This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [C++-11] User defined literals

From: Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>
To: Ed Smith-Rowland <3dw4rd at verizon dot net>
Cc: gcc-patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 12:57:06 -0400
Subject: Re: [C++-11] User defined literals
References: <4E6F6A1C.90305@verizon.net> <4E7008DA.6090703@redhat.com> <4E76FBBB.6050601@verizon.net> <4E77B002.50804@redhat.com> <4E77F549.6000704@verizon.net> <4E78F475.8070303@redhat.com> <4E8C7DF0.9030809@verizon.net> <4E8CC75A.5090900@redhat.com> <4E909588.3000801@verizon.net> <4E90D97F.9060506@redhat.com> <4E922BEF.1080100@verizon.net> <4E947505.3050404@redhat.com>

On 10/11/2011 12:55 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:

On 10/09/2011 07:19 PM, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
Does cp_parser_identifier (parser) *not* consume the identifier token?
I'm pretty sure it does.

Does it work to only complain if !cp_parser_parsing_tentatively?

I suppose not, if you got no complaints with cp_parser_error.

Jason

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [C++-11] User defined literals
  - From: Ed Smith-Rowland

References:
- Re: [C++-11] User defined literals
  - From: Ed Smith-Rowland
- Re: [C++-11] User defined literals
  - From: Jason Merrill
- Re: [C++-11] User defined literals
  - From: Ed Smith-Rowland
- Re: [C++-11] User defined literals
  - From: Jason Merrill
- Re: [C++-11] User defined literals
  - From: Ed Smith-Rowland
- Re: [C++-11] User defined literals
  - From: Jason Merrill

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]