sdkrystian wrote:
> > @mizvekov Without unannotated tentative parsing (to be _properly_
> > introduced by #96364), issuing a warning is infeasible. Either way, by the
> > time we detect the error we could be who knows how deep into the second
> > operand of a `>` operator.
>
> So when we are parsing `this->A`. Suppose what follows it looks like a
> template argument list. Then we see if `this->template A` would have found a
> template. if it does find the template `A`, we issue the warning and proceed
> as if the user had written `this->template A`
>
> Do you think that's workable?
We already do that :) the problem is when what follows `A` _doesn't_
unambiguously look like a template argument list:
``cpp
int x = 0;
template<int I>
struct f { };
template<typename T>
void g(T t)
{
t.f<0>::x; // could be interpreted as '((t.f) < 0) > (::x)'
}
```
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/98547
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
