On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 11:31:08PM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> >2016-03-03 Marek Polacek <pola...@redhat.com>
> >
> > PR c/69798
> > * c-parser.c (c_parser_postfix_expression): Call
> > c_parser_cast_expression instead of c_parser_postfix_expression.
> >
> > * gcc.dg/cilk-plus/pr69798-1.c: New test.
> > * gcc.dg/cilk-plus/pr69798-2.c: New test.
> Do we need to do anything for the call into c_parser_postfix_expression that
> occurs between the two you changed in this patch.
>
> I think you can get into that code with something like
>
> _Cilk_spawn _Cilk_spawn (<whatever>));
The _Cilk_spawn _Cilk_spawn (struct S);
case needs the same treatment as the other 2 spots, sure, and should be also
covered by a testcase. Perhaps another testcase should test the various
other cases of the postfix vs. cast expression I've mentioned in the other
mail, just make sure the diagnostics is reasonable and we don't ICE.
Jakub
