Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[clang] Implement CWG2398 provisional TTP matching to class templates #94981
[clang] Implement CWG2398 provisional TTP matching to class templates #94981
Changes from 1 commit
2729c98
530f884
9c307db
c414b9c
653f6fa
09440f8
b9900e4
ae27685
2ace043
5275f0d
446f916
861d1bc
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I wonder if instead we want to add an additional method.
In a lot of places through the rest of the patch,
DefaultArgs
is defaultedThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I am not seeing a worthwhile tradeoff.
Just the function signature is hugely complicated, and would need to be duplicated.
The implementation would be mostly the same, with a small block which would be omitted in one of the implementations.
What did you have in mind?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Maybe something like that?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah. One issue I have often had with these functions with large amount of both defaulted and non-defaulted parameters, is that you would want to extend it by changing the signature, then arguments would match parameters incorrectly, but this would not cause a hard error on all of the call sites.
I could have easily added DefaultArgs as defaulted empty here, but chose not to due to this reason.
Besides that, overloading functions with such huge numbers of parameters creates some confusion as well.
I'd slightly prefer if we avoided that, but don't have strong enough feelings to go on a crusade against it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can we think about ways to simplify these interface in a subsequent patch?
@AaronBallman @erichkeane for additional opinions
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There's enough repeated stuff though these interfaces here, I don't think I'd mind a followup that created an object to contain all the related stuff. For example, the Sugared/Canonical vectors shoudl probably be a vectro of TempalteArgument pairs (or more likely their own structure) or something? But I'm open to other ideas as well (agian in a followup).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The problem with the separate Sugared / Converted lists I already have an incomplete patch to address that, though I am currently working on something else.