if (DeclaratorInfo.isFunctionDeclarator() &&
isStartOfFunctionDefinition(DeclaratorInfo)) {
if (DS.getStorageClassSpec() == DeclSpec::SCS_typedef) {
- Diag(Tok, diag::err_function_declared_typedef);
-
- // Recover by ignoring the 'typedef'.
+ // Recover by ignoring the 'typedef'. This was probably supposed to be
+ // the 'typename' keyword, which we should have already suggested adding
+ // if it's appropriate.
+ Diag(DS.getStorageClassSpecLoc(), diag::err_function_declared_typedef)
+ << FixItHint::CreateRemoval(DS.getStorageClassSpecLoc());
DS.ClearStorageClassSpecs();
}
return ParseFunctionDefinition(DeclaratorInfo, TemplateInfo);
-// RUN: %clang_cc1 -pedantic -Wall -verify -fcxx-exceptions -x c++ %s
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -pedantic -Wall -Wno-comment -verify -fcxx-exceptions -x c++ %s
// RUN: cp %s %t
-// RUN: not %clang_cc1 -pedantic -Wall -fcxx-exceptions -fixit -x c++ %t
-// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -pedantic -Wall -Werror -fcxx-exceptions -x c++ %t
+// RUN: not %clang_cc1 -pedantic -Wall -Wno-comment -fcxx-exceptions -fixit -x c++ %t
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -pedantic -Wall -Werror -Wno-comment -fcxx-exceptions -x c++ %t
/* This is a test of the various code modification hints that are
provided as part of warning or extension diagnostics. All of the
try {
} catch (...) {
}
+
+template<class T> struct Mystery;
+template<class T> typedef Mystery<T>::type getMysteriousThing() { // \
+ expected-error {{function definition declared 'typedef'}} \
+ expected-error {{missing 'typename' prior to dependent}}
+ return Mystery<T>::get();
+}