efriedma added inline comments.
================
Comment at: lib/Parse/ParseStmt.cpp:186
// found.
- if (Next.isNot(tok::coloncolon)) {
+ if (Next.isNot(tok::coloncolon) && (!getLangOpts().MSVCCompat ||
+ Next.isNot(tok::less))) {
----------------
erichkeane wrote:
> efriedma wrote:
> > erichkeane wrote:
> > > Clang-tidy created this layout here that I'm not thrilled with, if OK,
> > > I'd like to move the entirety of the 2nd component to the "&&" on its own
> > > line. Additionally, if anyone has a better way to do this logic, I'm all
> > > ears!
> > Why is this checking for MSVCCompat? I think we want to detect constructs
> > like your testcase in all modes so we can generate a good error message.
> We get a good error message here ("typename missing") in normal mode. The
> issue here is that the examples below work in MSVC's relaxed 'typename'
> situation, thus this should only be accepting code in MSVC mode, right? Or
> am I missing something.
This is what I see for the testcase in your commit message on trunk:
```
<stdin>:7:4: error: expected ';' after expression
S<TMP>::TD varname =0;
^
;
<stdin>:7:14: error: use of undeclared identifier 'varname'
S<TMP>::TD varname =0;
^
<stdin>:7:3: error: missing 'typename' prior to dependent type name 'S<int>::TD'
S<TMP>::TD varname =0;
^~~~~~~~~~
<stdin>:11:3: note: in instantiation of function template specialization
'foo<int>' requested here
foo<int>();
^
3 errors generated.
```
Technically speaking, we do get the "missing typename" message, but I still
wouldn't call this result "a good error message".
https://reviews.llvm.org/D29401
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
