implement PR4451, improving error recovery for a mistaken : where a :: was

intended.  On the first testcase in the bug, we now produce:

cxx-decl.cpp:12:2: error: unexpected ':' in nested name specifier
y:a a2;
 ^
 ::

instead of:

t.cc:8:1: error: C++ requires a type specifier for all declarations
x:a a2;
^
t.cc:8:2: error: invalid token after top level declarator
x:a a2;
 ^
 ;
t.cc:9:11: error: use of undeclared identifier 'a2'
x::a a3 = a2;
          ^



git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@90713 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8

1 files changed, 24 insertions, 2 deletions

diff --git a/lib/Parse/ParseExprCXX.cpp b/lib/Parse/ParseExprCXX.cpp
index 4eb6cd5daa..ae2a47befd 100644
--- a/lib/Parse/ParseExprCXX.cpp
+++ b/lib/Parse/ParseExprCXX.cpp
@@ -45,10 +45,14 @@ using namespace clang;
 /// \param EnteringContext whether we will be entering into the context of
 /// the nested-name-specifier after parsing it.
 ///
+/// \param ColonIsSacred - If this is true, then a colon is valid after the
+/// specifier, so we should not try to recover from colons aggressively.
+///
 /// \returns true if a scope specifier was parsed.
 bool Parser::ParseOptionalCXXScopeSpecifier(CXXScopeSpec &SS,
                                             Action::TypeTy *ObjectType,
-                                            bool EnteringContext) {
+                                            bool EnteringContext,
+                                            bool ColonIsSacred) {
   assert(getLang().CPlusPlus &&
          "Call sites of this function should be guarded by checking for C++");
 
@@ -214,11 +218,29 @@ bool Parser::ParseOptionalCXXScopeSpecifier(CXXScopeSpec &SS,
     //   namespace-name '::'
     //   nested-name-specifier identifier '::'
     Token Next = NextToken();
+    
+    // If we get foo:bar, this is almost certainly a typo for foo::bar.  Recover
+    // and emit a fixit hint for it.
+    if (Next.is(tok::colon) && !ColonIsSacred &&
+        Actions.IsInvalidUnlessNestedName(CurScope, SS, II, ObjectType,
+                                          EnteringContext) &&
+        // If the token after the colon isn't an identifier, it's still an
+        // error, but they probably meant something else strange so don't
+        // recover like this.
+        PP.LookAhead(1).is(tok::identifier)) {
+      Diag(Next, diag::err_unexected_colon_in_nested_name_spec)
+        << CodeModificationHint::CreateReplacement(Next.getLocation(), "::");
+      
+      // Recover as if the user wrote '::'.
+      Next.setKind(tok::coloncolon);
+    }
+    
     if (Next.is(tok::coloncolon)) {
       // We have an identifier followed by a '::'. Lookup this name
       // as the name in a nested-name-specifier.
       SourceLocation IdLoc = ConsumeToken();
-      assert(Tok.is(tok::coloncolon) && "NextToken() not working properly!");
+      assert((Tok.is(tok::coloncolon) || Tok.is(tok::colon)) &&
+             "NextToken() not working properly!");
       SourceLocation CCLoc = ConsumeToken();
 
       if (!HasScopeSpecifier) {