[cfe-dev] Probable problem in ElaboratedType AST representation

Abramo Bagnara abramobagnara at tin.it
Wed Jan 6 16:40:16 CST 2010


Analyzing the AST produced for this snippet:

struct g {
  struct h {
    struct v;
    h::v *y;       /* (1) */
    class h::v *z; /* (2) */
  };
};

I see that the syntactic info for (2) are lost, while they are not for (1).

In (1) the type for y is translated to PointerType -> QualifiedNameType
-> RecordType
In (2) the type for z is translated to ElaboratedType -> PointerType ->
RecordType

This mean that in (2) there are currently no containers to represent the
NestedNameSpecifier that in (1) we have inside QualifiedNameType.

The problem is shown also using -ast-dump -emit-ast:

struct g {
public:
    struct g;
    struct h {
    public:
        struct h;
        struct v;
        h::v *y;            /* (1) */
        class g::h::v *z;   /* (2) */
        inline h();
        inline h(struct g::h const &);
        inline struct g::h &operator=(struct g::h const &);
        inline void ~h();
    };
    inline g();
    inline g(struct g const &);
    inline struct g &operator=(struct g const &);
    inline void ~g();
};

While in (1) we have only the name specifiers present in the source, in
(2) we have always the full name specification.

I'd like to know if this problem is confirmed and if the design
intention is to have a QualifiedNameType also under ElaboratedType or to
encode the missing info in an other way.



More information about the cfe-dev mailing list