templates. We now distinguish between an explicit instantiation
declaration and an explicit instantiation definition, and know not to
instantiate explicit instantiation declarations. Unfortunately, there
is some remaining confusion w.r.t. instantiation of out-of-line member
function definitions that causes trouble here.
llvm-svn: 81053
formed without a trailing '(', diagnose the error (these expressions
must be immediately called), emit a fix-it hint, and fix the code.
llvm-svn: 81015
involve qualified names, e.g., x->Base::f. We now maintain enough
information in the AST to compare the results of the name lookup of
"Base" in the scope of the postfix-expression (determined at template
definition time) and in the type of the object expression.
llvm-svn: 80953
x->Base::f
We no longer try to "enter" the context of the type that "x" points
to. Instead, we drag that object type through the parser and pass it
into the Sema routines that need to know how to perform lookup within
member access expressions.
We now implement most of the crazy name lookup rules in C++
[basic.lookup.classref] for non-templated code, including performing
lookup both in the context of the type referred to by the member
access and in the scope of the member access itself and then detecting
ambiguities when the two lookups collide (p1 and p4; p3 and p7 are
still TODO). This change also corrects our handling of name lookup
within template arguments of template-ids inside the
nested-name-specifier (p6; we used to look into the scope of the
object expression for them) and fixes PR4703.
I have disabled some tests that involve member access expressions
where the object expression has dependent type, because we don't yet
have the ability to describe dependent nested-name-specifiers starting
with an identifier.
llvm-svn: 80843
When performing template instantiation of the definitions of member
templates (or members thereof), we build a data structure containing
the template arguments from each "level" of template
instantiation. During template instantiation, we substitute all levels
of template arguments simultaneously.
llvm-svn: 80389
declarations of same, introduce a single AST class and add appropriate bits
(encoded in the namespace) for whether a decl is "real" or not. Much hackery
about previously-declared / not-previously-declared, but it's essentially
mandated by the standard that friends alter lookup, and this is at least
fairly non-intrusive.
Refactor the Sema methods specific to friends for cleaner flow and less nesting.
Incidentally solve a few bugs, but I remain confident that we can put them back.
llvm-svn: 80353
TypenameType if getTypeName is looking at a member of an unknown
specialization. This allows us to properly parse class templates that
derived from type that could only otherwise be described by a typename type,
e.g.,
template<class T> struct X {};
template<typename T> struct Y : public X<T>::X { };
Fixes PR4381.
llvm-svn: 80123
their members, including member class template, member function
templates, and member classes and functions of member templates.
To actually parse the nested-name-specifiers that qualify the name of
an out-of-line definition of a member template, e.g.,
template<typename X> template<typename Y>
X Outer<X>::Inner1<Y>::foo(Y) {
return X();
}
we need to look for the template names (e.g., "Inner1") as a member of
the current instantiation (Outer<X>), even before we have entered the
scope of the current instantiation. Since we can't do this in general
(i.e., we should not be looking into all dependent
nested-name-specifiers as if they were the current instantiation), we
rely on the parser to tell us when it is parsing a declaration
specifier sequence, and, therefore, when we should consider the
current scope specifier to be a current instantiation.
Printing of complicated, dependent nested-name-specifiers may be
somewhat broken by this commit; I'll add tests for this issue and fix
the problem (if it still exists) in a subsequent commit.
llvm-svn: 80044
the logic is there for out-of-line definitions with multiple levels of
nested templates, but this is still a work-in-progress: we're having
trouble determining when we should look into a dependent
nested-name-specifier.
llvm-svn: 80003
that type. Note that we do not produce a diagnostic if the type is
incomplete; rather, we just don't look for conversion functions. Fixes PR4660.
llvm-svn: 79919
Anders Carlsson