------- Comment #7 from pinskia at gmail dot com 2007-10-02 23:59 ------- Subject: Re: Unhelpful diagnostic for incorrect pointer-to-member function syntax
On 2 Oct 2007 23:54:04 -0000, jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ------- Comment #6 from jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com 2007-10-02 23:54 > ------- > (From update of attachment 14287) > >+ "function in %<%E (...)%>, e.g. %<(... ->* %E) (...)%>", > >+ original, original); > > return error_mark_node; It might be better to use %$1E (I think that is how it is done) so you don't have to pass original twice. Thanks, Andrew Pinski -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23194
