blob: 1a65aeb3d6cb5ea15d29d5663ef24ea1e07a327b (
plain)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
|
// RUN: %clang_cc1 -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 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}}
};
template<typename T, T N>
struct X1 {
void f0(const X1&); // expected-note{{here}}
void f0(X1&);
void f0(const X1<T, N>&); // expected-error{{redecl}}
};
|
