On 18 September 2015 at 20:30, Ville Voutilainen
<ville.voutilai...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 18 September 2015 at 20:26, Jason Merrill <ja...@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>> I suppose so, but it seems pretty trivial. In any case, looks like your
>>>> patch would accept the odd
>>>> namespace A __attribute ((visibility ("default"))) ::B { }
>>> Yes, or namespace A[[nonsense]]::B {}. Those cases are easy to fix,
>>> but namespace [[attribute_in_proper_location]] A {} seemingly caused
>>> weird barfing. That's why I didn't put in the rejection of the former, I'd
>>> prefer
>>> to figure out the latter and the former at the same time, and I'd prefer
>>> doing
>>> that once the basic facility is in. Yes, partly because I'll travel
>>> tomorrow. :)
>> To fix the former, you just need to keep
>>> /* Parse any specified attributes. */
>>> attribs = cp_parser_attributes_opt (parser);
>> next to the open brace. OK with that change, I suppose the other can wait.
>
>
> I also need to diagnose the use of attributes with a nested namespace
> definition,
> so I need to add the error emission and test it. ;)
Hmm, I already do that, the nested namespace definition parsing
effectively requires
an identifier. Ok, I'll give it a spin, I'll send an updated patch for
review. :)
