ebcfbb5d22
part of template argument deduction is ill-formed, we mark it as invalid and treat it as a deduction failure. If we happen to find that specialization again, treat it as a deduction failure rather than silently building a call to the declaration. Fixes PR11117, a marvelous bug where deduction failed after creating an invalid specialization, causing overload resolution to pick a different candidate. Then we performed a similar overload resolution later, and happily picked the invalid specialization to call... resulting in a silent link failure. llvm-svn: 141809
19 lines
886 B
C++
19 lines
886 B
C++
// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify %s
|
|
|
|
// Make sure we accept this
|
|
template<class X>struct A{typedef X Y;};
|
|
template<class X>bool operator==(A<X>,typename A<X>::Y); // expected-note{{candidate template ignored: failed template argument deduction}}
|
|
|
|
int a(A<int> x) { return operator==(x,1); }
|
|
|
|
int a0(A<int> x) { return x == 1; }
|
|
|
|
// FIXME: the location information for the note isn't very good
|
|
template<class X>struct B{typedef X Y;};
|
|
template<class X>bool operator==(B<X>*,typename B<X>::Y); // \
|
|
// expected-error{{overloaded 'operator==' must have at least one parameter of class or enumeration type}} \
|
|
// expected-note{{in instantiation of function template specialization}} \
|
|
// expected-note{{candidate template ignored: substitution failure [with X = int]}}
|
|
int a(B<int> x) { return operator==(&x,1); } // expected-error{{no matching function for call to 'operator=='}}
|
|
|