rnk accepted this revision. rnk added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
lgtm ================ Comment at: clang/test/CodeGenCXX/microsoft-abi-member-pointers.cpp:958 +extern template class a<int>; +template class a<int>; +} ---------------- tahonermann wrote: > rnk wrote: > > My expectation here is that we assign the unknown inheritance model to > > `a<int>`, is that right? Can you add a static_assert to that effect, or add > > some CHECK lines for the structure, maybe make an alloca of type `void > > (a<int>::*var)()` and check for the allocated type (it should be a struct > > with a pointer with lots of i32s)? > Yes, when a pointer to member is formed for an incomplete class, in the > absence of a `#pragma pointers_to_members` directive, use of inheritance > keywords like `__single_inheritance`, or use of the `/vmb` or `/vmg` options > (or equivalents), the "full_generality" / "virtual_inheritance" model is > selected. I did verify that manually. > > I can add a `static_assert` so long as it follows the explicit template > instantiation definition. If it is placed earlier, then code related to > obtaining a complete type is run and that ends up avoiding the assertion > failure. See https://godbolt.org/z/qzTTfdfY1. This might indicate there is a > bug elsewhere; I find it surprising that the early `static_assert` has that > effect. Got it, that makes sense. It's really just anything to document the requirement that we expect to get the most general member pointer representation from this code (notwithstanding global member pointer settings). Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D158869/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D158869 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
