------- Comment #7 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-09 23:24 -------
Testing the following patch. Not as good as ICC's diagnostic but close.
Index: gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/parse/pr20118.C
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/parse/pr20118.C (revision 0)
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/parse/pr20118.C (revision 0)
@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
+// { dg-do compile }
+// { dg-options "-fshow-column" }
+template<typename t>struct foo {
+ static const int i; };
+
+const int foo<bool>::i = 5; // { dg-error ":11: error: specializing member
foo<bool>::i requires template<> syntax" }
+
+int main() { return 0; }
+
Index: gcc/cp/parser.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/cp/parser.c (revision 138906)
+++ gcc/cp/parser.c (working copy)
@@ -1905,11 +1905,11 @@ static tree cp_parser_lookup_name_simple
static tree cp_parser_maybe_treat_template_as_class
(tree, bool);
static bool cp_parser_check_declarator_template_parameters
(cp_parser *, cp_declarator *, location_t);
static bool cp_parser_check_template_parameters
- (cp_parser *, unsigned, location_t);
+ (cp_parser *, unsigned, location_t, cp_declarator *);
static tree cp_parser_simple_cast_expression
(cp_parser *);
static tree cp_parser_global_scope_opt
(cp_parser *, bool);
static bool cp_parser_constructor_declarator_p
@@ -11591,11 +11591,12 @@ cp_parser_elaborated_type_specifier (cp_
|| cp_lexer_next_token_is (parser->lexer, CPP_SEMICOLON)));
/* An unqualified name was used to reference this type, so
there were no qualifying templates. */
if (!cp_parser_check_template_parameters (parser,
/*num_templates=*/0,
- token->location))
+ token->location,
+ /*declarator=*/NULL))
return error_mark_node;
type = xref_tag (tag_type, identifier, ts, template_p);
}
}
@@ -15049,11 +15050,12 @@ cp_parser_class_head (cp_parser* parser,
end of this function; set "type "to the correct return value and
use "goto done;" to return. */
/* Make sure that the right number of template parameters were
present. */
if (!cp_parser_check_template_parameters (parser, num_templates,
- type_start_token->location))
+ type_start_token->location,
+ /*declarator=*/NULL))
{
/* If something went wrong, there is no point in even trying to
process the class-definition. */
type = NULL_TREE;
goto done;
@@ -16946,13 +16948,13 @@ cp_parser_check_declarator_template_para
== TEMPLATE_ID_EXPR)
/* If the DECLARATOR has the form `X<y>' then it uses one
additional level of template parameters. */
++num_templates;
- return cp_parser_check_template_parameters (parser,
- num_templates,
- declarator_location);
+ return cp_parser_check_template_parameters
+ (parser, num_templates, declarator_location, declarator);
+
case cdk_function:
case cdk_array:
case cdk_pointer:
case cdk_reference:
@@ -16969,34 +16971,42 @@ cp_parser_check_declarator_template_para
return false;
}
/* NUM_TEMPLATES were used in the current declaration. If that is
invalid, return FALSE and issue an error messages. Otherwise,
- return TRUE. */
+ return TRUE. If DECLARATOR is non-NULL, then we are checking a
+ declarator and we can print more accurate diagnostics. */
static bool
cp_parser_check_template_parameters (cp_parser* parser,
unsigned num_templates,
- location_t location)
+ location_t location,
+ cp_declarator *declarator)
{
+ /* If there are the same number of template classes and parameter
+ lists, that's OK. */
+ if (parser->num_template_parameter_lists == num_templates)
+ return true;
+ /* If there are more, but only one more, then we are referring to a
+ member template. That's OK too. */
+ if (parser->num_template_parameter_lists == num_templates + 1)
+ return true;
/* If there are more template classes than parameter lists, we have
something like:
template <class T> void S<T>::R<T>::f (); */
if (parser->num_template_parameter_lists < num_templates)
{
- error ("%Htoo few template-parameter-lists", &location);
+ if (declarator)
+ error_at (location, "specializing member %<%T::%qE%> "
+ "requires %<template<>%> syntax",
+ declarator->u.id.qualifying_scope,
+ declarator->u.id.unqualified_name);
+ else
+ error_at (location, "too few template-parameter-lists");
return false;
}
- /* If there are the same number of template classes and parameter
- lists, that's OK. */
- if (parser->num_template_parameter_lists == num_templates)
- return true;
- /* If there are more, but only one more, then we are referring to a
- member template. That's OK too. */
- if (parser->num_template_parameter_lists == num_templates + 1)
- return true;
/* Otherwise, there are too many template parameter lists. We have
something like:
template <class T> template <class U> void S::f(); */
error ("%Htoo many template-parameter-lists", &location);
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20118
