================
@@ -1519,7 +1519,8 @@ bool Sema::IsAtLeastAsConstrained(NamedDecl *D1,
auto IsExpectedEntity = [](const FunctionDecl *FD) {
FunctionDecl::TemplatedKind Kind = FD->getTemplatedKind();
return Kind == FunctionDecl::TK_NonTemplate ||
- Kind == FunctionDecl::TK_FunctionTemplate;
----------------
katzdm wrote:
@shafik Thanks for taking a look here!
I was able reverse engineer the following program which fails the assertion in
question, due to removal of `TK_FunctionTemplate` from the list of "expected"
Decls:
```cpp
template <typename T>
struct S {
template <typename U=T>
S(U={}) requires (^T != ^void) {}
template <typename U=T>
S(U={}) requires (^T != ^bool) {}
};
S<int> s;
```
@cor3ntin As per your original comment, I think this _does_ imply that the
assertion is somewhat vacuous - it covers every non-dependent case (well, I
guess the `TK_FunctionTemplate` case is sort of dependent too, but whatever).
Would it be better just to remove this assertion altogether, and perhaps to add
the above snippet as a test for future reference? Let me know what y'all think
would be best.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/98671
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
