On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Richard Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > This isn't the right way to fix this issue; this patch is just pretending > that there wasn't a trailing return type specified, and will give bogus > follow-on errors if a return type can't be deduced. The right approach is to > take the parameter declarations from the Declarator rather than from the > FunctionTypeLoc (which won't have been filled in if the type is invalid); > r162904.
Interesting! Thanks for checking into it! ~Aaron _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
