martong marked 8 inline comments as done. martong added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/lib/AST/ASTStructuralEquivalence.cpp:124 + case DeclarationName::CXXConversionFunctionName: + return true; + ---------------- a_sidorin wrote: > Should we check the equivalence of getCXXNameType() in such cases? Good catch, thanks! ================ Comment at: clang/lib/AST/ASTStructuralEquivalence.cpp:127 + case DeclarationName::CXXDeductionGuideName: + return IsStructurallyEquivalent( + Name1.getCXXDeductionGuideTemplate()->getDeclName(), ---------------- a_sidorin wrote: > Should we check the equivalence of the whole > Name1.getCXXDeductionGuideTemplate() (with the template arguments)? Good catch, thanks! ================ Comment at: clang/lib/AST/ASTStructuralEquivalence.cpp:147 + + return true; +} ---------------- a_sidorin wrote: > llvm_unreachable()? Good catch, thanks! ================ Comment at: clang/lib/AST/ASTStructuralEquivalence.cpp:163 + return IsStructurallyEquivalent(Context, DE1->getQualifier(), + DE2->getQualifier()); + } ---------------- a_sidorin wrote: > Should we compare TemplateArgs (getTemplateArgs) somehow? No, that is not needed. Because `getQualifier()` returns with a `NestedNameSpecifier` and then in the appropriare overload of IsStructurallyEquivalent we will investigate further the type together with the template params: ``` 213 case NestedNameSpecifier::TypeSpec: 214 case NestedNameSpecifier::TypeSpecWithTemplate: 215 return IsStructurallyEquivalent(Context, QualType(NNS1->getAsType(), 0), 216 QualType(NNS2->getAsType(), 0)); ``` Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D62329/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D62329 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
