Here during maybe_dependent_member_ref for accepted_type<_Up>, we
correctly don't strip the typedef because it's a complex one (its
defaulted template parameter isn't used in its definition) and so
we recurse to consider its corresponding TYPE_DECL.
We then incorrectly decide to not rewrite this use because of the
TYPENAME_TYPE shortcut. But I don't think this shortcut should apply to
a typedef TYPE_DECL.
PR c++/118626
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
* pt.cc (maybe_dependent_member_ref): Restrict TYPENAME_TYPE
shortcut to non-typedef TYPE_DECL.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* g++.dg/cpp2a/class-deduction-alias25a.C: New test.
Reviewed-by: Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
if (TREE_CODE (t) == TYPE_DECL)
{
- if (TREE_CODE (TREE_TYPE (t)) == TYPENAME_TYPE
+ if (!is_typedef_decl (t)
+ && TREE_CODE (TREE_TYPE (t)) == TYPENAME_TYPE
&& TYPE_NAME (TREE_TYPE (t)) == t)
/* The TYPE_DECL for a typename has DECL_CONTEXT of the typename
scope, but it doesn't need to be rewritten again. */
--- /dev/null
+// PR c++/118626
+// { dg-do compile { target c++20 } }
+
+template<long> struct _Nth_type { using type = _Nth_type; };
+
+template<class _Up>
+struct variant {
+ template<class _Tp> static constexpr long __accepted_index = 0;
+ template<long _Np> using __to_type = typename _Nth_type<_Np>::type;
+ template<class _Tp, int = sizeof(_Tp)> using __accepted_type = __to_type<__accepted_index<_Tp>>;
+ template<class = __accepted_type<_Up>> variant(_Up);
+};
+
+template<class _Tp>
+struct Node { Node(_Tp); };
+
+template<class R> using Tree = variant<Node<R>>;
+using type = decltype(Tree{Node{42}});
+using type = Tree<int>;