sammccall accepted this revision.
sammccall added a subscriber: rsmith.
sammccall added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
Yeah, I think you're right, and this small version of the patch seems good.
> if the arg is a DeclRefExpr (no typo correction), we'll never into this
> branch - the lookup should find the responding ValueDecl, which is not a
> TypeDecl
I think this is true but I don't feel certain. @rsmith could think of an
exception if anyone can. (Only important if the exception is common enough we
really need to offer the `typename` recovery.
Agree that if we've already done typo correction then offering further recovery
isn't necessary and in fact often does more harm than good.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaTemplate.cpp:4866
LookupResult::NotFoundInCurrentInstantiation) {
+ assert(SS.getScopeRep() && "A scope specifier must be present.");
// Suggest that the user add 'typename' before the NNS.
----------------
Assertion message doesn't really say anything more than the assertion itself.
Instead of saying what, can we say why?
(DependentScopeDeclRefExpr must be relative to some specified scope!)
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D82738/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D82738
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
