PR17567: Improve diagnostic for a mistyped constructor name. If we see something

that looks like a function declaration, except that it's missing a return type,
try typo-correcting it to the relevant constructor name.

In passing, fix a bug where the missing-type-specifier recovery codepath would
drop a preceding scope specifier on the floor, leading to follow-on diagnostics
and incorrect recovery for the auto-in-c++98 hack.

llvm-svn: 192644

1 files changed, 9 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/clang/test/Parser/cxx-decl.cpp b/clang/test/Parser/cxx-decl.cpp
index ea20354bf9a..06272504bc5 100644
--- a/clang/test/Parser/cxx-decl.cpp
+++ b/clang/test/Parser/cxx-decl.cpp
@@ -223,6 +223,15 @@ void foo() {
 }
 }
 
+namespace PR17567 {
+  struct Foobar { // expected-note 2{{declared here}}
+    FooBar(); // expected-error {{missing return type for function 'FooBar'; did you mean the constructor name 'Foobar'?}}
+    ~FooBar(); // expected-error {{expected the class name after '~' to name a destructor}}
+  };
+  FooBar::FooBar() {} // expected-error {{undeclared}} expected-error {{missing return type}}
+  FooBar::~FooBar() {} // expected-error {{undeclared}} expected-error {{expected the class name}}
+}
+
 // PR8380
 extern ""      // expected-error {{unknown linkage language}}
 test6a { ;// expected-error {{C++ requires a type specifier for all declarations}} \