When we're performing tentative parsing to determine whether the
parser is looking at a declaration or an expression, use a '=' to
conclude that we are parsing a declaration.
This is wrong. However, our previous approach of finding a comma after
the '=' is also wrong, because the ',' could be part of a
template-argument-list. So, for now we're going to use the same wrong
heuristic as GCC and Visual C++, because less real-world code is
likely to be broken this way. I've opened PR7655 to keep track of our
wrongness; note also the XFAIL'd test.
Fixes <rdar://problem/8193163>.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@108459 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
diff --git a/test/Parser/cxx-ambig-decl-expr-xfail.cpp b/test/Parser/cxx-ambig-decl-expr-xfail.cpp
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ac4accb
--- /dev/null
+++ b/test/Parser/cxx-ambig-decl-expr-xfail.cpp
@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify %s
+// XFAIL: *
+struct X {
+ template<typename T> X(T);
+ X(int, int);
+
+ X operator()(int, int) const;
+};
+
+template<typename T, typename U> struct Y { };
+
+X *x;
+void f() {
+ int y = 0;
+ X (*x)(int(y), int(y)) = Y<int, float>(), ++y;
+}