Lines Matching refs:Operator
467 /// '::' operator-function-id
496 /// direct operand of the address-of operator. This is, besides member contexts,
519 // This is only the direct operand of an & operator if it is not
1079 /// . or -> operator, and nested-name-specifier have already been
1570 /// operator-function-id is parsed by \c ParseUnqualifiedId() to determine
1590 /// \param Id as input, describes the template-name or operator-function-id
1638 Name = "operator ";
1640 Name += getOperatorSpelling(Id.OperatorFunctionId.Operator);
1721 TemplateId->Operator = OO_None;
1725 TemplateId->Operator = Id.OperatorFunctionId.Operator;
1765 /// \brief Parse an operator-function-id or conversion-function-id as part
1768 /// This routine is responsible only for parsing the operator-function-id or
1772 /// operator-function-id: [C++ 13.5]
1773 /// 'operator' operator
1775 /// operator: one of
1784 /// operator conversion-type-id
1790 /// ptr-operator conversion-declarator[opt]
1808 assert(Tok.is(tok::kw_operator) && "Expected 'operator' keyword");
1810 // Consume the 'operator' keyword.
1813 operator name we have.
1879 // Code completion for the operator name.
1891 // We have parsed an operator-function-id.
1896 // Parse a literal-operator-id.
1898 // literal-operator-id: [C++0x 13.5.8]
1899 // operator "" identifier
1924 // Grab the literal operator's suffix, which will be either the next token
1953 // This isn't a valid literal-operator-id, but we think we know
1969 // operator conversion-type-id
1975 // ptr-operator conversion-declarator[opt]
2004 /// operator-function-id
2006 /// [C++0x] literal-operator-id [TODO]
2127 // operator-function-id
2133 // If we have an operator-function-id or a literal-operator-id and the next
2137 // operator-function-id < template-argument-list[opt] >
2225 /// ptr-operator new-declarator[opt]
2389 /// This ambiguity appears in the syntax of the C++ new operator.
