On Thu, 12 Nov 2015, Marek Polacek wrote:
> As explained in the PR, the issue here was that we were treating a TYPENAME
> wrongly as an ID. That happened because we were using information from the
> wrong scope when parsing a token after an else clause. I.e. in fn1 in the
> attached testcase we
As explained in the PR, the issue here was that we were treating a TYPENAME
wrongly as an ID. That happened because we were using information from the
wrong scope when parsing a token after an else clause. I.e. in fn1 in the
attached testcase we need to examine the token after "if (1);" to see if