davrec added a comment.
Once the FIXME is removed this looks good, but I was involved in this so better
if @sammccall can give the thumbs up at least to the RecursiveASTVisitor code.
================
Comment at: clang/include/clang/AST/RecursiveASTVisitor.h:1577-1578
DEF_TRAVERSE_DECL(FriendTemplateDecl, {
+ // FIXME: Traverse getOwnedTagDecl like at the FriendDecl case?
+ // (FriendTemplateDecl is not used)
if (D->getFriendType())
----------------
I don't think anything is necessary here, because we should never see an
`OwnedTagDecl` here.
In the FriendDecl case the ElaboratedType only has an OwnedTagDecl when `struct
Fr` has not yet been declared before the friend decl.
In the documentation of FriendTemplateDecl on the other hand these examples are
given:
```
/// template \<typename T> class A {
/// friend class MyVector<T>; // not a friend template
/// template \<typename U> friend class B; // not a friend template
/// template \<typename U> friend class Foo<T>::Nested; // friend template
/// };
```
So, a FriendTemplateDecl is only created when referencing a nested class
template member. But that *must* have been declared before the friend decl, or
we will get an error:
```
template<typename T> struct B;
template<typename T> struct A { template<typename U> friend struct B<T>::Fr; };
//ERROR: no member named 'Fr' in B<T>
```
So the OwnedTagDecl should always be nullptr here/the issue should never arise
in this case.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D131685/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D131685
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
