llvm-project/clang/test/SemaCXX/delete-and-function-templat...

134 lines
4.2 KiB
C++
Raw Normal View History

Implement CWG 941 - explicit specializations of deleted function templates template<class T> void f(T) = delete; template<> void f(int); // OK. f(3); // OK Implementation strategy: When an explicit specialization of a function template, a member function template or a member function of a class template is declared, clang first implicitly instantiates the declaration of a specialization from the templated-entity being explicitly specialized (since their signatures must be the same) and then links the explicit specialization being declared as a redeclaration of the aforementioned specialization. The problem was that when clang 'implicitly instantiates' the initial specialization, it marks the corresponding FunctionDecl as deleted if the corresponding templated-entity was deleted, rather than waiting to see whether the explicit specialization being declared provides a non-deleted body. (The eager marking of delete has advantages during overload resolution I suppose, where we don't have to try and instantiate a definition of the function to see if it is deleted). The present fix entails recognizing that when clang knows that an explicit specialization is being declared (for whichever templated-entity), the prior implicit instantiation should not inherit the 'deleted' status, and so we reset it to false. I suppose an alternative fix (amongst others) could consider creating a new context (ExplicitSpecializationDeclarationSubstitution or some such) that is checked during template-argument-deduction and final substitution, and avoid inheriting the deleted status during declaration substitution. But while conceptually cleaner, that would be a slightly more involved change (as could be some of the other alternatives: such as avoid tagging implicit specializations as deleted, and check their primary templates for the deleted status where needed), and so I chose a different path. Hopefully it'll prove to not be a bad choice. llvm-svn: 266561
2016-04-18 01:32:04 +08:00
// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++11 -verify -fsyntax-only -emit-llvm-only %s
// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++11 -verify -fsyntax-only -fdelayed-template-parsing %s
// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++11 -verify -fsyntax-only -fms-extensions %s
// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++11 -verify -fsyntax-only -fdelayed-template-parsing -fms-extensions %s
template<class T, class U> struct is_same { enum { value = false }; };
template<class T> struct is_same<T, T> { enum { value = true }; };
namespace test_sfinae_and_delete {
namespace ns1 {
template<class T> double f(T) = delete; //expected-note{{candidate}}
char f(...); //expected-note{{candidate}}
static_assert(is_same<decltype(f(3)),char>::value, ""); //expected-error{{call to deleted function}} expected-error{{static_assert failed}}
template<class T> decltype(f(T{})) g(T); // this one sfinae's out.
template<class T> int *g(T);
void foo() {
int *ip = g(3);
}
} //end ns1
namespace ns2 {
template<class T> double* f(T);
template<> double* f(double) = delete;
template<class T> decltype(f(T{})) g(T); // expected-note{{candidate}}
template<class T> int *g(T); //expected-note{{candidate}}
void foo() {
double *dp = g(3); //expected-error{{ambiguous}}
int *ip = g(3.14); // this is OK - because the explicit specialization is deleted and sfinae's out one of the template candidates
}
} // end ns2
namespace ns3 {
template<class T> double* f(T) = delete;
template<> double* f(double);
template<class T> decltype(f(T{})) g(T); // expected-note{{candidate}}
template<class T> int *g(T); //expected-note{{candidate}}
void foo() {
int *dp = g(3); // this is OK - because the non-double specializations are deleted and sfinae's out one of the template candidates
double *ip = g(3.14); //expected-error{{ambiguous}}
}
} // end ns3
} // end ns test_sfinae_and_delete
namespace test_explicit_specialization_of_member {
namespace ns1 {
template<class T> struct X {
int* f(T) = delete;
};
template<> int* X<int>::f(int) { }
template<class T> decltype(X<T>{}.f(T{})) g(T); // expected-note{{candidate}}
template<class T> int *g(T); //expected-note{{candidate}}
void foo() {
int *ip2 = g(3.14); // this is OK - because the non-int specializations are deleted and sfinae's out one of the template candidates
int *ip = g(3); //expected-error{{ambiguous}}
}
} // end ns1
namespace ns2 {
struct X {
template<class T> double* f(T) = delete;
};
template<> double* X::f(int);
template<class T> decltype(X{}.f(T{})) g(T); // expected-note{{candidate}}
template<class T> int *g(T); //expected-note{{candidate}}
void foo() {
int *ip2 = g(3.14); // this is OK - because the non-int specializations are deleted and sfinae's out one of the template candidates
int *ip = g(3); //expected-error{{ambiguous}}
}
} // end ns2
namespace ns3 {
template<class T> struct X {
template<class U> double *f1(U, T) = delete;
template<class U> double *f2(U, T) = delete;
};
template<> template<> double* X<int>::f1(int, int);
template<> template<class U> double* X<int>::f2(U, int);
template<class T, class U> decltype(X<T>{}.f1(U{}, T{})) g1(U, T); // expected-note{{candidate}}
template<class T, class U> int *g1(U, T); //expected-note{{candidate}}
template<class T, class U> decltype(X<T>{}.f2(U{}, T{})) g2(U, T); // expected-note2{{candidate}}
template<class T, class U> int *g2(U, T); //expected-note2{{candidate}}
void foo() {
int *ip2 = g1(3.14, 3); // this is OK - because the non-int specializations are deleted and sfinae's out one of the template candidates
int *ip = g1(3, 3); //expected-error{{ambiguous}}
{
int *ip3 = g2(3.14, 3); //expected-error{{ambiguous}}
int *ip4 = g2(3, 3); //expected-error{{ambiguous}}
}
{
int *ip3 = g2(3.14, 3.14);
int *ip4 = g2(3, 3.14);
}
}
} // end ns3
namespace ns4 {
template < typename T> T* foo (T);
template <> int* foo(int) = delete;
template <> int* foo(int); //expected-note{{candidate}}
int *IP = foo(2); //expected-error{{deleted}}
double *DP = foo(3.14);
} //end ns4
namespace ns5 {
template < typename T> T* foo (T);
template <> int* foo(int); //expected-note{{previous}}
template <> int* foo(int) = delete; //expected-error{{deleted definition must be first declaration}}
} //end ns5
Implement CWG 941 - explicit specializations of deleted function templates template<class T> void f(T) = delete; template<> void f(int); // OK. f(3); // OK Implementation strategy: When an explicit specialization of a function template, a member function template or a member function of a class template is declared, clang first implicitly instantiates the declaration of a specialization from the templated-entity being explicitly specialized (since their signatures must be the same) and then links the explicit specialization being declared as a redeclaration of the aforementioned specialization. The problem was that when clang 'implicitly instantiates' the initial specialization, it marks the corresponding FunctionDecl as deleted if the corresponding templated-entity was deleted, rather than waiting to see whether the explicit specialization being declared provides a non-deleted body. (The eager marking of delete has advantages during overload resolution I suppose, where we don't have to try and instantiate a definition of the function to see if it is deleted). The present fix entails recognizing that when clang knows that an explicit specialization is being declared (for whichever templated-entity), the prior implicit instantiation should not inherit the 'deleted' status, and so we reset it to false. I suppose an alternative fix (amongst others) could consider creating a new context (ExplicitSpecializationDeclarationSubstitution or some such) that is checked during template-argument-deduction and final substitution, and avoid inheriting the deleted status during declaration substitution. But while conceptually cleaner, that would be a slightly more involved change (as could be some of the other alternatives: such as avoid tagging implicit specializations as deleted, and check their primary templates for the deleted status where needed), and so I chose a different path. Hopefully it'll prove to not be a bad choice. llvm-svn: 266561
2016-04-18 01:32:04 +08:00
} // end test_explicit_specializations_and_delete