This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [c++-concepts] code review


>> +        // If the types of the underlying templates match, compare
>> +        // their constraints. The declarations could differ there.
>> +        if (types_match)
>> +          types_match = equivalent_constraints (get_constraints
>> (olddecl),
>> +                                                current_template_reqs);
>
>
> We can't assume that current_template_reqs will always apply to newdecl
> here, as decls_match is called in overload resolution as well.  What's the
> problem with attaching the requirements to the declaration before we get to
> duplicate_decls?

It's because newdecl doesn't have a template_info at the point at
which this is called, and the constraints are associated through that
information. This seems like another good reason for keeping
constraints with template decls.

Until I change that, I can just test to see if newdecl has template
info. If so, I'll use its constraints. If not, I'll use the current
requirements.

Andrew


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]