erichkeane wrote:
> @erichkeane PR updated.
>
> When we encounter a class member access expression with a
> nested-name-specifier that is invalid, should we simply ignore it and instead
> use the type of the object expression as the lookup context? This is the
> current behavior, but it leads to lots of duplicate diagnostics. For example:
>
> ```c++
> struct A
> {
> using I = int;
> };
>
> void f(A* x)
> {
> x->I::z; // error: 'A::I' (aka 'int') is not a class, namespace, or
> enumeration
> // error: no member named 'z' in 'A'
> }
> ```
>
> IMO we should just return `ExprError` from `BuildMemberReferenceExpr` and
> thus not emit the second error.
Sorry, I'm not really getting the question here. Obviously that 2nd error is
invalid and we shouldn't be emitting it, and doing the `::z` lookup inside of
`A` seems wrong to me. But I'm not sure I get the issue.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84050
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
