[Bug c++/29408] [4.1/4.2 regression] parse error for valid code

2006-10-16 Thread mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 


-- 

mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu   |mark at codesourcery dot com
   |dot org |
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29408

[Bug c++/29408] [4.1/4.2 regression] parse error for valid code

2006-10-16 Thread mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #10 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-10-16 23:08 
---
Subject: Bug 29408

Author: mmitchel
Date: Mon Oct 16 23:07:46 2006
New Revision: 117800

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=117800
Log:
PR c++/29408
* parser.c (cp_parser_using_declaration): Stop parsing when
something goes wrong with an access declaration.
PR c++/29408
* g++.dg/parse/dtor12.C: New test.

Added:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/parse/dtor12.C
Modified:
trunk/gcc/cp/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/cp/parser.c
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29408

[Bug c++/29408] [4.1/4.2 regression] parse error for valid code

2006-10-15 Thread mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #9 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-10-15 21:21 
---
There is long-standing confusion in the C++ standard regarding the naming of
destructors in various situations.  (Part of the issue is to what extent
destructors have names, and how the injection of class names into their own
scopes work, and how the lookup rules for qualified names apply to destructors,
and so forth.)  However, I do think this code should be accepted; it doesn't
look like one of the particularly tricky cases.


-- 

mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Priority|P3  |P1


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29408

[Bug c++/29408] [4.1/4.2 regression] parse error for valid code

2006-10-11 Thread debian-gcc at lists dot debian dot org 


--- Comment #7 from debian-gcc at lists dot debian dot org  2006-10-12 
00:37 ---
fails with trunk 20061012 as well.

  Matthias


-- 

debian-gcc at lists dot debian dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Known to fail|4.1.2   |4.1.2 4.2.0
  Known to work|4.0.4 4.1.1 4.2.0   |4.0.4 4.1.1
Summary|[4.1 regression] parse error|[4.1/4.2 regression] parse
   |for valid code  |error for valid code


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29408

[Bug c++/29408] [4.1/4.2 regression] parse error for valid code

2006-10-11 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 


-- 

pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Target Milestone|--- |4.1.2


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29408

[Bug c++/29408] [4.1/4.2 regression] parse error for valid code

2006-10-11 Thread bangerth at dealii dot org 


--- Comment #8 from bangerth at dealii dot org  2006-10-12 04:27 ---
I don't believe the code is valid.

W.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29408