pseduo-destructor tests

[Aaron Ballman]

Thanks! Committed in r209891

~Aaron

On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 10:44 PM, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 5:41 AM, Aaron Ballman <aaron at aaronballman.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> I noticed that
>> clang\test\CXX\basic\basic.lookup\basic.lookup.qual\p6-0x.cpp
>> is XFAILed for all targets with the comment "Our C++0x doesn't
>> currently have specialized destructor name handling, since the
>> specification is still in flux."
>>
>> That seems a bit outdated. From looking at the standard, I believe
>> this test should be unXFAILed, the comment removed, and
>> expected-no-diagnostics added to the test. The contents of the test
>> are:
>>
>> struct C {
>>   typedef int I;
>> };
>>
>> typedef int I1, I2;
>> extern int* p;
>> extern int* q;
>>
>> void f() {
>>   p->C::I::~I();
>>   q->I1::~I2();
>> }
>>
>> struct A {
>>   ~A();
>> };
>>
>> typedef A AB;
>> int main() {
>>   AB *p;
>>   p->AB::~AB();
>> }
>>
>> Any disagreement with that direction?
>
>
> Sounds good to me. There's some weirdnesses with cv-qualifiers in the C++11
> rules, but we have a core issue to get them fixed (core issue 1920), and
> that doesn't affect this test.