[PATCH] Implement DR61: Address of ambiguous bound methods should be disallowed

[Richard Smith]

On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 3:25 PM, David Majnemer
<david.majnemer at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 12:00 PM, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 1:14 AM, David Majnemer <david.majnemer at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 10:12 PM, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Please remove the FIXME from dr0xx.cpp.
>> >
>> >
>> > Done.
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> I'm not sure the changes to p2-resolve-single-template-id.cpp are
>> >> right -- we should have resolved the name to a single static member
>> >> function in those cases. EDG thinks those cases are valid.
>> >
>> >
>> > You are totally correct. I *wrongly* tried to rationalize GCC's behavior
>> > as
>> > it seemed believable. That's the last time I do that...
>> >
>> > I've attached a patch that corrects for this.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> I think we should actually be fixing up the & operand to point to the
>> resolved function in CheckAddressOfOperand, rather than just checking
>> it. Does (for instance) decltype(&a.static_fn) work with the current
>> approach?
>
>
> Neither my patch nor EDG allows decltype(&a.static_fn).

Sorry, the case I meant was this one:

struct A { template<typename T> static void f(); } a;
decltype(&a.f<int>) p;

>> >> On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 9:20 PM, David Majnemer
>> >> <david.majnemer at gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > Sorry, I accidentally forgot to mark the test as passing in
>> >> > dr0xx.cpp.
>> >> >
>> >> > An updated patch is attached.
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > David Majnemer
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 9:15 PM, David Majnemer
>> >> > <david.majnemer at gmail.com>
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> clang currently disallows bound methods from having their address
>> >> >> taken
>> >> >> but sometimes allows them if the method is overloaded in some way.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> The attached patch implements DR61 [*] which affirms that
>> >> >> expressions
>> >> >> containing unresolved member access should be disallowed when
>> >> >> performing
>> >> >> "address of" operations.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> [*] http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_closed.html#61
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Thanks
>> >> >> --
>> >> >> David Majnemer
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >
>> >
>
>