[all-commits] [llvm/llvm-project] 5aeaab: [Concepts] Check constraints for explicit template...
royjacobson via All-commits
all-commits at lists.llvm.org
Thu Mar 3 06:34:07 PST 2022
Branch: refs/heads/main
Home: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project
Commit: 5aeaabf35eaddf9e5bfb05c0ec901a8aecfaa36a
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/5aeaabf35eaddf9e5bfb05c0ec901a8aecfaa36a
Author: Roy Jacobson <roi.jacobson1 at gmail.com>
Date: 2022-03-03 (Thu, 03 Mar 2022)
Changed paths:
M clang/lib/Sema/SemaTemplateInstantiate.cpp
A clang/test/AST/constraints-explicit-instantiation.cpp
Log Message:
-----------
[Concepts] Check constraints for explicit template instantiations
The standard requires[0] member function constraints to be checked when
explicitly instantiating classes. This patch adds this constraints
check.
This issue is tracked as #46029 [1].
Note that there's an related open CWG issue (2421[2]) about what to do when
multiple candidates have satisfied constraints. This is particularly an
issue because mangling doesn't contain function constraints, and so the
following code still ICEs with definition with same mangled name
'_ZN1BIiE1fEv' as another definition:
template<class T>
struct B {
int f() requires std::same_as<T, int> {
return 0;
}
int f() requires (std::same_as<T, int> &&
!std::same_as<T, char>) {
return 1;
}
};
template struct B<int>;
Also note that the constraints checking while instantiating *functions*
is still not implemented. I started looking at it but It's a bit more
complicated. I believe in such a case we have to consider the partial
constraints order and potentially choose the best candidate out of the
set of multiple valid ones.
[0]: https://eel.is/c++draft/temp.explicit#10
[1]: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/46029
[2]: https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/2421.html
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D120255
More information about the All-commits
mailing list