maybe_new_partial_specialization wasn't propagating TYPE_CONTEXT when
creating a new class type corresponding to a constrained partial spec,
which do_friend relies on via template_class_depth to distinguish a
template friend from a non-template friend, and so in the below testcase
we were incorrectly instantiating the non-template operator+ as if it
were a template leading to an ICE.
PR c++/111890
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
* pt.cc (maybe_new_partial_specialization): Propagate TYPE_CONTEXT
to the newly created partial specialization.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec15.C: New test.
Reviewed-by: Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
tree t = make_class_type (TREE_CODE (type));
CLASSTYPE_DECLARED_CLASS (t) = CLASSTYPE_DECLARED_CLASS (type);
SET_TYPE_TEMPLATE_INFO (t, build_template_info (tmpl, args));
+ TYPE_CONTEXT (t) = TYPE_CONTEXT (type);
/* We only need a separate type node for storing the definition of this
partial specialization; uses of S<T*> are unconstrained, so all are
--- /dev/null
+// PR c++/111890
+// { dg-do compile { target c++20 } }
+
+template<class>
+struct A {
+ template<class T>
+ struct B { };
+
+ template<class T> requires T::value
+ struct B<T> { };
+
+ template<class T> requires (sizeof(T) == sizeof(int))
+ struct B<T> {
+ friend void operator+(B&, int) { }
+ };
+};
+
+void f(A<int>::B<int> b) {
+ b + 0;
+}