sdkrystian wrote: > > We already do that :) the problem is when what follows `A` _doesn't_ > > unambiguously look like a template argument list: > > Sure, but before CWG1835, we would perform the lookup anyway and treat the > `<0>` as a template argument list, even if it isn't unambiguously a template > argument list. > > So we could try to do this just as well if A doesn't unambiguously look like > a template argument list. > > That seems better than not trying to apply the new rule at all.
I'm not sure I follow. If we "treat the `<0>` as a template argument list, even if it isn't unambiguously a template argument list.", then aren't applying CWG1835 at all. 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
