On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 5:11 PM, Paolo Carlini <paolo.carl...@oracle.com> wrote: > On 11/01/2018 21:33, Jason Merrill wrote: >> On 01/10/2018 06:50 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote: >>> >>> thus the below is a rather "dull" solution at the level of >>> cplus_decl_attributes itself: cp_check_const_attributes is tweaked to check >>> for error_mark_node at each outer iteration >> >> This shouldn't be necessary; we should have returned error_mark_node for >> the attribute list rather than append it to something else, in which case >> the existing check for attributes == error_mark_node would have done the >> job. > > Indeed. That seems the most straightforward way to approach the issue. > Thanks. > > In grokdeclarator we could either explicitly assign error_mark_node to > *attrlist (instead of chaining) or simply drop the erroneous > declarator->std_attributes. Both solutions appear to work fine in practice, > pass testing.
Hmm, I think dropping the attributes is reasonable for grokdeclarator to do as error-recovery, similarly to how it discards an ill-formed exception-specification. But let's assert seen_error() in that case. Jason
