From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 2208F389365C; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 13:11:33 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 2208F389365C DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1592485893; bh=+Dvv+1KQFvhMqlW5nFSMKUnFVVnBaA9r8QoTAfy/RUU=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=d7+2vMU/BtC4vT7niwXH6LZ5MXbNa32PGEgRF8ko+MEHY/mQsf1erKvURqDROeaWt kR0zmvkF3CInkdETevzDhdBUzyqSRGGuAaNjLr5oxjpnEO617AAszOKnIyJs7czuCM Sw5Wb8bfFIOVZutUZKzk4vOtHrCpUr4y3f0C94eg= From: "mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/95742] Bad error message in parsing a function with "decltype()" Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2020 13:11:33 +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: mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P5 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: everconfirmed priority bug_status cc cf_reconfirmed_on Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2020 13:11:33 -0000 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D95742 Marek Polacek changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ever confirmed|0 |1 Priority|P3 |P5 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW CC| |mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org Last reconfirmed| |2020-06-18 --- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek --- I suppose in this case there's some room for improvement, but very low prio= .=