[PATCH] D18221: [Concepts] Implement subsection [dcl.spec.concept]p7 of the Concepts TS

[Nathan Wilson via cfe-commits]

nwilson added inline comments.

================
Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp:7837
@@ -7819,1 +7836,3 @@
+        NewFD->setInvalidDecl(true);
+        return NewFD;
       }
----------------
Please let me know if there are thoughts about better error recovery here. I did this because we don't have the specifier information when checking an explicit specialization. So, we still diagnose for the explication specialization (one of the checks in this patch), when `concept` is specified, e.g.:
template<typename T> concept bool C() { return true; }
template <> concept bool C<int>() { return true; }

Would it be okay to pass `Declarator` to Sema::CheckFunctionTemplateSpecialization?


http://reviews.llvm.org/D18221