When we see 'Class(X' or 'Class::Class(X' and we suspect that it names a

constructor, but X is not a known typename, check whether the tokens could
possibly match the syntax of a declarator before concluding that it isn't
a constructor. If it's definitely ill-formed, assume it is a constructor.

Empirical evidence suggests that this pattern is much more often a
constructor with a typoed (or not-yet-declared) type name than any of the
other possibilities, so the extra cost of the check is not expected to be
problematic.

llvm-svn: 153488

1 files changed, 2 insertions, 7 deletions

diff --git a/clang/test/SemaCXX/copy-assignment.cpp b/clang/test/SemaCXX/copy-assignment.cpp
index 7aca9d6a80a..798582c149c 100644
--- a/clang/test/SemaCXX/copy-assignment.cpp
+++ b/clang/test/SemaCXX/copy-assignment.cpp
@@ -98,18 +98,13 @@ void test() {
 }
 
 // <rdar://problem/8315440>: Don't crash
-// FIXME: the recovery here is really bad.
 namespace test1 {
   template<typename T> class A : public unknown::X { // expected-error {{undeclared identifier 'unknown'}} expected-error {{expected class name}}
-    A(UndeclaredType n) : X(n) {} // expected-error{{expected ')'}} expected-note{{to match this '('}} \
-    // expected-error{{use of undeclared identifier 'n'}} \
-    // expected-error{{expected ';' at end of declaration list}} \
-    // expected-error{{field has incomplete type 'test1::A<char>'}}
+    A(UndeclaredType n) : X(n) {} // expected-error {{unknown type name 'UndeclaredType'}}
   };
   template<typename T> class B : public A<T>     {
     virtual void foo() {}
   };
-  extern template class A<char>; // expected-note {{in instantiation of template class 'test1::A<char>' requested here}} \
-                                 // expected-note {{definition of 'test1::A<char>' is not complete until the closing '}'}}
+  extern template class A<char>;
   extern template class B<char>;
 }