On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 10:50 PM, Richard Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 6:57 AM, Aaron Ballman <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> The exception-declaration for a function-try-block cannot redeclare a >> function parameter. One of our existing test cases was XFAILed because >> of this. This patch is an attempt to fix the issue and un-XFAIL the >> test. >> >> I am getting this from [basic.lookup.unqual]p15, which says, >> >> A name used in the handler for a function-try-block (Clause 15) is >> looked up as if the name was used in the outermost block of the >> function definition. In particular, the function parameter names shall >> not be redeclared in the exception-declaration nor in the outermost >> block of a handler for the function-try-block. > > > This looks like it might do the wrong thing for a function nested within > another function: > > void f(int i) { > struct S { > void g() try {} catch (int i) {}; // shouldn't diagnose this, but I > think you will > }; > } > > The way we generally handle this is in IdentifierResolver::isDeclInScope, > and that's the right place for this fix. You should be able to detect a > catch of a function try block by looking at the flags on the Scope.
That simplifies things, thank you for the information! New patch attached, along with updated test case. ~Aaron
FnCatch2.patch
Description: Binary data
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
