1 // { dg-do compile }
2 // { dg-options "-std=gnu++98" }
3 // Origin: <tilps at hotmail dot com>
4 // c++/9154: poor error message for ">>" vs "> >" in template argument list
5 
6 
7 /*
8  * Test that the error message is issued properly
9  */
10 template <class T>
11 class A {};
12 
13 A<A<int>> blah;  // { dg-error "should be '> >' within" }
14 A<int>> blah2; // { dg-error "spurious '>>'" }
15 
16 
17 /*
18  * Test that a few valid constructs containing a ">>" token in a
19  * template argument list are handled correctly.
20  */
21 template <int N>
B(void)22 void B(void) {}
23 
Btest()24 int Btest()
25 {
26   B<256 >> 4>();
27   return 0;
28 }
29 
30 template <int N = 123>>4>
31 struct C {};
32 
33 template <int>      struct D {};
34 template <typename> struct E {};
35 
36 E<D< 1>>2 > > E1;
37 
38 const int x = 0;
39 E<D< 1>>x > > E2;
40 
41 template <int> struct F {
42   typedef int I;
43 };
44 
45 template <typename T = F< 1>>2 >::I>
46 struct G {};
47 
48 /*
49  * In this special case, a valid type-id (H() is a function type) is followed
50  * by '>>', but the argument should still be parsed as an expression, which
51  * will then be rejected as non-constant expression.
52  */
53 struct H
54 {
55   int operator >>(int);
56 };
57 
58 template <int V> struct L {};
59 L<H() >> 5> l;  // { dg-error "" "non-constant" }
60 
61 
62 /*
63  * This case used to not emit the nice error message because of a typo
64  *  in the code.
65  */
66 template <void (*)(void)>
67 struct K {};
68 
69 void KFunc(void);
70 
71 A<K<&KFunc>> k1;  // { dg-error "" }
72 K<&KFunc>> k2; // { dg-error "" }
73