-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 14.3k
Revert "[Clang] Profile singly-resolved UnresolvedLookupExpr with the declaration" #140655
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
Conversation
… declara…" This reverts commit 858649a.
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang-modules @llvm/pr-subscribers-clang Author: Younan Zhang (zyn0217) ChangesThis introduced a bug where noexcept specifiers are involved, as reported in #140029 (comment) Addressing that doesn't seem trivial at the moment, so I'll need some time to think it over; in the meantime let's Reverts llvm/llvm-project#140029 Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/140655.diff 3 Files Affected:
diff --git a/clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst b/clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
index ac9baf229b489..d756f7a3a3f70 100644
--- a/clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
+++ b/clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
@@ -741,7 +741,6 @@ Bug Fixes to C++ Support
- Fixed the handling of pack indexing types in the constraints of a member function redeclaration. (#GH138255)
- Clang now correctly parses arbitrary order of ``[[]]``, ``__attribute__`` and ``alignas`` attributes for declarations (#GH133107)
- Fixed a crash when forming an invalid function type in a dependent context. (#GH138657) (#GH115725) (#GH68852)
-- Fixed a function declaration mismatch that caused inconsistencies between concepts and variable template declarations. (#GH139476)
- Clang no longer segfaults when there is a configuration mismatch between modules and their users (http://crbug.com/400353616).
- Fix an incorrect deduction when calling an explicit object member function template through an overload set address.
- Fixed bug in constant evaluation that would allow using the value of a
diff --git a/clang/lib/AST/StmtProfile.cpp b/clang/lib/AST/StmtProfile.cpp
index 19db338f760ba..f7d1655f67ed1 100644
--- a/clang/lib/AST/StmtProfile.cpp
+++ b/clang/lib/AST/StmtProfile.cpp
@@ -2189,10 +2189,7 @@ StmtProfiler::VisitCXXPseudoDestructorExpr(const CXXPseudoDestructorExpr *S) {
void StmtProfiler::VisitOverloadExpr(const OverloadExpr *S) {
VisitExpr(S);
- if (S->getNumDecls() == 1)
- VisitDecl(*S->decls_begin());
- else
- VisitNestedNameSpecifier(S->getQualifier());
+ VisitNestedNameSpecifier(S->getQualifier());
VisitName(S->getName(), /*TreatAsDecl*/ true);
ID.AddBoolean(S->hasExplicitTemplateArgs());
if (S->hasExplicitTemplateArgs())
diff --git a/clang/test/SemaTemplate/concepts-out-of-line-def.cpp b/clang/test/SemaTemplate/concepts-out-of-line-def.cpp
index bf505dec0ca14..e5d00491d3fb8 100644
--- a/clang/test/SemaTemplate/concepts-out-of-line-def.cpp
+++ b/clang/test/SemaTemplate/concepts-out-of-line-def.cpp
@@ -853,18 +853,3 @@ template <int... Ts>
requires C<Ts...[0]>
auto TplClass<int>::buggy() -> void {}
}
-
-namespace GH139476 {
-
-namespace moo {
- template <typename T>
- constexpr bool baa = true;
-
- template <typename T> requires baa<T>
- void caw();
-}
-
-template <typename T> requires moo::baa<T>
-void moo::caw() {}
-
-}
|
LLVM Buildbot has detected a new failure on builder Full details are available at: https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/65/builds/16860 Here is the relevant piece of the build log for the reference
|
… declaration" (llvm#140655) This introduced a bug where noexcept specifiers are involved, as reported in llvm#140029 (comment) Addressing that doesn't seem trivial at the moment, so I'll need some time to think it over; in the meantime let's revert the offending patch. Reverts llvm#140029
… declaration" (llvm#140655) This introduced a bug where noexcept specifiers are involved, as reported in llvm#140029 (comment) Addressing that doesn't seem trivial at the moment, so I'll need some time to think it over; in the meantime let's revert the offending patch. Reverts llvm#140029
This introduced a bug where noexcept specifiers are involved, as reported in #140029 (comment)
Addressing that doesn't seem trivial at the moment, so I'll need some time to think it over; in the meantime let's
revert the offending patch.
Reverts #140029