On Sunday, November 19th, 2023 at 1:34 PM, Jason Merrill <ja...@redhat.com>
wrote:
>
>
> On 11/19/23 13:36, waffl3x wrote:
>
> > I'm having trouble fixing the error for this case, the control flow
> > when the functions are overloaded is much more complex.
> >
> > struct S {
> > void f(this S&) {}
> > void f(this S&, int)
> >
> > void g() {
> > void (*fp)(S&) = &f;
> > }
> > };
> >
> > This seemed to have fixed the non overloaded case, but I'm also not
> > very happy with it, it feels kind of icky. Especially since the expr's
> > location isn't available here, although, it just occurred to me that
> > the expr's location is probably stored in the node.
> >
> > typeck.cc:cp_build_addr_expr_1
> > ```
> > case BASELINK:
> > arg = BASELINK_FUNCTIONS (arg);
> > if (DECL_XOBJ_MEMBER_FUNC_P (
> > {
> > error ("You must qualify taking address of xobj member functions");
> > return error_mark_node;
> > }
>
>
> The loc variable was set earlier in the function, you can use that.
Will do.
> The overloaded case we want to handle here in
> resolve_address_of_overloaded_function:
>
> > if (DECL_NONSTATIC_MEMBER_FUNCTION_P (fn)
> > && !(complain & tf_ptrmem_ok) && !flag_ms_extensions)
> > {
> > static int explained;
> >
> > if (!(complain & tf_error))
> > return error_mark_node;
> >
> > auto_diagnostic_group d;
> > if (permerror (input_location, "assuming pointer to member %qD", fn)
> > && !explained)
> > {
> > inform (input_location, "(a pointer to member can only be "
> > "formed with %<&%E%>)", fn);
> > explained = 1;
> > }
> > }
>
>
> Jason
I'll check that out now, I just mostly finished the first lambda crash.
What is the proper way to error out of instantiate_body? What I have
right now is just not recursing down further if theres a problem. Also,
I'm starting to wonder if I should actually be erroring in
instantiate_decl instead.
I guess it will be better to just finish and you can share your
comments upon review though.
Alex
