On Tue, 2019-02-19 at 20:37 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 02:44:55PM -0500, David Malcolm wrote:
> > How about something like this? (on top of Jakub's patch)
>
> I had following queued for regtest, so if you want to go for the
> make_location ^~, you should change more spots.
>
> > pr89390.C: In function 'void foo()':
> > pr89390.C:9:6: error: '~A' is not a member of 'A'
> > 9 | A::~A (); // { dg-error "6: '~A' is not a member of
> > 'A'" }
> > | ^~
> > pr89390.C: In function 'void test_2()':
> > pr89390.C:17:10: error: '~ns::P' is not a member of 'ns::P'
> > 17 | ns::P::~P (); // { dg-error "10: '~ns::P' is not a
> > member of 'ns::P'" }
> > | ^~
> >
> > (Presumably gcc 10 material at this point; not yet bootstrapped).
>
> I wouldn't say so, it actually is even a regression:
> $ /usr/src/gcc-6/obj/gcc/cc1plus -quiet pr89390.C
> pr89390.C: In function ‘void foo()’:
> pr89390.C:9:3: error: ‘~A’ is not a member of ‘A’
> A::~A (); // { dg-error "'~A' is not a member of 'A'" }
> ^
>
> $ /usr/src/gcc-7/obj/gcc/cc1plus -quiet pr89390.C
> In function ‘void foo()’:
> cc1plus: error: ‘~A’ is not a member of ‘A’
>
> Feel free to take this over though.
Sorry about colliding here; I have no objections to your version of the
patch (and yours seems more comprehensive).
Dave
