Under this defect resolution, the injected-class-name of a class or class
template cannot be used except in very limited circumstances (when declaring a
constructor, in a nested-name-specifier, in a base-specifier, or in an
elaborated-type-specifier). This is apparently done to make parsing easier, but
it's a pain for us since we don't know whether a template-id using the
injected-class-name is valid at the point when we annotate it (we don't yet
know whether the template-id will become part of an elaborated-type-specifier).
As a tentative resolution to a perceived language defect, mem-initializer-ids
are added to the list of exceptions here (they generally follow the same rules
as base-specifiers).
When the reference to the injected-class-name uses the 'typename' or 'template'
keywords, we permit it to be used to name a type or template as an extension;
other compilers also accept some cases in this area. There are also a couple of
corner cases with dependent template names that we do not yet diagnose, but
which will also get this treatment.
llvm-svn: 292518
InjectedClassNameType's Decl to point at the definition. It's a little
messy, but we do the same thing with classes and their record types,
since much of Clang expects that the TagDecl* one gets out of a type
is the definition. Fixes several Boost.Proto failures.
llvm-svn: 102691
injected class name of a class template or class template partial specialization.
This is a non-canonical type; the canonical type is still a template
specialization type. This becomes the TypeForDecl of the pattern declaration,
which cleans up some amount of code (and complicates some other parts, but
whatever).
Fixes PR6326 and probably a few others, primarily by re-establishing a few
invariants about TypeLoc sizes.
llvm-svn: 98134
that name constructors, the endless joys of out-of-line constructor
definitions, and various other corner cases that the previous hack
never imagined. Fixes PR5688 and tightens up semantic analysis for
constructor names.
Additionally, fixed a problem where we wouldn't properly enter the
declarator scope of a parenthesized declarator. We were entering the
scope, then leaving it when we saw the ")"; now, we re-enter the
declarator scope before parsing the parameter list.
Note that we are forced to perform some tentative parsing within a
class (call it C) to tell the difference between
C(int); // constructor
and
C (f)(int); // member function
which is rather unfortunate. And, although it isn't necessary for
correctness, we use the same tentative-parsing mechanism for
out-of-line constructors to improve diagnostics in icky cases like:
C::C C::f(int); // error: C::C refers to the constructor name, but
// we complain nicely and recover by treating it as
// a type.
llvm-svn: 93322
- This is designed to make it obvious that %clang_cc1 is a "test variable"
which is substituted. It is '%clang_cc1' instead of '%clang -cc1' because it
can be useful to redefine what gets run as 'clang -cc1' (for example, to set
a default target).
llvm-svn: 91446
template arguments, as in template specialization types. This permits
matching out-of-line definitions of members for class templates that
involve non-type template parameters.
llvm-svn: 77462
template. The injected-class-name is either a type or a template,
depending on whether a '<' follows it. As a type, the
injected-class-name's template argument list contains its template
parameters in declaration order.
As part of this, add logic for canonicalizing declarations, and be
sure to canonicalize declarations used in template names and template
arguments.
A TagType is dependent if the declaration it references is dependent.
I'm not happy about the rather complicated protocol needed to use
ASTContext::getTemplateSpecializationType.
llvm-svn: 71408
specializations can be treated as a template. Finally, we can parse
and process the first implementation of Fibonacci I wrote!
Note that this code does not handle all of the cases where
injected-class-names can be treated as templates. In particular,
there's an ambiguity case that we should be able to handle (but
can't), e.g.,
template <class T> struct Base { };
template <class T> struct Derived : Base<int>, Base<char> {
typename Derived::Base b; // error: ambiguous
typename Derived::Base<double> d; // OK
};
llvm-svn: 67720
Richard Smith