================
@@ -1,8 +1,16 @@
-// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify %s -std=c++98 -Wc++11-compat
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify %s -std=c++98 -Wc++11-compat
void f() {
auto int a; // expected-warning {{'auto' storage class specifier is
redundant and incompatible with C++11}}
int auto b; // expected-warning {{'auto' storage class specifier is
redundant and incompatible with C++11}}
auto c; // expected-warning {{C++11 extension}} expected-error {{requires an
initializer}}
static auto d = 0; // expected-warning {{C++11 extension}}
auto static e = 0; // expected-warning {{C++11 extension}}
}
+
+// typedef and auto storage-class-specifier cannot appear in the same
+// decl-specifier-seq ([dcl.stc] p1). This must be diagnosed in C++98 even
+// though 'auto int' (without typedef) is valid there.
+void g() {
+ typedef auto int t1; // expected-error {{cannot combine with previous
'typedef' declaration specifier}}
----------------
AaronBallman wrote:
Aren't we solving the wrong regression?
https://godbolt.org/z/xMrh3rzfv
In 22.x we're diagnosing that you cannot combine `auto` and `int` in C++98
mode. This patch restores that behavior, but in C++98, we *can* combine `auto`
and `int` (https://godbolt.org/z/K8GWKr7Yj), what we cannot combine is `auto`
and `typedef`. But we dropped the diagnostic which said `'auto' not allowed in
typedef`. I think that was the diagnostic we wanted to retain, wasn't it?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/210141
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
