rsmith accepted this revision.
rsmith added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
LGTM, thanks!
https://reviews.llvm.org/D9
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listi
hubert.reinterpretcast updated this revision to Diff 99632.
hubert.reinterpretcast added a comment.
Remove stray ellipsis treatment entirely
https://reviews.llvm.org/D9
Files:
lib/Parse/ParseTentative.cpp
test/Parser/cxx0x-ambig.cpp
Index: test/Parser/cxx0x-ambig.cpp
==
hubert.reinterpretcast added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D9#759797, @rsmith wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D9#759146, @hubert.reinterpretcast wrote:
>
> > The `check-all` target passes even if the ellipsis-after-declarator-id
> > disambiguation as a declarator is removed
rsmith added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D9#759146, @hubert.reinterpretcast wrote:
> The `check-all` target passes even if the ellipsis-after-declarator-id
> disambiguation as a declarator is removed entirely.
[...]
> So, on the whole, the stray ellipsis treatment is both too c
hubert.reinterpretcast added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D9#759125, @rsmith wrote:
> Should I assume our "misplaced ellipsis" diagnostic requires that we
> disambiguate the ill-formed ellipsis-after-declarator-id as a declarator in
> some cases? If so, do we have tests for that s
rsmith added a comment.
Should I assume our "misplaced ellipsis" diagnostic requires that we
disambiguate the ill-formed ellipsis-after-declarator-id as a declaration in
some cases? If so, do we have tests for that somewhere?
Comment at: include/clang/Parse/Parser.h:2138
+ T
hubert.reinterpretcast added inline comments.
Comment at: lib/Parse/ParseTentative.cpp:542
+ (Tok.is(tok::greatergreater) ||
+ (Tok.is(tok::ellipsis) &&
+ NextToken().isOneOf(tok::greater, tok::greatergreater,
Th
hubert.reinterpretcast created this revision.
The trial parse for declarative syntax accepts an invalid pack declaration
syntax, which is ambiguous with valid pack expansions of expressions. This
commit restricts the invalid pack declaration syntax to avoid mistaking valid
pack expansions as in
