From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id 20A043983A56; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 19:20:28 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 20A043983A56
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
 s=default; t=1600284028;
 bh=hhUeCoxBN37IZM12pTnrQdyrQ6ZK1lADdK/inkh2cRk=;
 h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
 b=ryEZuUE0AnnITtWUTVnfWyjNG+Gtr/CqioE8iHdbt5DGP5hF8XlwtYxxS2V/TgJnm
 AIZIgM6d60sY/7rhT3TcxViene25QnZPuLy6sSrMta5pDSAQaAYqvQeLmURdIaeFGk
 kyx+9jQDJ8FmgzX6Q144Z/hLEdxRmbDVWHN80KpM=
From: "cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/94571] Error: Expected comma or semicolon, comma found
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2020 19:20:27 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-94571-4-AGTnI4KU4T@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-94571-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-94571-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2020 19:20:28 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D94571

--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
<jakub@gcc.gnu.org>:

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a43981bb51fd0b8e68452faea6ec160cbea058e5

commit r9-8879-ga43981bb51fd0b8e68452faea6ec160cbea058e5
Author: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Date:   Thu Apr 16 07:19:57 2020 +0200

    c++: Fix pasto in structured binding diagnostics [PR94571]

    This snippet has been copied from the non-structured binding declaration
    parsing later in the function, and while for non-structured bindings
    it can be followed by comma or semicolon, structured bindings may be
    only followed by semicolon.

    Or, do we want to have a different message for the case when there is
    a comma (and keep this corrected one only if there is something else)
    that would explain better what is the bug (or add a fix-it hint)?
    Marek said in the PR that clang++ reports
    error: decomposition declaration must be the only declaration in its gr=
oup

    There is another thing Marek noted (though, something for different spo=
t),
    that diagnostic for auto x(1), [e,f] =3D test2; could also use a clearer
    wording like the above (or a fix-it hint), but the question is if we sh=
ould
    assume [ after , as a structured binding or if we should do some tentat=
ive
    parsing first to figure out if it looks like a structured binding.

    2020-04-16  Jakub Jelinek  <jakub@redhat.com>

            PR c++/94571
            * parser.c (cp_parser_simple_declaration): Fix up a pasto in
            diagnostics.

            * g++.dg/cpp1z/decomp51.C: New test.

    (cherry picked from commit e4658c7dbbe88f742c96e5f58ee4a6d549d642ca)=