public inbox for gcc-cvs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [gcc r11-8210] c++: Fix up C++23 [] <...> requires primary -> type {} parsing [PR99850]
@ 2021-04-16 7:35 Jakub Jelinek
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Jakub Jelinek @ 2021-04-16 7:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-cvs
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:784de5292c34e287c848b382b431599b818ea76e
commit r11-8210-g784de5292c34e287c848b382b431599b818ea76e
Author: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Date: Fri Apr 16 09:34:26 2021 +0200
c++: Fix up C++23 [] <...> requires primary -> type {} parsing [PR99850]
The requires clause parsing has code to suggest users wrapping
non-primary expressions in (), so if it e.g. parses a primary expression
and sees it is followed by ++, --, ., ( or -> among other things it
will try to reparse it as assignment expression or what and if that works
suggests wrapping it inside of parens.
When it is requires-clause that is after <typename T> etc. it already
has an exception from that as ( can occur in valid C++20 expression there
- starting the parameters of the lambda.
In C++23 another case can occur, as the parameters with the ()s can be
omitted, requires C can be followed immediately by -> which starts a
trailing return type. Even in that case, we don't want to parse that
as C->...
2021-04-16 Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
PR c++/99850
* parser.c (cp_parser_constraint_requires_parens) <case CPP_DEREF>:
If lambda_p, return pce_ok instead of pce_maybe_postfix.
* g++.dg/cpp23/lambda-specifiers2.C: New test.
Diff:
---
gcc/cp/parser.c | 13 +++++++++++++
gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp23/lambda-specifiers2.C | 7 +++++++
2 files changed, 20 insertions(+)
diff --git a/gcc/cp/parser.c b/gcc/cp/parser.c
index 940751b5f05..dfc9b8251a7 100644
--- a/gcc/cp/parser.c
+++ b/gcc/cp/parser.c
@@ -28530,7 +28530,20 @@ cp_parser_constraint_requires_parens (cp_parser *parser, bool lambda_p)
case CPP_PLUS_PLUS:
case CPP_MINUS_MINUS:
case CPP_DOT:
+ /* Unenclosed postfix operator. */
+ return pce_maybe_postfix;
+
case CPP_DEREF:
+ /* A primary constraint that precedes the lambda-declarator of a
+ lambda expression is followed by trailing return type.
+
+ []<typename T> requires C -> void {}
+
+ Don't try to re-parse this as a postfix expression in
+ C++23 and later. In C++20 ( needs to come in between but we
+ allow it to be omitted with pedwarn. */
+ if (lambda_p)
+ return pce_ok;
/* Unenclosed postfix operator. */
return pce_maybe_postfix;
}
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp23/lambda-specifiers2.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp23/lambda-specifiers2.C
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..0cc69bebc64
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp23/lambda-specifiers2.C
@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+// PR c++/99850
+// P1102R2 - Down with ()!
+// { dg-do compile { target c++23 } }
+
+auto l = []<auto> requires true -> void {};
+template <typename...> concept C = true;
+auto m = []<typename... Ts> requires (C<Ts> && ...) -> void {};
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread
only message in thread, other threads:[~2021-04-16 7:35 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-04-16 7:35 [gcc r11-8210] c++: Fix up C++23 [] <...> requires primary -> type {} parsing [PR99850] Jakub Jelinek
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).