13 tests have been updated for C++11 compatibility.
CXX/class.access/class.access.dcl/p1.cpp
Access declarations are deprecated in C++11. As a result, there are 4 types of diagnostics changes: For simple access declarations, there is a change in diagnostics. C++98: warning: access declarations are deprecated; use using declarations instead C++11: error: ISO C++11 does not allow access declarations; use using declarations instead For Self-referential access declarations, there is also an additional error message. C++98: warning: access declarations are deprecated; use using declarations instead C++11: error: ISO C++11 does not allow access declarations; use using declarations instead C++11: error: using declaration refers to its own class For an access declaration of a non-base method, there is a different additional error message. C++98: warning: access declarations are deprecated; use using declarations instead C++11: error: ISO C++11 does not allow access declarations; use using declarations instead C++11: error: using declaration refers into 'Subclass::', which is not a base class of 'C' For self-referential access declaration with local declaration, there is the additional error message but one less note message. C++98: warning: access declarations are deprecated; use using declarations instead [-Wdeprecated] C++98: error: using declaration refers to its own class C++98: note: target of using declaration C++11: error: ISO C++11 does not allow access declarations; use using declarations instead C++11: error: using declaration refers to its own class
CXX/temp/temp.spec/temp.expl.spec/p2.cpp
Guard multiple instances of the following diagnostics to C++98. C++98: warning: first declaration of function template specialization of 'f0' outside namespace 'N0' is a C++11 extension C++98: note: explicitly specialized declaration is here
CXX/temp/temp.spec/temp.expl.spec/p3.cpp
Guard one instance of the following diagnostics to C++98. C++98: warning: first declaration of class template specialization of 'X' outside namespace 'N' is a C++11 extension C++98: note: explicitly specialized declaration is here
CXX/temp/temp.spec/temp.explicit/p2.cpp
CXX/temp/temp.spec/temp.explicit/p5.cpp
In C++98 with -Wc++11-compat, Out-of-scope explicit instantiations of template is a Warning. In C++11, it is now an Error. C++98: warning: explicit instantiation of 'N::f1' must occur in namespace 'N' C++11: error: explicit instantiation of 'N::f1' must occur in namespace 'N'
CodeGenCXX/debug-info-static-member.cpp
In C++11, replace “const” with “constexpr” for in-class static initializer of non-integral type. Otherwise compiler would complain: C++11: error: in-class initializer for static data member of type 'const float' requires 'constexpr' specifier
SemaCXX/dcl_init_aggr.cpp
Diagnostic change due to initializer list C++98: error: non-aggregate type 'NonAggregate' cannot be initialized with an initializer list C++11: error no matching constructor for initialization of 'NonAggregate' note: candidate constructor (the implicit copy constructor) not viable note: candidate constructor (the implicit move constructor) not viable note: candidate constructor not viable Diagnostic Change C++98: conversion from string literal to 'char *' is deprecated C++11: ISO C++11 does not allow conversion from string literal to 'char *' Addition C++11 move constructor diagnostics C++11: note: candidate constructor (the implicit move constructor) not viable The next 2 lines caused a lot of diff. Source: TooFewError too_few_error = { 1 } C++98: error: no matching constructor for initialization of 'NoDefaultConstructor' note: candidate constructor not viable: requires 1 argument, but 0 were provided note: candidate constructor (the implicit copy constructor) not viable note: in implicit initialization of field 'nodef' with omitted initializer error: implicit default constructor for 'TooFewError' must explicitly initialize the member 'nodef' which does not have a default constructor note: member is declared here note: 'NoDefaultConstructor' declared here C++11: error: no matching constructor for initialization of 'NoDefaultConstructor' note: candidate constructor not viable: requires 1 argument, but 0 were provided note: candidate constructor (the implicit copy constructor) not viable note: candidate constructor (the implicit move constructor) not viable note: in implicit initialization of field 'nodef' with omitted initializer Source: TooFewError too_few_okay2[2] = { 1, 1 }; C++98: note: implicit default constructor for 'TooFewError' first required here note: 'NoDefaultConstructor' declared her C++11: error: no matching constructor for initialization of 'NoDefaultConstructor' note: candidate constructor not viable: requires 1 argument, but 0 were provided note: candidate constructor (the implicit copy constructor) not viable: requires 1 argument, but 0 were provided note: candidate constructor (the implicit move constructor) not viable: requires 1 argument, but 0 were provided note: in implicit initialization of field 'nodef' with omitted initializer note: in implicit initialization of array element 1 with omitted initializer
SemaCXX/type-convert-construct.cpp
*Note: Run line used “–std=gnu++XX” instead of “c++” due to use of “typeof”. New C++11 error message for int and pointer comparison C++11: error: comparison between pointer and integer ('T' (aka 'int') and 'int *') Change in diagnostics: C++98: Warning: conversion from string literal to 'char *' is deprecated C++11: Warning: ISO C++11 does not allow conversion from string literal to 'char *' C++98: Warning: conversion from string literal to 'wchar_t *' is deprecated C++11: Warning: ISO C++11 does not allow conversion from string literal to 'wchar_t
SemaCXX/vararg-non-pod.cpp
Clang in C++11 now allows non-POD type to be passed via variadic argument. However, Clang still does not allow non-trivial type to be passed (according C++11 standard 5.2.2\7 [expr.call] this behavior is “implementation defined”) Restrict the following warnings on non-POD types to C++98/03 C++98: warning: cannot pass object of non-POD type 'C' through variadic function; call will abort at runtime C++98: warning: cannot pass object of non-POD type 'C' through variadic method; call will abort at runtime C++98: warning: cannot pass object of non-POD type 'C' through variadic block; call will abort at runtime C++98: warning: cannot pass object of non-POD type 'C' through variadic constructor; call will abort at runtime Change in diagnostics for non-trivial type C++98: warning: cannot pass object of non-POD type 'Base' through variadic function; call will abort at runtime C++11: warning: cannot pass object of non-trivial type 'Base' through variadic function; call will abort at runtime
SemaTemplate/class-template-spec.cpp
Restrict the following diagnostics to C++98/03 C++98: warning: first declaration of class template specialization of 'B' outside namespace 'N' is a C++11 extension note: explicitly specialized declaration is here C++98: Warning: variadic templates are a C++11 extension C++98: Warning: alias declarations are a C++11 extension
SemaTemplate/instantiate-cast.cpp
When there is no matching conversion, C++98 tries copy and default constructors whereas C++11 tries copy, move and default constructors. Therefore, there is one additional move constructor Note message in C++11 C++11: note: candidate constructor (the implicit copy constructor) not viable: no known conversion from 'int' to 'const A' for 1st argument
SemaTemplate/instantiate-expr-4.cpp
Added C++11 specific diagnostics 3 instances of move constructor diagnostics C++11: candidate constructor (the implicit move constructor) not viable 1 instance of initializer list narrowing diagnostics C++11: error: type 'float' cannot be narrowed to 'int' in initializer list note: in instantiation of member function 'InitList1<int [1], float>::f' requested here note: insert an explicit cast to silence this issue
SemaTemplate/instantiate-member-class.cpp
Guard C++98/03 Specific warning C++98: Warning: alias declarations are a C++11 extension Change in diagnostics, C++98/03 allows for ‘0’ to null pointer conversion during initialization, C++11 does not. C++98: warning: expression which evaluates to zero treated as a null pointer constant of type 'int *' C++11: Error: cannot initialize a variable of type 'int *' with an rvalue of type 'int'