Richard makes a good point, clean up this test.

llvm-svn: 189444
This commit is contained in:
David Majnemer 2013-08-28 05:45:53 +00:00
parent 80655be83f
commit 8a0caa8525

View File

@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify %s
// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify -std=c++11 %s
template<template<typename T> class X> struct A; // expected-note 2{{previous template template parameter is here}}
@ -32,9 +31,7 @@ template<typename T> void f(int);
A<f> *a9; // expected-error{{must be a class template}}
// Evil digraph '<:' is parsed as '[', expect error.
#if __cplusplus < 201103
A<::N::Z> *a10; // expected-error{{found '<::' after a template name which forms the digraph '<:' (aka '[') and a ':', did you mean '< ::'?}}
#endif
// Do not do a digraph correction here.
A<: :N::Z> *a11; // expected-error{{expected expression}} \
@ -59,20 +56,18 @@ namespace N {
}
// PR12179
#if __cplusplus < 201103
template <typename Primitive, template <Primitive...> class F> // expected-warning {{variadic templates are a C++11 extension}}
struct unbox_args {
typedef typename Primitive::template call<F> x;
};
#else
template <template <typename> class... Templates>
template <template <typename> class... Templates> // expected-warning {{variadic templates are a C++11 extension}}
struct template_tuple {};
template <typename T>
struct identity {};
template <template <typename> class... Templates>
template <template <typename> class... Templates> // expected-warning {{variadic templates are a C++11 extension}}
template_tuple<Templates...> f7() {}
void foo() {
f7<identity>();
}
#endif