Revert the fix for PR8013.
That bug concerned the well-formedness of code such as (&ovl)(a, b,
c). GCC rejects the code, while EDG accepts it. On further study of the
standard, I see no support for EDG's position: in particular, C++
[over.over] does not list this as a context where we can take the
address of an overloaded function, C++ [over.call.func] does not
reference the address-of operator at any point, and C++ [expr.call]
claims that the function argument in a call is either a function
lvalue or a pointer-to-function; (&ovl) is neither.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@118620 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
diff --git a/test/CodeCompletion/call.cpp b/test/CodeCompletion/call.cpp
index 65b1cf1..f06470f 100644
--- a/test/CodeCompletion/call.cpp
+++ b/test/CodeCompletion/call.cpp
@@ -17,14 +17,12 @@
void test() {
f(Y(), 0, 0);
- (&f)(Y(), 0, 0);
- // RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -code-completion-patterns -code-completion-at=%s:19:9 %s -o - | FileCheck -check-prefix=CHECK-CC1 %s
+ // RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -code-completion-patterns -code-completion-at=%s:19:9 %s -o - | FileCheck -check-prefix=CC1 %s
// CHECK-CC1: COMPLETION: Pattern : dynamic_cast<<#type#>>(<#expression#>)
// CHECK-CC1: f(N::Y y, <#int ZZ#>)
// CHECK-CC1-NEXT: f(int i, <#int j#>, int k)
// CHECK-CC1-NEXT: f(float x, <#float y#>)
- // RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -code-completion-at=%s:19:13 %s -o - | FileCheck -check-prefix=CHECK-CC2 %s
+ // RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -code-completion-at=%s:19:13 %s -o - | FileCheck -check-prefix=CC2 %s
// CHECK-CC2-NOT: f(N::Y y, int ZZ)
// CHECK-CC2: f(int i, int j, <#int k#>)
}
- // RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -code-completion-patterns -code-completion-at=%s:20:16 %s -o - | FileCheck -check-prefix=CHECK-CC2 %s