[cfe-commits] [Request for approval] Redundant NNS and missing template keyword)

[Douglas Gregor]

Sent from my iPhone

On Aug 10, 2010, at 1:16 AM, Abramo Bagnara <abramo.bagnara at gmail.com> wrote:

> 
> Douglas Gregor wrote:
>> On Jul 27, 2010, at 12:01 PM, Abramo Bagnara wrote:
>> 
>>> Please find attached a couple of patches that are meant to fix the
>>> problems shown by the following examples.
> 
> [...]
> 
>>> The first problem is due to the fact that the NNS is encoded *both* in
>>> the ElaboratedType and in the underlying (dependent)
>>> TemplateSpecializationType: this should be corrected in redundant-nns.patch
>> 
>> In this patch, we have:
>> 
>> Index: lib/Sema/SemaTemplate.cpp
>> ===================================================================
>> --- lib/Sema/SemaTemplate.cpp    (revision 109367)
>> +++ lib/Sema/SemaTemplate.cpp    (working copy)
>> @@ -5258,8 +5260,6 @@
>> 
>>   TypeSourceInfo *InnerTSI = 0;
>>   QualType T = GetTypeFromParser(Ty, &InnerTSI);
>> -  NestedNameSpecifier *NNS
>> -    = static_cast<NestedNameSpecifier *>(SS.getScopeRep());
>> 
>>   assert(isa<TemplateSpecializationType>(T) && 
>>          "Expected a template specialization type");
>> @@ -5276,7 +5276,7 @@
>>     else
>>       Builder.push<TemplateSpecializationTypeLoc>(T).initialize(TemplateLoc);
>> 
>> -    T = Context.getElaboratedType(ETK_Typename, NNS, T);
>> +    T = Context.getElaboratedType(ETK_Typename, /*NNS=*/0, T);
>>     ElaboratedTypeLoc TL = Builder.push<ElaboratedTypeLoc>(T);
>>     TL.setKeywordLoc(TypenameLoc);
>>     TL.setQualifierRange(SS.getRange());
>> 
>> I think we only want to drop NNS when T is a TemplateSpecializationTypeLoc. Otherwise, we'll end up eliminating some syntactic sugar in the non-template-specialization case.
> 
> Here T is known to definitely be a TemplateSpecializationType.
> see the assert a few lines above:
> 
>  assert(isa<TemplateSpecializationType>(T) &&
>         "Expected a template specialization type");

You're right, sorry. 

> Anyway, we managed to improve this patch: we found another occurrence of
> the same problem in SemaType.cpp.
> 
> OK to commit?

Yes. 

  - Doug

> Cheers,
> Abramo.
> <redundant-nns-2.patch>