cor3ntin added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaDeclCXX.cpp:16805
+ // definition, the declaration has no effect.
+ bool InTemplateDefinition = getLangOpts().CPlusPlus &&
getTemplateDepth(getCurScope()) != 0;
+
----------------
erichkeane wrote:
> Hmm... interesting way to calculate template depth, I wasn't aware of that
> one. Does this cause problems in 'a template caused another template to
> instantiate' sorta thing?
>
> Also, is the "CPlusPlus" test here necessary?
It's what I came up with. Do you think there is a better way?
If you have suggestions for additional tests, I'm all ears!
The CplusPlus tests is just there to avoid unnecessary cycles in C mode. It
probably doesn't do much of a difference.
================
Comment at: clang/test/SemaTemplate/instantiate-var-template.cpp:34
template<typename T> void f() {
- static_assert(a<sizeof(sizeof(f(T())))> == 0, ""); // expected-error
{{static assertion failed due to requirement 'a<sizeof (sizeof
(f(type-parameter-0-0())))> == 0'}} \
- // expected-note
{{evaluates to '1 == 0'}}
+ static_assert(a<sizeof(sizeof(f(T())))> == 0, ""); // fixme: can we check
a var is dependant?
}
----------------
erichkeane wrote:
> You should be able to instantiate this template later, and probably what we
> now have to do. Also, 'dependent' is the spelling in this case, 'dependant'
> is something different :)
I'm afraid doing though would defeat the intent of the test - it is after all
named "InstantiationDependent"
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D144285/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D144285
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
