PR 61273 points out that "for ; false; c <- false {" doesn't parse correctly. It's because the "false {" is incorrectly interpreted as being a potential composite literal. This patch from Chris Manghane fixes the parsing bug. Bootstrapped and ran Go testsuite on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Committed to mainline.
Ian
diff -r 670705a1c9cc go/parse.cc --- a/go/parse.cc Mon Dec 15 12:17:08 2014 -0800 +++ b/go/parse.cc Tue Dec 16 10:50:34 2014 -0800 @@ -3819,7 +3819,7 @@ token = this->peek_token(); if (token->is_op(OPERATOR_CHANOP)) { - this->send_stmt(this->verify_not_sink(exp)); + this->send_stmt(this->verify_not_sink(exp), may_be_composite_lit); if (return_exp != NULL) *return_exp = true; } @@ -3913,13 +3913,13 @@ // Channel = Expression . void -Parse::send_stmt(Expression* channel) +Parse::send_stmt(Expression* channel, bool may_be_composite_lit) { go_assert(this->peek_token()->is_op(OPERATOR_CHANOP)); Location loc = this->location(); this->advance_token(); - Expression* val = this->expression(PRECEDENCE_NORMAL, false, true, NULL, - NULL); + Expression* val = this->expression(PRECEDENCE_NORMAL, false, + may_be_composite_lit, NULL, NULL); Statement* s = Statement::make_send_statement(channel, val, loc); this->gogo_->add_statement(s); } diff -r 670705a1c9cc go/parse.h --- a/go/parse.h Mon Dec 15 12:17:08 2014 -0800 +++ b/go/parse.h Tue Dec 16 10:50:34 2014 -0800 @@ -245,7 +245,7 @@ void statement_list(); bool statement_list_may_start_here(); void expression_stat(Expression*); - void send_stmt(Expression*); + void send_stmt(Expression*, bool may_be_composite_lit); void inc_dec_stat(Expression*); void assignment(Expression*, bool may_be_composite_lit, Range_clause*); void tuple_assignment(Expression_list*, bool may_be_composite_lit,