<html>
<head>
<base href="http://llvm.org/bugs/" />
</head>
<body><table border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="8">
<tr>
<th>Bug ID</th>
<td><a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW --- - int(::x) interpreted as a declaration but should it be interpreted as an expression?"
href="http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=22633">22633</a>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>Summary</th>
<td>int(::x) interpreted as a declaration but should it be interpreted as an expression?
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>Product</th>
<td>clang
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>Version</th>
<td>trunk
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>Hardware</th>
<td>PC
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>OS</th>
<td>All
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>Status</th>
<td>NEW
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>Severity</th>
<td>normal
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>Priority</th>
<td>P
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>Component</th>
<td>C++
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>Assignee</th>
<td>unassignedclangbugs@nondot.org
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>Reporter</th>
<td>yaghmour.shafik@gmail.com
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>CC</th>
<td>dgregor@apple.com, llvmbugs@cs.uiuc.edu
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>Classification</th>
<td>Unclassified
</td>
</tr></table>
<p>
<div>
<pre>Given the following code from this stackoverflow question
<a href="http://stackoverflow.com/q/24623071/1708801">http://stackoverflow.com/q/24623071/1708801</a> :
int x;
int main() {
int(::x); //does not compile
int(::x + 2); //compiles
}
clang rejects int(::x) since it is interpreting it as a declaration which is
obviously ill-formed. gcc on the other hand interprets it as an expression
statement and compiles the code. As far as I can tell section 6.8 [stmt.ambig]
says int(::x) should be a declaration.
Similar conclusion to bug report 4596:
<a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_RESOLVED bz_closed"
title="RESOLVED FIXED - Declaration containing qualified-id interpreted as function-style cast"
href="show_bug.cgi?id=4594">http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=4594</a>
I filed a gcc bug report:
<a href="https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62116">https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62116</a>
and the response was "Current G++ and EDG both treat it as the valid expression
(int)::x" which implies clang is incorrect.</pre>
</div>
</p>
<hr>
<span>You are receiving this mail because:</span>
<ul>
<li>You are on the CC list for the bug.</li>
</ul>
</body>
</html>