e362cea568
template. The injected-class-name is either a type or a template, depending on whether a '<' follows it. As a type, the injected-class-name's template argument list contains its template parameters in declaration order. As part of this, add logic for canonicalizing declarations, and be sure to canonicalize declarations used in template names and template arguments. A TagType is dependent if the declaration it references is dependent. I'm not happy about the rather complicated protocol needed to use ASTContext::getTemplateSpecializationType. llvm-svn: 71408
41 lines
992 B
C++
41 lines
992 B
C++
// RUN: clang-cc -fsyntax-only -verify %s
|
|
template<typename T>
|
|
struct X {
|
|
X<T*> *ptr;
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
X<int> x;
|
|
|
|
template<>
|
|
struct X<int***> {
|
|
typedef X<int***> *ptr;
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
// FIXME: EDG rejects this in their strict-conformance mode, but I
|
|
// don't see any wording making this ill-formed. Actually,
|
|
// [temp.local]p2 might make it ill-formed. Are we "in the scope of
|
|
// the class template specialization?"
|
|
X<float>::X<int> xi = x;
|
|
|
|
// [temp.local]p1:
|
|
|
|
// FIXME: test non-type and template template parameters
|
|
template<typename T, typename U>
|
|
struct X0 {
|
|
typedef T type;
|
|
typedef U U_type;
|
|
typedef U_type U_type2;
|
|
|
|
void f0(const X0&); // expected-note{{here}}
|
|
void f0(X0&);
|
|
void f0(const X0<T, U>&); // expected-error{{redecl}}
|
|
|
|
void f1(const X0&); // expected-note{{here}}
|
|
void f1(X0&);
|
|
void f1(const X0<type, U_type2>&); // expected-error{{redecl}}
|
|
|
|
void f2(const X0&); // expected-note{{here}}
|
|
void f2(X0&);
|
|
void f2(const ::X0<type, U_type2>&); // expected-error{{redecl}}
|
|
};
|