From: Jason Merrill Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2021 20:12:15 +0000 (-0400) Subject: c++: tweak parsing of invalid types X-Git-Tag: basepoints/gcc-13~3729 X-Git-Url: http://git.ipfire.org/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=1c690164668bda556f308632eab4204f63a138d7;p=thirdparty%2Fgcc.git c++: tweak parsing of invalid types cp_parser_parse_and_diagnose_invalid_type_name is called during declaration parsing, so it should pass 'true' for the declarator_p argument. But that caused a diagnostic regression on template/pr84789.C due to undesired lookup in dependent scopes. To fix that, cp_parser_nested_name_specifier_opt needs to respect the value of check_dependency_p. This patch avoids a regression from Andrew Sharp's WIP patch for PR70417. It would make more sense to test only check_dependency_p, not declarator_p, but removing the declarator_p condition turns out to reveal complicated interactions of cp_parser_constructor_declarator_p and caching of nested-name-specifiers and template-ids that I've already spent too much time trying to sort out. gcc/cp/ChangeLog: * parser.c (cp_parser_parse_and_diagnose_invalid_type_name): Pass true for declarator_p. (cp_parser_nested_name_specifier_opt): Only look through TYPENAME_TYPE if check_dependency_p is false. --- diff --git a/gcc/cp/parser.c b/gcc/cp/parser.c index 9c7ed65f55c8..49d951cfb193 100644 --- a/gcc/cp/parser.c +++ b/gcc/cp/parser.c @@ -3693,7 +3693,7 @@ cp_parser_parse_and_diagnose_invalid_type_name (cp_parser *parser) /*template_keyword_p=*/false, /*check_dependency_p=*/true, /*template_p=*/NULL, - /*declarator_p=*/false, + /*declarator_p=*/true, /*optional_p=*/false); /* If the next token is a (, this is a function with no explicit return type, i.e. constructor, destructor or conversion op. */ @@ -6605,6 +6605,8 @@ check_template_keyword_in_nested_name_spec (tree name) it unchanged if there is no nested-name-specifier. Returns the new scope iff there is a nested-name-specifier, or NULL_TREE otherwise. + If CHECK_DEPENDENCY_P is FALSE, names are looked up in dependent scopes. + If IS_DECLARATION is TRUE, the nested-name-specifier is known to be part of a declaration and/or decl-specifier. */ @@ -6645,9 +6647,10 @@ cp_parser_nested_name_specifier_opt (cp_parser *parser, /* Grab the nested-name-specifier and continue the loop. */ cp_parser_pre_parsed_nested_name_specifier (parser); /* If we originally encountered this nested-name-specifier - with IS_DECLARATION set to false, we will not have + with CHECK_DEPENDENCY_P set to true, we will not have resolved TYPENAME_TYPEs, so we must do so here. */ if (is_declaration + && !check_dependency_p && TREE_CODE (parser->scope) == TYPENAME_TYPE) { new_scope = resolve_typename_type (parser->scope, @@ -6729,6 +6732,7 @@ cp_parser_nested_name_specifier_opt (cp_parser *parser, a template. So, if we have a typename at this point, we make an effort to look through it. */ if (is_declaration + && !check_dependency_p && !typename_keyword_p && parser->scope && TREE_CODE (parser->scope) == TYPENAME_TYPE)