Templates

A template is represented by a TEMPLATE_DECL. The specific fields used are:

DECL_TEMPLATE_RESULT

The generic decl on which instantiations are based. This looks just like any other decl.

DECL_TEMPLATE_PARMS

The parameters to this template.

The generic decl is parsed as much like any other decl as possible, given the parameterization. The template decl is not built up until the generic decl has been completed. For template classes, a template decl is generated for each member function and static data member, as well.

Template members of template classes are represented by a TEMPLATE_DECL for the class' parameters around another TEMPLATE_DECL for the member's parameters.

All declarations that are instantiations or specializations of templates refer to their template and parameters through DECL_TEMPLATE_INFO.

How should I handle parsing member functions with the proper param decls? Set them up again or try to use the same ones? Currently we do the former. We can probably do this without any extra machinery in store_pending_inline, by deducing the parameters from the decl in do_pending_inlines. PRE_PARSED_TEMPLATE_DECL?

If a base is a parm, we can't check anything about it. If a base is not a parm, we need to check it for name binding. Do finish_base_struct if no bases are parameterized (only if none, including indirect, are parms). Nah, don't bother trying to do any of this until instantiation -- we only need to do name binding in advance.

Always set up method vec and fields, inc. synthesized methods. Really? We can't know the types of the copy folks, or whether we need a destructor, or can have a default ctor, until we know our bases and fields. Otherwise, we can assume and fix ourselves later. Hopefully.

Go to the first, previous, next, last section, table of contents.