On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 10:47 AM, Grzegorz Jablonski <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 11/10/2012 12:35 AM, Eli Friedman wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 9:27 AM, Jordan Rose <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> If you're okay with adding a PrintImplicitNodes bit to PrintingPolicy
>>> that
>>> would be good enough for us. Otherwise we'll have to think of something
>>> else.
>>
>> This seems okay to me. Grzegorz?
>
> Patch attached.
Sorry about the delayed review.
It doesn't look like your patch sets the PrintImplicitNodes bit
correctly in all the cases we care about; for example, the following
testcase:
struct MyClass10
{
operator const char *() { return "str"; }
};
void test10(const char *str)
{
MyClass10* m;
extern int x;
extern decltype(test10(*m)) x;
}
currently gives:
<stdin>:10:33: error: redefinition of 'x' with a different type:
'decltype(test10(*m.operator const char *()))' (aka 'void') vs 'int'
extern decltype(test10(*m)) x;
^
<stdin>:9:16: note: previous definition is here
extern int x;
^
-Eli
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
