PR17567: Improve diagnostic for a mistyped constructor name. If we see something
that looks like a function declaration, except that it's missing a return type,
try typo-correcting it to the relevant constructor name.
In passing, fix a bug where the missing-type-specifier recovery codepath would
drop a preceding scope specifier on the floor, leading to follow-on diagnostics
and incorrect recovery for the auto-in-c++98 hack.
llvm-svn: 192644
diff --git a/clang/test/Parser/cxx-decl.cpp b/clang/test/Parser/cxx-decl.cpp
index ea20354..0627250 100644
--- a/clang/test/Parser/cxx-decl.cpp
+++ b/clang/test/Parser/cxx-decl.cpp
@@ -223,6 +223,15 @@
}
}
+namespace PR17567 {
+ struct Foobar { // expected-note 2{{declared here}}
+ FooBar(); // expected-error {{missing return type for function 'FooBar'; did you mean the constructor name 'Foobar'?}}
+ ~FooBar(); // expected-error {{expected the class name after '~' to name a destructor}}
+ };
+ FooBar::FooBar() {} // expected-error {{undeclared}} expected-error {{missing return type}}
+ FooBar::~FooBar() {} // expected-error {{undeclared}} expected-error {{expected the class name}}
+}
+
// PR8380
extern "" // expected-error {{unknown linkage language}}
test6a { ;// expected-error {{C++ requires a type specifier for all declarations}} \