================
@@ -2792,6 +2811,24 @@ void DeclareImplicitDeductionGuidesForTypeAlias(
} else {
assert(false && "unhandled RHS type of the alias");
}
+ return {Template, AliasRhsTemplateArgs};
+}
+
+// Build deduction guides for a type alias template.
+void DeclareImplicitDeductionGuidesForTypeAlias(
+ Sema &SemaRef, TypeAliasTemplateDecl *AliasTemplate, SourceLocation Loc) {
+ if (AliasTemplate->isInvalidDecl())
+ return;
+ auto &Context = SemaRef.Context;
+ // FIXME: if there is an explicit deduction guide after the first use of the
----------------
erichkeane wrote:
WOULD we remove said diagnostic? It seems that:
`If there are some explicit deduction guides after the first usage, they are
not covered and are not added to the overload candidate sets.`
means that adding an explicit deduction guide after first use effectively 'does
nothing'.
That said, I'm ok having us do it (or whatever we do next) in a followup patch.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/85904
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
