forked from llvm/llvm-project
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 56
Commit
This commit does not belong to any branch on this repository, and may belong to a fork outside of the repository.
[Clang][Sema] Diagnose variable template explicit specializations wit…
…h storage-class-specifiers (llvm#93873) According to [temp.expl.spec] p2: > The declaration in an _explicit-specialization_ shall not be an _export-declaration_. An explicit specialization shall not use a _storage-class-specifier_ other than `thread_local`. Clang partially implements this, but a number of issues exist: 1. We don't diagnose class scope explicit specializations of variable templates with _storage-class-specifiers_, e.g. ``` struct A { template<typename T> static constexpr int x = 0; template<> static constexpr int x<void> = 1; // ill-formed, but clang accepts }; ```` 2. We incorrectly reject class scope explicit specializations of variable templates when `static` is not used, e.g. ``` struct A { template<typename T> static constexpr int x = 0; template<> constexpr int x<void> = 1; // error: non-static data member cannot be constexpr; did you intend to make it static? }; ```` 3. We don't diagnose dependent class scope explicit specializations of function templates with storage class specifiers, e.g. ``` template<typename T> struct A { template<typename U> static void f(); template<> static void f<int>(); // ill-formed, but clang accepts }; ```` This patch addresses these issues as follows: - # 1 is fixed by issuing a diagnostic when an explicit specialization of a variable template has storage class specifier - # 2 is fixed by considering any non-function declaration with any template parameter lists at class scope to be a static data member. This also allows for better error recovery (it's more likely the user intended to declare a variable template than a "field template"). - # 3 is fixed by checking whether a function template explicit specialization has a storage class specifier even when the primary template is not yet known. One thing to note is that it would be far simpler to diagnose this when parsing the _decl-specifier-seq_, but such an implementation would necessitate a refactor of `ParsedTemplateInfo` which I believe to be outside the scope of this patch. (cherry-picked from commit 9a88aa0) Change-Id: I83a3158e50af6550db031c7b45d772bc9ceda487
- Loading branch information
1 parent
65fd8ab
commit 1f2c2c0
Showing
18 changed files
with
234 additions
and
224 deletions.
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.