If we attempt to add a constructor template specialization that looks

like a copy constructor to the overload set, just ignore it. This
ensures that we don't try to use such a constructor as a copy
constructor *without* triggering diagnostics at the point of
declaration.

Note that we *do* diagnose such copy constructors when explicitly
written by the user (e.g., as an explicit specialization).



git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@88733 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8

1 files changed, 5 insertions, 2 deletions

diff --git a/lib/Sema/SemaStmt.cpp b/lib/Sema/SemaStmt.cpp
index 6a65bd1dd1..e9061b8ac2 100644
--- a/lib/Sema/SemaStmt.cpp
+++ b/lib/Sema/SemaStmt.cpp
@@ -965,9 +965,12 @@ Sema::ActOnReturnStmt(SourceLocation ReturnLoc, ExprArg rex) {
     // In C++ the return statement is handled via a copy initialization.
     // the C version of which boils down to CheckSingleAssignmentConstraints.
     // FIXME: Leaks RetValExp on error.
-    if (PerformCopyInitialization(RetValExp, FnRetType, "returning", Elidable))
+    if (PerformCopyInitialization(RetValExp, FnRetType, "returning", Elidable)){
+      // We should still clean up our temporaries, even when we're failing!
+      RetValExp = MaybeCreateCXXExprWithTemporaries(RetValExp, true);
       return StmtError();
-
+    }
+    
     if (RetValExp) CheckReturnStackAddr(RetValExp, FnRetType, ReturnLoc);
   }