Re: [PATCH 1/2] PR c++/61636

[Adam Butcher <adam at jessamine dot co dot uk>]

On 2015-04-18 18:53, Adam Butcher wrote:
> Test like this?
>
> /* { dg-do run { target c++14 } }  */
> /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "..." } }  */
>
> struct X
> {
>   int f (int, double) { return 255; }
>   static int f (int, int) { return 65535; }
>
>   auto m1 ()
>   {
>     return [=] (auto a) {
>       return f (7, a);
>     };
>   }
>
>   auto m2 ()
>   {
>     return [=] (auto a) {
>       return f (9, 10) + a;
>     };
>   }

And this:

  auto m3 ()
  {
    return [=] (auto a) {
      return f (11, 12.0) + a;
    };
  }

Currently we don't capture 'this' here despite the call not being 
dependent on any lambda parameter and resolving to a non-static member 
function.

I think I need to resolve a member call within a generic lambda as if 
it were not in template context to determine whether it unambiguously 
resolves to a static member function.  If it does, then no capture 
required.  Otherwise, 'this' should be captured because either a) the 
call is to a non-static member function without any dependent parameters 
or b) because it may resolve to a non-static member function at callop 
instantiate time.

No sure whether I can do all this at my current patch site in 
cp_parser_postfix_expression or whether it needs to be later.

Adam