f6b0ae144e
parameters.
The current implementation to judge the similarity of TypeConstraint in
ASTContext::isSameTemplateParameter is problematic, it couldn't handle
the following case:
```C++
template <__integer_like _Tp, C<_Tp> Sentinel>
constexpr _Tp operator()(_Tp &&__t, Sentinel &&last) const {
return __t;
}
```
When we see 2 such declarations from different modules, we would judge
their similarity by `ASTContext::isSame*` methods. But problems come for
the TypeConstraint. Originally, we would profile each argument one by
one. But it is not right. Since the profiling result of `_Tp` would
refer to two different template type declarations. So it would get
different results. It is right since the `_Tp` in different modules
refers to different declarations indeed. So the same declaration in
different modules would meet incorrect our-checking results.
It is not the thing we want. We want to know if the TypeConstraint have
the same expression.
Reviewer: vsapsai, ilya-biryukov
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D129068
97 lines
2.2 KiB
C++
97 lines
2.2 KiB
C++
// RUN: rm -rf %t
|
|
// RUN: mkdir %t
|
|
// RUN: split-file %s %t
|
|
//
|
|
// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++20 %t/A.cppm -emit-module-interface -o %t/A.pcm
|
|
// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++20 -fprebuilt-module-path=%t -I%t -DDIFFERENT %t/B.cppm -verify
|
|
// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++20 -fprebuilt-module-path=%t -I%t %t/B.cppm -verify
|
|
|
|
//--- foo.h
|
|
#ifndef FOO_H
|
|
#define FOO_H
|
|
|
|
template <class T>
|
|
concept Range = requires(T &t) { t.begin(); };
|
|
|
|
template<class _Tp>
|
|
concept __integer_like = true;
|
|
|
|
template <class _Tp>
|
|
concept __member_size = requires(_Tp &&t) { t.size(); };
|
|
|
|
template <class First, class Second>
|
|
concept C = requires(First x, Second y) { x + y; };
|
|
|
|
struct A {
|
|
public:
|
|
template <Range T>
|
|
using range_type = T;
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
struct __fn {
|
|
template <__member_size _Tp>
|
|
constexpr __integer_like auto operator()(_Tp&& __t) const {
|
|
return __t.size();
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
template <__integer_like _Tp, C<_Tp> Sentinel>
|
|
constexpr _Tp operator()(_Tp &&__t, Sentinel &&last) const {
|
|
return __t;
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
template <template <class> class H, class S, C<H<S>> Sentinel>
|
|
constexpr H<S> operator()(H<S> &&__s, Sentinel &&last) const {
|
|
return __s;
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// Tests that we could find different concept definition indeed.
|
|
#ifndef DIFFERENT
|
|
template <__integer_like _Tp, __integer_like _Up, C<_Tp> Sentinel>
|
|
constexpr _Tp operator()(_Tp &&__t, _Up _u, Sentinel &&last) const {
|
|
return __t;
|
|
}
|
|
#else
|
|
template <__integer_like _Tp, __integer_like _Up, C<_Up> Sentinel>
|
|
constexpr _Tp operator()(_Tp &&__t, _Up _u, Sentinel &&last) const {
|
|
return __t;
|
|
}
|
|
#endif
|
|
};
|
|
#endif
|
|
|
|
//--- A.cppm
|
|
module;
|
|
#include "foo.h"
|
|
export module A;
|
|
|
|
//--- B.cppm
|
|
module;
|
|
#include "foo.h"
|
|
export module B;
|
|
import A;
|
|
|
|
#ifdef DIFFERENT
|
|
// expected-error@foo.h:41 {{'__fn::operator()' from module 'A.<global>' is not present in definition of '__fn' provided earlier}}
|
|
// expected-note@* 1+{{declaration of 'operator()' does not match}}
|
|
#else
|
|
// expected-no-diagnostics
|
|
#endif
|
|
|
|
template <class T>
|
|
struct U {
|
|
auto operator+(U) { return 0; }
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
void foo() {
|
|
A a;
|
|
struct S {
|
|
int size() { return 0; }
|
|
auto operator+(S s) { return 0; }
|
|
};
|
|
__fn{}(S());
|
|
__fn{}(S(), S());
|
|
__fn{}(S(), S(), S());
|
|
|
|
__fn{}(U<int>(), U<int>());
|
|
}
|