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 79C73393C8BB; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 12:25:17 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 79C73393C8BB
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
 s=default; t=1592483117;
 bh=07/290Na8h+bZ6QxSm3aVQg7JnGqiZBUylwYB+fP/rU=;
 h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
 b=dy3DVVCERTXx5pbi0niGpol0HTOKkXVwsGPA4YJdkw+kEPAtq0d0aglngT8UpoHfC
 rvSIIZS00Gwc6g3dECi1JV1ChC0i92R5v9l4klmontvgPCz3xvSqyozHWP7GPPz9OV
 60JtwHSMcsc+o4dyGjlPYxss1JXaJ4ebN7s6WvkY=
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/95724] bogue error : "expected '{' before ')' token"
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2020 12:25:17 +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: 11.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
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-95724-4-6f9dJBK5r9@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-95724-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-95724-4@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: <http://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: <http://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2020 12:25:17 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D95724

--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #6)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> > Note the testcase does not ICE so ice-on-invalid is wrong.  It's really
> > a diagnostic only.  If we want sth extra to distinguish error diagnosti=
cs
> > from warning diagnostics then we should add one (can't come up with a g=
ood
> > name right now)
>=20
> It's like a weaker form of error-recovery but for cases that don't ICE.

error-recovery is fine then I guess since it doens't imply ICEing.  We
use the combo of ice-on-invalid-code, error-recovery for that.  But indeed
the description says 'use only for ice-on-invalid-code' ...

> cascading-errors maybe.=