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).
llvm-svn: 88733
diff --git a/clang/lib/Sema/SemaStmt.cpp b/clang/lib/Sema/SemaStmt.cpp
index 6a65bd1..e9061b8 100644
--- a/clang/lib/Sema/SemaStmt.cpp
+++ b/clang/lib/Sema/SemaStmt.cpp
@@ -965,9 +965,12 @@
// In C++ the return statement is handled via a copy initialization.
// the C version of which boils down to CheckSingleAssignmentConstraints.
// FIXME: Leaks RetValExp on error.
- if (PerformCopyInitialization(RetValExp, FnRetType, "returning", Elidable))
+ if (PerformCopyInitialization(RetValExp, FnRetType, "returning", Elidable)){
+ // We should still clean up our temporaries, even when we're failing!
+ RetValExp = MaybeCreateCXXExprWithTemporaries(RetValExp, true);
return StmtError();
-
+ }
+
if (RetValExp) CheckReturnStackAddr(RetValExp, FnRetType, ReturnLoc);
}