On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 5:54 PM, Paolo Carlini <paolo.carl...@oracle.com> wrote:
> On 17/05/2018 16:58, Jason Merrill wrote:
>> On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 10:27 AM, Paolo Carlini
>> <paolo.carl...@oracle.com> wrote:
>>> PS: maybe better using function_declarator_p?
>> I think so, yes.  The relevant rule seems to be "The declarator shall
>> not specify a function or an array.", so let's check for arrays, too.
> Agreed. I had the amended patch ready when I noticed (again) that it wasn't
> addressing another related class of issues which involves declarators not
> followed by initializers. Thus I tried to fix those too, and the below which
> moves the check up appears to work fine, passes testing, etc. Are there any
> risks that an erroneous function / array as declarator is in fact a well
> formed expression?!?

That doesn't matter; if it parses as a declarator, it's a declarator,
even if it's an ill-formed declarator.  But...

+      bool decl_p = cp_parser_parse_definitely (parser);
+      if (!cp_parser_check_condition_declarator (parser, declarator, loc))
+        return error_mark_node;

...if cp_parser_parse_definitely returns false, parsing as a
declarator failed, so we shouldn't look at "declarator".

Also, "here" in the diagnostic seems unnecessarily vague; we could be
more specific.  Maybe "condition declares a function/array"?


Reply via email to