// CHECK: define {{.*}} @_ZN7PR460291AILi2EE1fEv +// void PR46029::A<

[PATCH] D120255: [Concepts] Check constraints for explicit template instantiations

royjacobson added inline comments. Comment at: clang/test/SemaTemplate/constraints-instantiation.cpp:3-8 +// void PR46029::A<1>::f() +// CHECK: define {{.*}} @_ZN7PR460291AILi1EE1fEv +// void PR46029::A<2>::f() +// CHECK: define {{.*}} @_ZN7PR460291AILi2EE1fEv +// void PR46029::A

[PATCH] D120255: [Concepts] Check constraints for explicit template instantiations

aaron.ballman added inline comments. Comment at: clang/test/SemaTemplate/constraints-instantiation.cpp:3-8 +// void PR46029::A<1>::f() +// CHECK: define {{.*}} @_ZN7PR460291AILi1EE1fEv +// void PR46029::A<2>::f() +// CHECK: define {{.*}} @_ZN7PR460291AILi2EE1fEv +// void PR46029:

[PATCH] D120255: [Concepts] Check constraints for explicit template instantiations

erichkeane added a comment. In D120255#3352920 , @royjacobson wrote: > In D120255#3352755 , @erichkeane > wrote: > >> Hmm... doing FileCheck in a Sema test is highly irregular. I would expect >> us to be able

[PATCH] D120255: [Concepts] Check constraints for explicit template instantiations

royjacobson updated this revision to Diff 412262. royjacobson added a comment. Slightly update the test command line (add -triple %itanium_abi_triple like in other similar tests). Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D120255/new/ https://r

[PATCH] D120255: [Concepts] Check constraints for explicit template instantiations

royjacobson added a comment. In D120255#3352755 , @erichkeane wrote: > Hmm... doing FileCheck in a Sema test is highly irregular. I would expect us > to be able to test this in the type system in some way. Something like > `A<3>::f()` is invalid (see

[PATCH] D120255: [Concepts] Check constraints for explicit template instantiations

royjacobson updated this revision to Diff 412252. royjacobson added a comment. Adding context. (Sorry - didn't realize you were speaking about the diff itself, thought you meant adding general context to the PR message...) Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https

[PATCH] D120255: [Concepts] Check constraints for explicit template instantiations

erichkeane added a comment. Hmm... doing FileCheck in a Sema test is highly irregular. I would expect us to be able to test this in the type system in some way. Something like `A<3>::f()` is invalid (see -verify). Also, please add all the context (as requested above!) with the -U stuff.

[PATCH] D120255: [Concepts] Check constraints for explicit template instantiations

royjacobson updated this revision to Diff 412229. royjacobson edited the summary of this revision. royjacobson set the repository for this revision to rG LLVM Github Monorepo. royjacobson added a comment. Herald added projects: clang, All. Updated test so it checks actual instantiation and update

[PATCH] D120255: [Concepts] Check constraints for explicit template instantiations

erichkeane added a comment. Please add all the context (see https://llvm.org/docs/Phabricator.html). Also, I'd like to see some level of negative tests. Finally, I'll have to evaluate how this works with the delayed concepts build. I don't see this as making it into Clang-14, we are pretty clo