[cfe-commits] r154248 - in /cfe/trunk: include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td include/clang/Sema/Sema.h lib/Sema/SemaAccess.cpp lib/Sema/SemaDeclCXX.cpp lib/Sema/SemaExprCXX.cpp lib/Sema/SemaInit.cpp test/CXX/class.access/class.protected/p1.c

[John McCall]

On Apr 8, 2012, at 2:29 AM, Francois Pichet wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 11:04 PM, John McCall <rjmccall at apple.com> wrote:
>> Author: rjmccall
>> Date: Fri Apr  6 22:04:20 2012
>> New Revision: 154248
>> 
>> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=154248&view=rev
>> Log:
>> Fix several problems with protected access control:
>>  - The [class.protected] restriction is non-trivial for any instance
>>    member, even if the access lacks an object (for example, if it's
>>    a pointer-to-member constant).  In this case, it is equivalent to
>>    requiring the naming class to equal the context class.
>>  - The [class.protected] restriction applies to accesses to constructors
>>    and destructors.  A protected constructor or destructor can only be
>>    used to create or destroy a base subobject, as a direct result.
>>  - Several places were dropping or misapplying object information.
>> 
>> The standard could really be much clearer about what the object type is
>> supposed to be in some of these accesses.  Usually it's easy enough to
>> find a reasonable answer, but still, the standard makes a very confident
>> statement about accesses to instance members only being possible in
>> either pointer-to-member literals or member access expressions, which
>> just completely ignores concepts like constructor and destructor
>> calls, using declarations, unevaluated field references, etc.
>> 
> 
> Hi John,
> I am not asking you to make the modification but do you have any
> suggestion about how to handle case like that in MicrosoftMode?
> 
> class A {
> protected:
> 	void f();
> };
> 
> class B : public A{
> public:
> 	void test();
> };
> 
> void B::test() {
> 	&A::f;
> }


It should be trivial to disable the additional restrictions in MicrosoftMode.
Does MSVC implement the protected member access restriction at all,
or does it just miss it in the case of pointer-to-members?

Try this:

  void B::test() {
   A *a = 0;
   a->f();
  }

John.