parser is looking at a declaration or an expression, use a '=' to
conclude that we are parsing a declaration.
This is wrong. However, our previous approach of finding a comma after
the '=' is also wrong, because the ',' could be part of a
template-argument-list. So, for now we're going to use the same wrong
heuristic as GCC and Visual C++, because less real-world code is
likely to be broken this way. I've opened PR7655 to keep track of our
wrongness; note also the XFAIL'd test.
Fixes <rdar://problem/8193163>.
llvm-svn: 108459
propagating error conditions out of the various annotate-me-a-snowflake
routines. Generally (but not universally) removes redundant diagnostics
as well as, you know, not crashing on bad code. On the other hand,
I have just signed myself up to fix fiddly parser errors for the next
week. Again.
llvm-svn: 97221
The following attributes are currently supported in C++0x attribute
lists (and in GNU ones as well):
- align() - semantics believed to be conformant to n3000, except for
redeclarations and what entities it may apply to
- final - semantics believed to be conformant to CWG issue 817's proposed
wording, except for redeclarations
- noreturn - semantics believed to be conformant to n3000, except for
redeclarations
- carries_dependency - currently ignored (this is an optimization hint)
llvm-svn: 89543
their members, including member class template, member function
templates, and member classes and functions of member templates.
To actually parse the nested-name-specifiers that qualify the name of
an out-of-line definition of a member template, e.g.,
template<typename X> template<typename Y>
X Outer<X>::Inner1<Y>::foo(Y) {
return X();
}
we need to look for the template names (e.g., "Inner1") as a member of
the current instantiation (Outer<X>), even before we have entered the
scope of the current instantiation. Since we can't do this in general
(i.e., we should not be looking into all dependent
nested-name-specifiers as if they were the current instantiation), we
rely on the parser to tell us when it is parsing a declaration
specifier sequence, and, therefore, when we should consider the
current scope specifier to be a current instantiation.
Printing of complicated, dependent nested-name-specifiers may be
somewhat broken by this commit; I'll add tests for this issue and fix
the problem (if it still exists) in a subsequent commit.
llvm-svn: 80044
a paren expression without considering the context past the parentheses.
Behold:
(T())x; - type-id
(T())*x; - type-id
(T())/x; - expression
(T()); - expression
llvm-svn: 72260
instantiation for C++ typename-specifiers such as
typename T::type
The parsing of typename-specifiers is relatively easy thanks to
annotation tokens. When we see the "typename", we parse the
typename-specifier and produce a typename annotation token. There are
only a few places where we need to handle this. We currently parse the
typename-specifier form that terminates in an identifier, but not the
simple-template-id form, e.g.,
typename T::template apply<U, V>
Parsing of nested-name-specifiers has a similar problem, since at this
point we don't have any representation of a class template
specialization whose template-name is unknown.
Semantic analysis is only partially complete, with some support for
template instantiation that works for simple examples.
llvm-svn: 67875
disambiguation contexts, so that we properly parse template arguments
such as
A<int()>
as type-ids rather than as expressions. Since this can be confusing
(especially when the template parameter is a non-type template
parameter), we try to give a friendly error message.
Almost, eliminate a redundant error message (that should have been a
note) and add some ultra-basic checks for non-type template
arguments.
llvm-svn: 64189
.def file for each library. This means that adding a diagnostic
to sema doesn't require all the other libraries to be rebuilt.
Patch by Anders Johnsen!
llvm-svn: 63111
warning: statement was disambiguated as declaration
because it is currently firing in cases where the declaration would
not actually parse as a statement. We'd love to bring this warning
back if we can make it more accurate.
llvm-svn: 61137
This was the motivation of the following changes:
-'TentativeParsingResult' enum is replaced by a 'TPResult' class that basically encapsulates the enum.
-TPR_true, TPR_false, TPR_ambiguous, and TPR_error enum constants are replaced by TPResult::True(), TPResult::False(), etc. calls that return a TPResult object.
-Also fixed the subtle bug in Parser::isCXXFunctionDeclarator (caught by the above changes as a compilation error).
llvm-svn: 57125
'ParseTentative.cpp' implements the functionality needed to resolve ambiguous C++ statements, to either a declaration or an expression, by "tentatively parsing" them.
llvm-svn: 57084
Douglas Gregor