Why is the test case important? I think (though I may be wrong) that you're missing the main point of the bug report.
The main point is simply that the error message is uninformative. Nearly useless. Whatever the compiler *thought* it was parsing is hidden, and that's the problem -- it provides no information to the user.
I don't want to be side-tracked into a discussion of obscure logic for deciding which of many overloaded functions the compiler is choosing. This is a bug report on something that is essentially a user-interface issue.
The user interface of a compiler is the language (on the input side) and the error messages (as output). "Parse error after ',' token." is simply not much of a user interface.
If I spend a couple of hours boiling down 20 pages of code to a small test case, are you going to think about the user interface issues?
Falk Hueffner wrote:
Greg Kochanski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
You may assume that box, xform_split, and parallelogram are classes, that insidebox() is a member function of class parallelogram, and that inverse_image() and intersect() are functions.
I'm not willing to guess the test case, since my experience has taught me that just too often there's some subtle point that is missed that way. Please do provide a complete test case.
-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
