If we attempt to add a constructor template specialization that looks
like a copy constructor to the overload set, just ignore it. This
ensures that we don't try to use such a constructor as a copy
constructor *without* triggering diagnostics at the point of
declaration.
Note that we *do* diagnose such copy constructors when explicitly
written by the user (e.g., as an explicit specialization).
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@88733 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
diff --git a/test/SemaTemplate/operator-template.cpp b/test/SemaTemplate/operator-template.cpp
index 7039e0e..dc44d04 100644
--- a/test/SemaTemplate/operator-template.cpp
+++ b/test/SemaTemplate/operator-template.cpp
@@ -11,6 +11,6 @@
template<class X>struct B{typedef X Y;};
template<class X>bool operator==(B<X>*,typename B<X>::Y); // \
expected-error{{overloaded 'operator==' must have at least one parameter of class or enumeration type}} \
-expected-note{{in instantiation of member function}}
+expected-note{{in instantiation of function template specialization}}
int a(B<int> x) { return operator==(&x,1); }