[llvm-bugs] [Bug 39969] New: 123_p+1 combined with user defined literal should be ill-formed

[via llvm-bugs]

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=39969

            Bug ID: 39969
           Summary: 123_p+1 combined with user defined literal should be
                    ill-formed
           Product: clang
           Version: trunk
          Hardware: PC
                OS: All
            Status: NEW
          Severity: enhancement
          Priority: P
         Component: C++
          Assignee: unassignedclangbugs at nondot.org
          Reporter: yaghmour.shafik at gmail.com
                CC: blitzrakete at gmail.com, dgregor at apple.com,
                    erik.pilkington at gmail.com, llvm-bugs at lists.llvm.org,
                    richard-llvm at metafoo.co.uk

Given the following code

int  operator"" _p(unsigned long long)
{ return 0; }

int test2()
{
    return 123_p+1;  
}

This should be ill-formed just like the following taken from this Stack
Overflow question https://stackoverflow.com/a/53726202/1708801

int  operator"" _e(unsigned long long)
{ return 0; }

int test()
{
    return 0x123_e+1;
}

Where I note due to maximal munch 0x123_e+1 is a pp-token but the same analysis
should also apply to 123_p+1 since the grammar for pp-token includes both:

pp-number e sign 
pp-number p sign

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-bugs/attachments/20181212/021e1531/attachment.html>