Split DependentNameType into two types. DependentNameType represents the

case of an elaborated-type-specifier like 'typename A<T>::foo', and
DependentTemplateSpecializationType represents the case of an
elaborated-type-specifier like 'typename A<T>::template B<T>'.  The TypeLoc
representation of a DependentTST conveniently exactly matches that of an
ElaboratedType wrapping a TST.

Kill off the explicit rebuild methods for RebuildInCurrentInstantiation;
the standard implementations work fine because the nested name specifier
is computable in the newly-entered context.



git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@105801 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8

1 files changed, 18 insertions, 14 deletions

diff --git a/lib/CodeGen/Mangle.cpp b/lib/CodeGen/Mangle.cpp
index d8f1ca0b90..011e46941d 100644
--- a/lib/CodeGen/Mangle.cpp
+++ b/lib/CodeGen/Mangle.cpp
@@ -1369,21 +1369,25 @@ void CXXNameMangler::mangleType(const TemplateSpecializationType *T) {
 void CXXNameMangler::mangleType(const DependentNameType *T) {
   // Typename types are always nested
   Out << 'N';
-  if (T->getIdentifier()) {
-    mangleUnresolvedScope(T->getQualifier());
-    mangleSourceName(T->getIdentifier());
-  } else {
-    const TemplateSpecializationType *TST = T->getTemplateId();
+  mangleUnresolvedScope(T->getQualifier());
+  mangleSourceName(T->getIdentifier());    
+  Out << 'E';
+}
 
-    mangleTemplatePrefix(TST->getTemplateName());
-      
-    // FIXME: GCC does not appear to mangle the template arguments when
-    // the template in question is a dependent template name. Should we
-    // emulate that badness?
-    mangleTemplateArgs(TST->getTemplateName(), TST->getArgs(),
-                       TST->getNumArgs());    
-  }
-    
+void CXXNameMangler::mangleType(const DependentTemplateSpecializationType *T) {
+  // Dependently-scoped template types are always nested
+  Out << 'N';
+
+  // TODO: avoid making this TemplateName.
+  TemplateName Prefix =
+    getASTContext().getDependentTemplateName(T->getQualifier(),
+                                             T->getIdentifier());
+  mangleTemplatePrefix(Prefix);
+
+  // FIXME: GCC does not appear to mangle the template arguments when
+  // the template in question is a dependent template name. Should we
+  // emulate that badness?
+  mangleTemplateArgs(Prefix, T->getArgs(), T->getNumArgs());    
   Out << 'E';
 }