On 11/04/2011 11:31 AM, Jason Merrill wrote:
> Speaking of which, that function's comment doesn't match the code:
>
>> + transaction-expression:
>> + __transaction_atomic txn-exception-spec[opt] compound-statement
>> + __transaction_relaxed txn-exception-spec[opt] compound-statement
Fixed.
>> + function-definition:
>> + decl-specifier-seq [opt] declarator function-atomic-block
>
> function-atomic-block should be function-transaction-block, right?
Yes. The spec has changed a couple of times, and the comments didn't
make all the same changes.
r~
* cp/parser.c (cp_parser_init_declarator): Fix production comments.
(cp_parser_transaction_expression): Don't parse txn-attributes here.
diff --git a/gcc/cp/parser.c b/gcc/cp/parser.c
index d7cdb9c..ed70178 100644
--- a/gcc/cp/parser.c
+++ b/gcc/cp/parser.c
@@ -15116,7 +15116,7 @@ cp_parser_asm_definition (cp_parser* parser)
TM Extension:
function-definition:
- decl-specifier-seq [opt] declarator function-atomic-block
+ decl-specifier-seq [opt] declarator function-transaction-block
The DECL_SPECIFIERS apply to this declarator. Returns a
representation of the entity declared. If MEMBER_P is TRUE, then
@@ -26652,7 +26652,7 @@ cp_parser_transaction_expression (cp_parser *parser,
enum rid keyword)
unsigned char old_in = parser->in_transaction;
unsigned char this_in = 1;
cp_token *token;
- tree ret, attrs;
+ tree ret;
gcc_assert (keyword == RID_TRANSACTION_ATOMIC
|| keyword == RID_TRANSACTION_RELAXED);
@@ -26663,12 +26663,6 @@ cp_parser_transaction_expression (cp_parser *parser,
enum rid keyword)
if (keyword == RID_TRANSACTION_RELAXED)
this_in |= TM_STMT_ATTR_RELAXED;
- else
- {
- attrs = cp_parser_txn_attribute_opt (parser);
- if (attrs)
- this_in |= parse_tm_stmt_attr (attrs, 0);
- }
parser->in_transaction = this_in;
if (cp_lexer_next_token_is (parser->lexer, CPP_OPEN_PAREN))
