(cp_parser *, bool);
static tree cp_parser_type_id
(cp_parser *);
+static tree cp_parser_template_type_arg
+ (cp_parser *);
+static tree cp_parser_type_id_1
+ (cp_parser *, bool);
static void cp_parser_type_specifier_seq
(cp_parser *, bool, cp_decl_specifier_seq *);
static tree cp_parser_parameter_declaration_clause
static bool cp_parser_check_declarator_template_parameters
(cp_parser *, cp_declarator *, location_t);
static bool cp_parser_check_template_parameters
- (cp_parser *, unsigned, location_t);
+ (cp_parser *, unsigned, location_t, cp_declarator *);
static tree cp_parser_simple_cast_expression
(cp_parser *);
static tree cp_parser_global_scope_opt
/* Stop if this is an unnested '}', or closes the outermost
nesting level. */
nesting_depth--;
+ if (nesting_depth < 0)
+ return;
if (!nesting_depth)
nesting_depth = -1;
break;
new_declarator = NULL;
}
- type = groktypename (&type_specifier_seq, new_declarator);
+ type = groktypename (&type_specifier_seq, new_declarator, false);
return type;
}
Therefore, we try a type-id first. */
cp_parser_parse_tentatively (parser);
- argument = cp_parser_type_id (parser);
+ argument = cp_parser_template_type_arg (parser);
/* If there was no error parsing the type-id but the next token is a
'>>', our behavior depends on which dialect of C++ we're
parsing. In C++98, we probably found a typo for '> >'. But there
was the only alternative that matched (albeit with a '>' after
it). We can assume it's just a typo from the user, and a
diagnostic will then be issued. */
- return cp_parser_type_id (parser);
+ return cp_parser_template_type_arg (parser);
}
/* Parse an explicit-instantiation.
there were no qualifying templates. */
if (!cp_parser_check_template_parameters (parser,
/*num_templates=*/0,
- token->location))
+ token->location,
+ /*declarator=*/NULL))
return error_mark_node;
type = xref_tag (tag_type, identifier, ts, template_p);
}
else
value = NULL_TREE;
+ /* If we are processing a template, make sure the initializer of the
+ enumerator doesn't contain any bare template parameter pack. */
+ if (check_for_bare_parameter_packs (value))
+ value = error_mark_node;
+
/* Create the enumerator. */
build_enumerator (identifier, value, type);
}
Returns the TYPE specified. */
static tree
-cp_parser_type_id (cp_parser* parser)
+cp_parser_type_id_1 (cp_parser* parser, bool is_template_arg)
{
cp_decl_specifier_seq type_specifier_seq;
cp_declarator *abstract_declarator;
return error_mark_node;
}
- return groktypename (&type_specifier_seq, abstract_declarator);
+ return groktypename (&type_specifier_seq, abstract_declarator,
+ is_template_arg);
+}
+
+static tree cp_parser_type_id (cp_parser *parser)
+{
+ return cp_parser_type_id_1 (parser, false);
+}
+
+static tree cp_parser_template_type_arg (cp_parser *parser)
+{
+ return cp_parser_type_id_1 (parser, true);
}
/* Parse a type-specifier-seq.
static tree
cp_parser_class_specifier (cp_parser* parser)
{
- cp_token *token;
tree type;
tree attributes = NULL_TREE;
- int has_trailing_semicolon;
bool nested_name_specifier_p;
unsigned saved_num_template_parameter_lists;
bool saved_in_function_body;
/* Look for the trailing `}'. */
cp_parser_require (parser, CPP_CLOSE_BRACE, "%<}%>");
- /* We get better error messages by noticing a common problem: a
- missing trailing `;'. */
- token = cp_lexer_peek_token (parser->lexer);
- has_trailing_semicolon = (token->type == CPP_SEMICOLON);
/* Look for trailing attributes to apply to this class. */
if (cp_parser_allow_gnu_extensions_p (parser))
attributes = cp_parser_attributes_opt (parser);
/* Make sure that the right number of template parameters were
present. */
if (!cp_parser_check_template_parameters (parser, num_templates,
- type_start_token->location))
+ type_start_token->location,
+ /*declarator=*/NULL))
{
/* If something went wrong, there is no point in even trying to
process the class-definition. */
additional level of template parameters. */
++num_templates;
- return cp_parser_check_template_parameters (parser,
- num_templates,
- declarator_location);
+ return cp_parser_check_template_parameters
+ (parser, num_templates, declarator_location, declarator);
+
case cdk_function:
case cdk_array:
/* NUM_TEMPLATES were used in the current declaration. If that is
invalid, return FALSE and issue an error messages. Otherwise,
- return TRUE. */
+ return TRUE. If DECLARATOR is non-NULL, then we are checking a
+ declarator and we can print more accurate diagnostics. */
static bool
cp_parser_check_template_parameters (cp_parser* parser,
unsigned num_templates,
- location_t location)
+ location_t location,
+ cp_declarator *declarator)
{
+ /* If there are the same number of template classes and parameter
+ lists, that's OK. */
+ if (parser->num_template_parameter_lists == num_templates)
+ return true;
+ /* If there are more, but only one more, then we are referring to a
+ member template. That's OK too. */
+ if (parser->num_template_parameter_lists == num_templates + 1)
+ return true;
/* If there are more template classes than parameter lists, we have
something like:
template <class T> void S<T>::R<T>::f (); */
if (parser->num_template_parameter_lists < num_templates)
{
- error ("%Htoo few template-parameter-lists", &location);
+ if (declarator)
+ error_at (location, "specializing member %<%T::%E%> "
+ "requires %<template<>%> syntax",
+ declarator->u.id.qualifying_scope,
+ declarator->u.id.unqualified_name);
+ else
+ error_at (location, "too few template-parameter-lists");
return false;
}
- /* If there are the same number of template classes and parameter
- lists, that's OK. */
- if (parser->num_template_parameter_lists == num_templates)
- return true;
- /* If there are more, but only one more, then we are referring to a
- member template. That's OK too. */
- if (parser->num_template_parameter_lists == num_templates + 1)
- return true;
/* Otherwise, there are too many template parameter lists. We have
something like:
OSDN Git Service
