================
Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaExprCXX.cpp:136-137
@@ -135,4 +135,4 @@
//
// the class-names are looked up as types in the scope designated by
// the nested-name-specifier.
//
----------------
Richard Smith wrote:
> Please update this to match the standard (in particular, "the second
> class-name is looked up in the same scope as the first").
Done. :)
================
Comment at: test/CXX/drs/dr2xx.cpp:1016
@@ -1015,3 +1015,2 @@
B::A() {} // ok
- C::~C() {} // expected-error {{expected the class name}}
C::~A() {} // ok
----------------
Richard Smith wrote:
> Why was this deleted? If we no longer reject this, that's a regression, and
> we can no longer claim to implement DR298...
It was deleted because it conflicts with the following line. Not only do we
still reject, we provide a superior diagnostic :)
I've updated the test-case so that we test both cases.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D3583
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
