Mangle dependent template names such as the nested-name-specifier in
T::apply <U>::type
Fixes PR6899, although I want to dig a little deeper into the FIXME
for dependent template names that refer to operators.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@102167 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
diff --git a/test/CodeGenCXX/mangle-template.cpp b/test/CodeGenCXX/mangle-template.cpp
index 22949da..8b097ff 100644
--- a/test/CodeGenCXX/mangle-template.cpp
+++ b/test/CodeGenCXX/mangle-template.cpp
@@ -104,3 +104,26 @@
// CHECK: define weak_odr void @_ZN5test81fIiEEvNS_5int_cIXsrNS_4metaIT_E4typeE5valueEEE
template void f<int>(int_c<sizeof(int)>);
}
+
+namespace test9 {
+ template<typename T>
+ struct supermeta {
+ template<typename U>
+ struct apply {
+ typedef T U::*type;
+ };
+ };
+
+ struct X { };
+
+ template<typename T, typename U>
+ typename supermeta<T>::template apply<U>::type f();
+
+ void test_f() {
+ // CHECK: @_ZN5test91fIiNS_1XEEENS_9supermetaIT_E5applyIT0_E4typeEv()
+ // Note: GCC incorrectly mangles this as
+ // _ZN5test91fIiNS_1XEEENS_9supermetaIT_E5apply4typeEv, while EDG
+ // gets it right.
+ f<int, X>();
+ }
+}