pt.c (check_explicit_specialization): Don't abort on bogus explicit instantiations.

	* pt.c (check_explicit_specialization): Don't abort on bogus
	explicit instantiations.

From-SVN: r21643

gcc/cp/ChangeLog

+1998-08-09  Mark Mitchell  <mark@markmitchell.com>
+
+	* pt.c (check_explicit_specialization): Don't abort on bogus
+	explicit instantiations.
+
 1998-08-07  Mark Mitchell  <mark@markmitchell.com>
 
 	* typeck.c (require_complete_type): Use complete_type_or_else.

gcc/cp/pt.c

@@ -1205,6 +1205,8 @@ check_explicit_specialization (declarator, decl, template_count, flags)
 
       if (ctype != NULL_TREE && TYPE_BEING_DEFINED (ctype))
 	{
+	  if (!explicit_instantiation)
+	    {
 	      /* Since finish_struct_1 has not been called yet, we
 		 can't call lookup_fnfields.  We note that this
 		 template is a specialization, and proceed, letting
@@ -1214,10 +1216,22 @@ check_explicit_specialization (declarator, decl, template_count, flags)
 					NULL_TREE);
 	      TI_PENDING_SPECIALIZATION_FLAG (ti) = 1;
 	      DECL_TEMPLATE_INFO (decl) = ti;
-	  /* This should not be an instantiation; explicit
-	     instantiation directives can only occur at the top
-	     level.  */
-	  my_friendly_assert (!explicit_instantiation, 0);
+	    }
+	  else
+	    /* It's not legal to write an explicit instantiation in
+	       class scope, e.g.:
+
+	         class C { template void f(); }
+
+	       This case is caught by the parser.  However, on
+	       something like:
+	       
+	         template class C { void f(); };
+
+	       (which is illegal) we can get here.  The error will be
+	       issued later.  */
+	    ;
+
 	  return decl;
 	}
       else if (ctype != NULL_TREE 

gcc/testsuite/g++.old-deja/g++.pt/explicit69.C

 //Build don't link:
-template class x {}; // ERROR - not a template instantiation XFAIL *-*-*
+template class x {}; // ERROR - not a template instantiation