From 84824edd0b44855a699dc05aaf055a727bb51a5a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Richard Smith Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2015 22:39:52 +0000 Subject: Allow non-defining declarations of class template partial specializations to have a nested name specifier. Strictly speaking, forward declarations of class template partial specializations are not permitted at all, but that seems like an obvious wording defect, and if we allow them without a nested name specifier we should also allow them with a nested name specifier. llvm-svn: 255383 --- clang/lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp | 7 ++++++- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) (limited to 'clang/lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp') diff --git a/clang/lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp b/clang/lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp index f9c1a014260..203adeab8d4 100644 --- a/clang/lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp +++ b/clang/lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp @@ -3780,10 +3780,15 @@ Decl *Sema::ParsedFreeStandingDeclSpec(Scope *S, AccessSpecifier AS, bool IsExplicitSpecialization = !TemplateParams.empty() && TemplateParams.back()->size() == 0; if (Tag && SS.isNotEmpty() && !Tag->isCompleteDefinition() && - !IsExplicitInstantiation && !IsExplicitSpecialization) { + !IsExplicitInstantiation && !IsExplicitSpecialization && + !isa(Tag)) { // Per C++ [dcl.type.elab]p1, a class declaration cannot have a // nested-name-specifier unless it is an explicit instantiation // or an explicit specialization. + // + // FIXME: We allow class template partial specializations here too, per the + // obvious intent of DR1819. + // // Per C++ [dcl.enum]p1, an opaque-enum-declaration can't either. Diag(SS.getBeginLoc(), diag::err_standalone_class_nested_name_specifier) << GetDiagnosticTypeSpecifierID(DS.getTypeSpecType()) << SS.getRange(); -- cgit v1.2.3