[PATCH] D84136: [clangd] Fix visitation of ConceptSpecializationExpr in constrained-parameter

[Nathan Ridge via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

nridge updated this revision to Diff 280771.
nridge marked an inline comment as done.
nridge added a comment.

Spun off the source-location issue to D84613 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D84613>.

Some other review comments remain to be addressed.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D84136/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D84136

Files:
  clang-tools-extra/clangd/unittests/FindTargetTests.cpp
  clang/include/clang/AST/RecursiveASTVisitor.h


Index: clang/include/clang/AST/RecursiveASTVisitor.h
===================================================================
--- clang/include/clang/AST/RecursiveASTVisitor.h
+++ clang/include/clang/AST/RecursiveASTVisitor.h
@@ -1777,8 +1777,10 @@
   // D is the "T" in something like "template<typename T> class vector;"
   if (D->getTypeForDecl())
     TRY_TO(TraverseType(QualType(D->getTypeForDecl(), 0)));
-  if (const auto *TC = D->getTypeConstraint())
+  if (const auto *TC = D->getTypeConstraint()) {
+    TRY_TO(TraverseStmt(TC->getImmediatelyDeclaredConstraint()));
     TRY_TO(TraverseConceptReference(*TC));
+  }
   if (D->hasDefaultArgument() && !D->defaultArgumentWasInherited())
     TRY_TO(TraverseTypeLoc(D->getDefaultArgumentInfo()->getTypeLoc()));
 })
Index: clang-tools-extra/clangd/unittests/FindTargetTests.cpp
===================================================================
--- clang-tools-extra/clangd/unittests/FindTargetTests.cpp
+++ clang-tools-extra/clangd/unittests/FindTargetTests.cpp
@@ -405,6 +405,11 @@
 }
 
 TEST_F(TargetDeclTest, Concept) {
+  Flags.push_back("-std=c++20");
+
+  // FIXME: Should we truncate the pretty-printed form of a concept decl
+  // somewhere?
+
   Code = R"cpp(
     template <typename T>
     concept Fooable = requires (T t) { t.foo(); };
@@ -414,12 +419,31 @@
       t.foo();
     }
   )cpp";
-  Flags.push_back("-std=c++20");
   EXPECT_DECLS(
       "ConceptSpecializationExpr",
-      // FIXME: Should we truncate the pretty-printed form of a concept decl
-      // somewhere?
       {"template <typename T> concept Fooable = requires (T t) { t.foo(); };"});
+
+  // constrained-parameter
+  Code = R"cpp(
+    template <typename T>
+    concept Fooable = true;
+
+    template <[[Fooable]] T>
+    void bar(T t);
+  )cpp";
+  EXPECT_DECLS("ConceptSpecializationExpr",
+               {"template <typename T> concept Fooable = true;"});
+
+  // partial-concept-id
+  Code = R"cpp(
+    template <typename T, typename U>
+    concept Fooable = true;
+
+    template <[[Fooable]]<int> T>
+    void bar(T t);
+  )cpp";
+  EXPECT_DECLS("ConceptSpecializationExpr",
+               {"template <typename T, typename U> concept Fooable = true;"});
 }
 
 TEST_F(TargetDeclTest, FunctionTemplate) {


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: D84136.280771.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 2255 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20200727/b37253cb/attachment.bin>