ChuanqiXu added a comment. In D116792#3227379 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D116792#3227379>, @erichkeane wrote:
> I had to do something similar for this at one point: > https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/90010c2e1d60c6a9a4a0b30a113d4dae2b7214eb > > I seem to remember hitting this assert, and from my end, I think I decided > even calling 'lookup' with the linkage spec to be a mistake (BTW, you might > consider updating that 'Encloses' for 'export' as well!). Yeah, it is another bug for 'export'. I've tried to address it in https://reviews.llvm.org/D116911 with the same style. > Is there any mechanism in the parent call of 'lookup' here to make it get the > right thing? And 'lookup' is called in various places. For example, from the stack trace of the crash, we could find that the parent of call is `DeclareImplicitDeductionGuides`. And I tried to handle it in `DeclareImplicitDeductionGuides`, then the compiler would crash again at `LookupDirect` in `SemaLookup.cpp`. I feel it is not good to add checks for places to call `lookup`. I agree that it is odd to lookup in a transparent DeclContext. But I feel it is not bad to lookup in the enclosing context from the definition of transparent DeclContext. Any thoughts? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D116792/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D116792 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
