aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorJakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>2021-04-16 09:34:26 +0200
committerJakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>2021-04-16 09:34:26 +0200
commit784de5292c34e287c848b382b431599b818ea76e (patch)
tree3dc8b374403f140ce4b8a6155a98876e0d6c7cc2
parent20eb7a1891cfd7fa85295a236cebe0322d041edd (diff)
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.
-rw-r--r--gcc/cp/parser.c13
-rw-r--r--gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp23/lambda-specifiers2.C7
2 files changed, 20 insertions, 0 deletions
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 {};