On 9/16/21 11:50, Michel Morin wrote:
On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 5:44 AM Jason Merrill <ja...@redhat.com> wrote:
On 9/14/21 04:29, Michel Morin via Gcc-patches wrote:
On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 7:14 AM David Malcolm <dmalc...@redhat.com> wrote:
On Tue, 2021-09-14 at 03:35 +0900, Michel Morin via Gcc-patches wrote:
Hi,
PR77565 reports that, with the code `typdef int Int;`, GCC emits
"did you mean 'typeof'?" instead of "did you mean 'typedef'?".
This happens because the typo corrector determines that `typeof` is a
candidate for suggestion (through
`cp_keyword_starts_decl_specifier_p`),
but `typedef` is not.
This patch fixes the issue by adding `typedef` as a candidate. The
patch
additionally adds the `inline` specifier and cv-specifiers as a
candidate.
Here is a patch (tests `make check-gcc` pass on darwin):
Thanks for this patch (and for reporting the bug in the first place).
I notice that, as well as being used for fix-it hints by
lookup_name_fuzzy (indirectly via suggest_rid_p),
cp_keyword_starts_decl_specifier_p is also used by
cp_lexer_next_token_is_decl_specifier_keyword, which is used by
cp_parser_lambda_declarator_opt and cp_parser_constructor_declarator_p.
Ah, you're right! Thank you for pointing this out.
I failed to grep those functions somehow.
One thing that confuses me is that cp_keyword_starts_decl_specifier_p
misses many keywords that can start decl-specifiers (e.g.
typedef/inline/cv-qual and friend/explicit/virtual).
So let's wait C++ frontend maintainers ;)
That is strange. Let's add all the rest of them as well.
Done. Thanks for your help!
One more thing — cp_keyword_starts_decl_specifier_p includes RID_ATTRIBUTE
(from the beginning; see https://gcc.gnu.org/PR28261 ), but attributes are
not decl-specifiers. Would it be reasonable to remove this?
It looks like the place that PR28261 used
cp_lexer_next_token_is_decl_specifier_keyword specifically exempts
attributes:
&& (!cp_lexer_next_token_is_decl_specifier_keyword (parser->lexer)
/* GNU attributes can actually appear both at the start of
a parameter and parenthesized declarator.
S (__attribute__((unused)) int);
is a constructor, but
S (__attribute__((unused)) foo) (int);
is a function declaration. */
|| (cp_parser_allow_gnu_extensions_p (parser)
&& cp_next_tokens_can_be_gnu_attribute_p (parser)))
So yes, let's remove RID_ATTRIBUTE and the || clause there. I'd keep
the comment, but move it to go with the test for C++11 attributes below.
Both patches (with and without removal of RID_ATTRIBUTE) attached.
No regressions on x86_64-apple-darwin.
Regards,
Michel
So I'm not sure if this fix is exactly correct - hopefully one of the
C++ frontend maintainers can chime in. If
cp_keyword_starts_decl_specifier_p isn't quite the right place for
this, the fix could probably go in suggest_rid_p instead, which *is*
specific to spelling corrections.
Hope this is constructive; thanks again for the patch
Dave
============================================
c++: add typo corrections for typedef/inline/cv-qual [PR77565]
PR c++/77565
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
* parser.c (cp_keyword_starts_decl_specifier_p): Handle
typedef/inline specifiers and cv-qualifiers.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* g++.dg/spellcheck-typenames.C: Add tests for decl-specs.
--- a/gcc/cp/parser.c
+++ b/gcc/cp/parser.c
@@ -1051,6 +1051,12 @@ cp_keyword_starts_decl_specifier_p (enum rid
keyword)
case RID_FLOAT:
case RID_DOUBLE:
case RID_VOID:
+ /* CV qualifiers. */
+ case RID_CONST:
+ case RID_VOLATILE:
+ /* typedef/inline specifiers. */
+ case RID_TYPEDEF:
+ case RID_INLINE:
/* GNU extensions. */
case RID_ATTRIBUTE:
case RID_TYPEOF:
--- a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/spellcheck-typenames.C
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/spellcheck-typenames.C
@@ -76,3 +76,38 @@ singed char ch; // { dg-error "1: 'singed' does
not
name a type; did you mean 's
^~~~~~
signed
{ dg-end-multiline-output "" } */
+
+typdef int my_int; // { dg-error "1: 'typdef' does not name a type;
did you mean 'typedef'?" }
+/* { dg-begin-multiline-output "" }
+ typdef int my_int;
+ ^~~~~~
+ typedef
+ { dg-end-multiline-output "" } */
+
+inlien int inline_func(); // { dg-error "1: 'inlien' does not name a
type; did you mean 'inline'?" }
+/* { dg-begin-multiline-output "" }
+ inlien int inline_func();
+ ^~~~~~
+ inline
+ { dg-end-multiline-output "" } */
+
+coonst int ci = 0; // { dg-error "1: 'coonst' does not name a type;
did you mean 'const'?" }
+/* { dg-begin-multiline-output "" }
+ coonst int ci = 0;
+ ^~~~~~
+ const
+ { dg-end-multiline-output "" } */
+
+voltil int vi; // { dg-error "1: 'voltil' does not name a type; did
you mean 'volatile'?" }
+/* { dg-begin-multiline-output "" }
+ voltil int vi;
+ ^~~~~~
+ volatile
+ { dg-end-multiline-output "" } */
+
+statik int si; // { dg-error "1: 'statik' does not name a type; did
you mean 'static'?" }
+/* { dg-begin-multiline-output "" }
+ statik int si;
+ ^~~~~~
+ static
+ { dg-end-multiline-output "" } */
============================================
--
Regards,
Michel
