diff mbox

[C++] PR 29003

Message ID 4DF09B6B.4060709@oracle.com
State New
Headers show

Commit Message

Paolo Carlini June 9, 2011, 10:07 a.m. UTC 
Hi,

I tested on x86_64-linux the below patchlet for a long standing 
accepts-invalid. Is it ok for mainline? Or do we want a different error 
message? A somehow tighter check?

Thanks,
Paolo.

//////////////////
/cp
2011-06-09  Paolo Carlini  <paolo.carlini@oracle.com>

	PR c++/29003
	* decl.c (grokdeclarator): Reject operator names in typedefs.

/testsuite
2011-06-09  Paolo Carlini  <paolo.carlini@oracle.com>

	PR c++/29003
	* g++.dg/parse/error38.C: New.

Comments

Jason Merrill June 9, 2011, 2:06 p.m. UTC | #1 
On 06/09/2011 06:07 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> I tested on x86_64-linux the below patchlet for a long standing
> accepts-invalid. Is it ok for mainline? Or do we want a different error
> message? A somehow tighter check?

The error message needs to say something about typedef being the 
problem.  Maybe follow the pattern of the previous error, and say

         error ("declaration of %qD as %<typedef%>", dname);

Jason
diff mbox

Patch

Index: testsuite/g++.dg/parse/error38.C
===================================================================
--- testsuite/g++.dg/parse/error38.C	(revision 0)
+++ testsuite/g++.dg/parse/error38.C	(revision 0)
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ 
+// PR c++/29003
+
+typedef int operator !(); // { dg-error "not allowed" }
Index: cp/decl.c
===================================================================
--- cp/decl.c	(revision 174838)
+++ cp/decl.c	(working copy)
@@ -8441,6 +8441,13 @@  grokdeclarator (const cp_declarator *declarator,
       return error_mark_node;
     }
 
+  if (dname && IDENTIFIER_OPNAME_P (dname)
+      && declspecs->specs[(int)ds_typedef])
+    {
+      error ("operator name is not allowed");
+      return error_mark_node;
+    }
+
   /* Anything declared one level down from the top level
      must be one of the parameters of a function
      (because the body is at least two levels down).  */