================
Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaInit.cpp:1923-1931
@@ -1973,16 +1922,11 @@
- if (!KnownField) {
- // The replacement field comes from typo correction; find it
- // in the list of fields.
- FieldIndex = 0;
- Field = RT->getDecl()->field_begin();
- for (; Field != FieldEnd; ++Field) {
- if (Field->isUnnamedBitfield())
- continue;
-
- if (ReplacementField == *Field ||
- Field->getIdentifier() == ReplacementField->getIdentifier())
- break;
-
- ++FieldIndex;
+ if (!ReplacementField) {
+ // Name lookup found something, but it wasn't a field.
+ SemaRef.Diag(D->getFieldLoc(), diag::err_field_designator_nonfield)
+ << FieldName;
+ SemaRef.Diag(Lookup.front()->getLocation(),
+ diag::note_field_designator_found);
+ ++Index;
+ return true;
}
+
----------------
This looks to be unreachable now.
I think you should rearrange this a little: if `lookup` found something, but
didn't find a field, then issue this diagnostic. Otherwise, fall through to
here and do typo correction.
================
Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaInit.cpp:1933-1934
@@ +1932,4 @@
+
+ // The replacement field comes from typo correction;
+ // find it in the list of fields.
+ KnownField = ReplacementField;
----------------
This comment doesn't make sense any more.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D4839
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
