================
@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify -std=c++11 %s
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify -std=c++14 %s
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify -std=c++17 %s
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify -std=c++20 %s
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify -std=c++23 %s
+
+// Test that 'auto' cannot be combined with a type specifier in C++.
+void f() {
+ auto int x = 1; // expected-error {{'auto' cannot be combined with a
type specifier}}
----------------
AaronBallman wrote:
That's why there's an instantiation of the template. The point is mostly: we
need to be sure we're rejecting that code even though it's a semantic error
rather than a parsing error. It's possible that the better way to approach this
is from `Sema` instead of from `Parser`.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/166004
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
