From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-368290-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 12119 invoked by alias); 21 Sep 2011 15:30:46 -0000
Received: (qmail 12109 invoked by uid 22791); 21 Sep 2011 15:30:45 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.9 required=5.0	tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from localhost (HELO gcc.gnu.org) (127.0.0.1)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 15:30:31 +0000
From: "manu at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/10618] Error message for function declarations with invalid return type could be improved
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 15:39:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: manu at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: giovannibajo at libero dot it
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-10618-4-lXCdOywFkV@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-10618-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-10618-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2011-09/txt/msg01467.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D10618

--- Comment #9 from Manuel L=C3=B3pez-Ib=C3=A1=C3=B1ez <manu at gcc dot gnu=
.org> 2011-09-21 15:30:26 UTC ---
>=20
> > test.cc:12:1: error: need =E2=80=98typename=E2=80=99 before =E2=80=98A<=
T>::k=E2=80=99 because =E2=80=98A<T>=E2=80=99 is a
> > dependent scope
> > test.cc:14:6: error: expected constructor, destructor, or type conversi=
on
> > before =E2=80=98func2=E2=80=99
>=20
> > Clang gives the correct output:
> >=20
> > /tmp/webcompile/_10395_0.cc:12:1: error: missing 'typename' prior to de=
pendent
> > type name 'A<T>::k'
> > A<T>::k func1();=20
> > ^~~~~~~
> > typename=20
> > /tmp/webcompile/_10395_0.cc:14:4: error: no type named 'k' in 'B'
> > B::k func2();
> > ~~~^
> > 2 errors generated.
>=20
> Huh? This is the same as G++'s output
>=20

The second diagnostic from G++ does not make sense. Clang gives the correct
diagnostics in that case.

> If you instantiate the function template G++ trunk gives a better diagnos=
tic
> than clang 3.0

Great! Let's say this is almost fixed then.