Fix PR4092 by improving error recovery in two ways:
1. In a struct field redefinition, don't mark the struct erroneous. The
field is erroneous, but the struct is otherwise well formed.
2. Don't emit diagnostics about functions that are known to be broken already.
Either fix is sufficient to silence the second diagnostic in the example,
but the combination is better :)
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@70371 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
diff --git a/lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp b/lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp
index 4427f0d..14136a3 100644
--- a/lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp
+++ b/lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp
@@ -2895,6 +2895,7 @@
// (C99 6.9.1p3, C++ [dcl.fct]p6).
QualType ResultType = FD->getResultType();
if (!ResultType->isDependentType() && !ResultType->isVoidType() &&
+ !FD->isInvalidDecl() &&
RequireCompleteType(FD->getLocation(), ResultType,
diag::err_func_def_incomplete_result))
FD->setInvalidDecl();
@@ -3713,7 +3714,6 @@
Diag(Loc, diag::err_duplicate_member) << II;
Diag(PrevDecl->getLocation(), diag::note_previous_declaration);
NewFD->setInvalidDecl();
- Record->setInvalidDecl();
}
if (getLangOptions().CPlusPlus && !T->isPODType())
diff --git a/test/Sema/struct-decl.c b/test/Sema/struct-decl.c
index b288850..2c0945f 100644
--- a/test/Sema/struct-decl.c
+++ b/test/Sema/struct-decl.c
@@ -33,3 +33,11 @@
char data;
};
+
+// PR4092
+struct s0 {
+ char a; // expected-note {{previous declaration is here}}
+ char a; // expected-error {{duplicate member 'a'}}
+};
+
+struct s0 f0(void) {}