On 2/16/24 17:15, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 10:47:47PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
The following patch works.
Or yet another option would be instead of (sometimes) clearing
declarator->parameter_pack_p when we diagnose this bug for error
recovery ignore the this specifier.
On Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 10:47:47PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> The following patch works.
Or yet another option would be instead of (sometimes) clearing
declarator->parameter_pack_p when we diagnose this bug for error
recovery ignore the this specifier.
With the following patch (testsuite patch
On Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 10:20:26PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> I've tried that (see below), but am getting
> Excess errors:
> /usr/src/gcc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp23/explicit-obj-diagnostics3.C:33:29:
> error: parameter packs not expanded with '...':
And the reason for those is that e.g. on
On Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 03:47:41PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> Can we move all the xobj handling down here (where we can trust
> declarator->parameter_pack_p) instead of adding a new variable?
I've tried that (see below), but am getting
Excess errors:
On 2/16/24 04:03, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
The simple presence of ellipsis as next token after the parameter
declaration doesn't imply it is a parameter pack, it sometimes is, e.g.
if its type is a pack, but sometimes is not and in that case it acts
the same as if the next tokens were , ...
Hi!
The simple presence of ellipsis as next token after the parameter
declaration doesn't imply it is a parameter pack, it sometimes is, e.g.
if its type is a pack, but sometimes is not and in that case it acts
the same as if the next tokens were , ... instead of just ...
The xobj param cannot be
