Re: [RFA] "Sort" C++ fieldlists

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>]

On Thu, Dec 03, 2009 at 06:21:05PM -0800, Keith Seitz wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> My method overload resolution patch was committed with the following
> comment (from value_struct_elt_for_reference):
> 
>   /* This assumes, of course, that all artificial methods appear
>      BEFORE any concrete methods.  */
> 
> Turns out that isn't a really great assumption. In particular, it
> fails on GCC 3.4.6. So I'm requesting that the attached patch be
> approved. The patch inserts artificial methods into the type's
> fieldlist starting at index 0 and concrete methods starting at the
> end index.
> 
> This shows no regressions (and no advantages) using GCC on linux.
> However, if you run cpexprs.exp, this patch will fix 17 failures with
> GCC 3.4.6. At the worst, consider this a defensive patch against
> breaking the value_struct_elt_for_reference assumption.

I guess this is OK... it seems nicer not to impose the restriction.
Is it this easy?

              int ii;
              j = -1;
              for (ii = 0; ii < TYPE_FN_FIELDLIST_LENGTH (t, i);
                   ++ii)
                {
		  /* Skip artificial methods.  This is necessary if, for example,
		     the user wants to "print subclass::subclass" with only
		     one user-defined constructor.  There is no ambiguity in this
		     case.  */
                  if (TYPE_FN_FIELD_ARTIFICIAL (f, ii))
                    continue;

		  /* Desired method is ambiguous if more than one method is
		     defined.  */
		  if (j != -1)
		    error (_("non-unique member `%s' requires type instantiation"), name);

		  j = ii;
                }

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery