1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
|
// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify %std_cxx98-14 %s
// This is a test for an egregious hack in Clang that works around
// issues with GCC's evolution. libstdc++ 4.2.x uses __is_pod as an
// identifier (to declare a struct template like the one below), while
// GCC 4.3 and newer make __is_pod a keyword. Clang treats __is_pod as
// a keyword *unless* it is introduced following the struct keyword.
template<typename T>
struct __is_pod { // expected-warning {{keyword '__is_pod' will be made available as an identifier}}
__is_pod() {}
};
__is_pod<int> ipi;
// Ditto for __is_same.
template<typename T>
struct __is_same { // expected-warning {{keyword '__is_same' will be made available as an identifier}}
};
__is_same<int> isi;
// Another, similar egregious hack for __is_signed, which is a type
// trait in Embarcadero's compiler but is used as an identifier in
// libstdc++.
struct test_is_signed {
static const bool __is_signed = true; // expected-warning {{keyword '__is_signed' will be made available as an identifier}}
};
bool check_signed = test_is_signed::__is_signed;
template<bool B> struct must_be_true {};
template<> struct must_be_true<false>;
void foo() {
bool b = __is_pod(int);
must_be_true<__is_pod(int)> mbt;
}
// expected-warning@+1 {{declaration does not declare anything}}
struct // expected-error {{declaration of anonymous struct must be a definition}}
#pragma pack(pop)
S {
};
#if !__has_feature(is_pod)
# error __is_pod should still be available.
#endif
|
