Fznamznon added a comment.
> What about
> template <typename T>
> struct A { };
>
> void foo() {
> new struct A<int> {};
> }
>
> I think this should be allowed, right?
Yes, I think so. The patch helps to allow. Thanks, I'll add it to the test.
> MSVC rejects the first but accepts the second which I think is wrong but
> worth testing:
>
> alignof(struct B {});
> sizeof(struct B{});
These don't have `new` so they are not affected by the patch ATM.
But why MSVC wrong? Operand of `alignof` is a `type-id` which is not
`defining-type-id` meaning it shouldn't be parsed as type definition. So,
`struct B{}` there is a reference to `struct B` with braced initializer, i.e.
object creation. That is not a `type-id`, right? On the opposite, `sizeof` can
accept either `type-id` or an expression, I guess this is why MSVC accepts.
================
Comment at: clang/include/clang/Parse/Parser.h:2359
case DeclSpecContext::DSC_template_param:
+ case DeclSpecContext::DSC_new:
return ImplicitTypenameContext::Yes;
----------------
shafik wrote:
> Should this be below since `DeclaratorContext::CXXNew` was grouped w/
> `DSC_normal` normal before?
Not really. Since there was no `DeclSpecContext` for `new` expression, it was
mostly handled as if it was `DSC_type_specifier`.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D153857/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D153857
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
