llvm-project/clang/test/SemaObjCXX/block-capture.mm

Ignoring revisions in .git-blame-ignore-revs. Click here to bypass and see the normal blame view.

86 lines
2.7 KiB
Plaintext
Raw Normal View History

// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++2b -fsyntax-only -fobjc-arc -fblocks -verify=cxx98_2b,cxx11_2b,cxx2b %s
// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++20 -fsyntax-only -fobjc-arc -fblocks -verify=cxx98_2b,cxx11_2b %s
// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++11 -fsyntax-only -fobjc-arc -fblocks -verify=cxx98_2b,cxx11_2b %s
// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++98 -fsyntax-only -fobjc-arc -fblocks -Wno-c++11-extensions -verify=cxx98_2b,cxx98 %s
#define TEST(T) void test_##T() { \
__block T x; \
(void)^(void) { (void)x; }; \
}
struct CopyOnly {
CopyOnly(); // cxx2b-note {{not viable}}
CopyOnly(CopyOnly &); // cxx2b-note {{not viable}}
};
TEST(CopyOnly); // cxx2b-error {{no matching constructor}}
[clang] C++98 implicit moves are back with a vengeance After taking C++98 implicit moves out in D104500, we put it back in, but now in a new form which preserves compatibility with pure C++98 programs, while at the same time giving almost all the goodies from P1825. * We use the exact same rules as C++20 with regards to which id-expressions are move eligible. The previous incarnation would only benefit from the proper subset which is copy ellidable. This means we can implicit move, in addition: * Parameters. * RValue references. * Exception variables. * Variables with higher-than-natural required alignment. * Objects with different type from the function return type. * We preserve the two-overload resolution, with one small tweak to the first one: If we either pick a (possibly converting) constructor which does not take an rvalue reference, or a user conversion operator which is not ref-qualified, we abort into the second overload resolution. This gives C++98 almost all the implicit move patterns which we had created test cases for, while at the same time preserving the meaning of these three patterns, which are found in pure C++98 programs: * Classes with both const and non-const copy constructors, but no move constructors, continue to have their non-const copy constructor selected. * We continue to reject as ambiguous the following pattern: ``` struct A { A(B &); }; struct B { operator A(); }; A foo(B x) { return x; } ``` * We continue to pick the copy constructor in the following pattern: ``` class AutoPtrRef { }; struct AutoPtr { AutoPtr(AutoPtr &); AutoPtr(); AutoPtr(AutoPtrRef); operator AutoPtrRef(); }; AutoPtr test_auto_ptr() { AutoPtr p; return p; } ``` Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com> Reviewed By: Quuxplusone Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105756
2021-07-10 08:34:17 +08:00
// Both ConstCopyOnly and NonConstCopyOnly are
// "pure" C++98 tests (pretend 'delete' means 'private').
// However we may extend implicit moves into C++98, we must make sure the
// results in these are not changed.
struct ConstCopyOnly {
ConstCopyOnly();
ConstCopyOnly(ConstCopyOnly &) = delete; // cxx98-note {{marked deleted here}}
ConstCopyOnly(const ConstCopyOnly &);
};
TEST(ConstCopyOnly); // cxx98-error {{call to deleted constructor}}
struct NonConstCopyOnly {
NonConstCopyOnly();
NonConstCopyOnly(NonConstCopyOnly &);
NonConstCopyOnly(const NonConstCopyOnly &) = delete; // cxx11_2b-note {{marked deleted here}}
};
TEST(NonConstCopyOnly); // cxx11_2b-error {{call to deleted constructor}}
struct CopyNoMove {
CopyNoMove();
CopyNoMove(CopyNoMove &);
[clang] C++98 implicit moves are back with a vengeance After taking C++98 implicit moves out in D104500, we put it back in, but now in a new form which preserves compatibility with pure C++98 programs, while at the same time giving almost all the goodies from P1825. * We use the exact same rules as C++20 with regards to which id-expressions are move eligible. The previous incarnation would only benefit from the proper subset which is copy ellidable. This means we can implicit move, in addition: * Parameters. * RValue references. * Exception variables. * Variables with higher-than-natural required alignment. * Objects with different type from the function return type. * We preserve the two-overload resolution, with one small tweak to the first one: If we either pick a (possibly converting) constructor which does not take an rvalue reference, or a user conversion operator which is not ref-qualified, we abort into the second overload resolution. This gives C++98 almost all the implicit move patterns which we had created test cases for, while at the same time preserving the meaning of these three patterns, which are found in pure C++98 programs: * Classes with both const and non-const copy constructors, but no move constructors, continue to have their non-const copy constructor selected. * We continue to reject as ambiguous the following pattern: ``` struct A { A(B &); }; struct B { operator A(); }; A foo(B x) { return x; } ``` * We continue to pick the copy constructor in the following pattern: ``` class AutoPtrRef { }; struct AutoPtr { AutoPtr(AutoPtr &); AutoPtr(); AutoPtr(AutoPtrRef); operator AutoPtrRef(); }; AutoPtr test_auto_ptr() { AutoPtr p; return p; } ``` Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com> Reviewed By: Quuxplusone Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105756
2021-07-10 08:34:17 +08:00
CopyNoMove(CopyNoMove &&) = delete; // cxx98_2b-note {{marked deleted here}}
};
[clang] C++98 implicit moves are back with a vengeance After taking C++98 implicit moves out in D104500, we put it back in, but now in a new form which preserves compatibility with pure C++98 programs, while at the same time giving almost all the goodies from P1825. * We use the exact same rules as C++20 with regards to which id-expressions are move eligible. The previous incarnation would only benefit from the proper subset which is copy ellidable. This means we can implicit move, in addition: * Parameters. * RValue references. * Exception variables. * Variables with higher-than-natural required alignment. * Objects with different type from the function return type. * We preserve the two-overload resolution, with one small tweak to the first one: If we either pick a (possibly converting) constructor which does not take an rvalue reference, or a user conversion operator which is not ref-qualified, we abort into the second overload resolution. This gives C++98 almost all the implicit move patterns which we had created test cases for, while at the same time preserving the meaning of these three patterns, which are found in pure C++98 programs: * Classes with both const and non-const copy constructors, but no move constructors, continue to have their non-const copy constructor selected. * We continue to reject as ambiguous the following pattern: ``` struct A { A(B &); }; struct B { operator A(); }; A foo(B x) { return x; } ``` * We continue to pick the copy constructor in the following pattern: ``` class AutoPtrRef { }; struct AutoPtr { AutoPtr(AutoPtr &); AutoPtr(); AutoPtr(AutoPtrRef); operator AutoPtrRef(); }; AutoPtr test_auto_ptr() { AutoPtr p; return p; } ``` Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com> Reviewed By: Quuxplusone Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105756
2021-07-10 08:34:17 +08:00
TEST(CopyNoMove); // cxx98_2b-error {{call to deleted constructor}}
struct MoveOnly {
MoveOnly();
[clang] C++98 implicit moves are back with a vengeance After taking C++98 implicit moves out in D104500, we put it back in, but now in a new form which preserves compatibility with pure C++98 programs, while at the same time giving almost all the goodies from P1825. * We use the exact same rules as C++20 with regards to which id-expressions are move eligible. The previous incarnation would only benefit from the proper subset which is copy ellidable. This means we can implicit move, in addition: * Parameters. * RValue references. * Exception variables. * Variables with higher-than-natural required alignment. * Objects with different type from the function return type. * We preserve the two-overload resolution, with one small tweak to the first one: If we either pick a (possibly converting) constructor which does not take an rvalue reference, or a user conversion operator which is not ref-qualified, we abort into the second overload resolution. This gives C++98 almost all the implicit move patterns which we had created test cases for, while at the same time preserving the meaning of these three patterns, which are found in pure C++98 programs: * Classes with both const and non-const copy constructors, but no move constructors, continue to have their non-const copy constructor selected. * We continue to reject as ambiguous the following pattern: ``` struct A { A(B &); }; struct B { operator A(); }; A foo(B x) { return x; } ``` * We continue to pick the copy constructor in the following pattern: ``` class AutoPtrRef { }; struct AutoPtr { AutoPtr(AutoPtr &); AutoPtr(); AutoPtr(AutoPtrRef); operator AutoPtrRef(); }; AutoPtr test_auto_ptr() { AutoPtr p; return p; } ``` Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com> Reviewed By: Quuxplusone Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105756
2021-07-10 08:34:17 +08:00
MoveOnly(MoveOnly &) = delete;
MoveOnly(MoveOnly &&);
};
[clang] C++98 implicit moves are back with a vengeance After taking C++98 implicit moves out in D104500, we put it back in, but now in a new form which preserves compatibility with pure C++98 programs, while at the same time giving almost all the goodies from P1825. * We use the exact same rules as C++20 with regards to which id-expressions are move eligible. The previous incarnation would only benefit from the proper subset which is copy ellidable. This means we can implicit move, in addition: * Parameters. * RValue references. * Exception variables. * Variables with higher-than-natural required alignment. * Objects with different type from the function return type. * We preserve the two-overload resolution, with one small tweak to the first one: If we either pick a (possibly converting) constructor which does not take an rvalue reference, or a user conversion operator which is not ref-qualified, we abort into the second overload resolution. This gives C++98 almost all the implicit move patterns which we had created test cases for, while at the same time preserving the meaning of these three patterns, which are found in pure C++98 programs: * Classes with both const and non-const copy constructors, but no move constructors, continue to have their non-const copy constructor selected. * We continue to reject as ambiguous the following pattern: ``` struct A { A(B &); }; struct B { operator A(); }; A foo(B x) { return x; } ``` * We continue to pick the copy constructor in the following pattern: ``` class AutoPtrRef { }; struct AutoPtr { AutoPtr(AutoPtr &); AutoPtr(); AutoPtr(AutoPtrRef); operator AutoPtrRef(); }; AutoPtr test_auto_ptr() { AutoPtr p; return p; } ``` Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com> Reviewed By: Quuxplusone Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105756
2021-07-10 08:34:17 +08:00
TEST(MoveOnly);
struct NoCopyNoMove {
NoCopyNoMove();
[clang] C++98 implicit moves are back with a vengeance After taking C++98 implicit moves out in D104500, we put it back in, but now in a new form which preserves compatibility with pure C++98 programs, while at the same time giving almost all the goodies from P1825. * We use the exact same rules as C++20 with regards to which id-expressions are move eligible. The previous incarnation would only benefit from the proper subset which is copy ellidable. This means we can implicit move, in addition: * Parameters. * RValue references. * Exception variables. * Variables with higher-than-natural required alignment. * Objects with different type from the function return type. * We preserve the two-overload resolution, with one small tweak to the first one: If we either pick a (possibly converting) constructor which does not take an rvalue reference, or a user conversion operator which is not ref-qualified, we abort into the second overload resolution. This gives C++98 almost all the implicit move patterns which we had created test cases for, while at the same time preserving the meaning of these three patterns, which are found in pure C++98 programs: * Classes with both const and non-const copy constructors, but no move constructors, continue to have their non-const copy constructor selected. * We continue to reject as ambiguous the following pattern: ``` struct A { A(B &); }; struct B { operator A(); }; A foo(B x) { return x; } ``` * We continue to pick the copy constructor in the following pattern: ``` class AutoPtrRef { }; struct AutoPtr { AutoPtr(AutoPtr &); AutoPtr(); AutoPtr(AutoPtrRef); operator AutoPtrRef(); }; AutoPtr test_auto_ptr() { AutoPtr p; return p; } ``` Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com> Reviewed By: Quuxplusone Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105756
2021-07-10 08:34:17 +08:00
NoCopyNoMove(NoCopyNoMove &) = delete;
NoCopyNoMove(NoCopyNoMove &&) = delete; // cxx98_2b-note {{marked deleted here}}
};
TEST(NoCopyNoMove); // cxx98_2b-error {{call to deleted constructor}}
struct ConvertingRVRef {
ConvertingRVRef();
[clang] C++98 implicit moves are back with a vengeance After taking C++98 implicit moves out in D104500, we put it back in, but now in a new form which preserves compatibility with pure C++98 programs, while at the same time giving almost all the goodies from P1825. * We use the exact same rules as C++20 with regards to which id-expressions are move eligible. The previous incarnation would only benefit from the proper subset which is copy ellidable. This means we can implicit move, in addition: * Parameters. * RValue references. * Exception variables. * Variables with higher-than-natural required alignment. * Objects with different type from the function return type. * We preserve the two-overload resolution, with one small tweak to the first one: If we either pick a (possibly converting) constructor which does not take an rvalue reference, or a user conversion operator which is not ref-qualified, we abort into the second overload resolution. This gives C++98 almost all the implicit move patterns which we had created test cases for, while at the same time preserving the meaning of these three patterns, which are found in pure C++98 programs: * Classes with both const and non-const copy constructors, but no move constructors, continue to have their non-const copy constructor selected. * We continue to reject as ambiguous the following pattern: ``` struct A { A(B &); }; struct B { operator A(); }; A foo(B x) { return x; } ``` * We continue to pick the copy constructor in the following pattern: ``` class AutoPtrRef { }; struct AutoPtr { AutoPtr(AutoPtr &); AutoPtr(); AutoPtr(AutoPtrRef); operator AutoPtrRef(); }; AutoPtr test_auto_ptr() { AutoPtr p; return p; } ``` Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com> Reviewed By: Quuxplusone Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105756
2021-07-10 08:34:17 +08:00
ConvertingRVRef(ConvertingRVRef &) = delete;
struct X {};
ConvertingRVRef(X &&);
operator X() const & = delete;
operator X() &&;
};
[clang] C++98 implicit moves are back with a vengeance After taking C++98 implicit moves out in D104500, we put it back in, but now in a new form which preserves compatibility with pure C++98 programs, while at the same time giving almost all the goodies from P1825. * We use the exact same rules as C++20 with regards to which id-expressions are move eligible. The previous incarnation would only benefit from the proper subset which is copy ellidable. This means we can implicit move, in addition: * Parameters. * RValue references. * Exception variables. * Variables with higher-than-natural required alignment. * Objects with different type from the function return type. * We preserve the two-overload resolution, with one small tweak to the first one: If we either pick a (possibly converting) constructor which does not take an rvalue reference, or a user conversion operator which is not ref-qualified, we abort into the second overload resolution. This gives C++98 almost all the implicit move patterns which we had created test cases for, while at the same time preserving the meaning of these three patterns, which are found in pure C++98 programs: * Classes with both const and non-const copy constructors, but no move constructors, continue to have their non-const copy constructor selected. * We continue to reject as ambiguous the following pattern: ``` struct A { A(B &); }; struct B { operator A(); }; A foo(B x) { return x; } ``` * We continue to pick the copy constructor in the following pattern: ``` class AutoPtrRef { }; struct AutoPtr { AutoPtr(AutoPtr &); AutoPtr(); AutoPtr(AutoPtrRef); operator AutoPtrRef(); }; AutoPtr test_auto_ptr() { AutoPtr p; return p; } ``` Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com> Reviewed By: Quuxplusone Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105756
2021-07-10 08:34:17 +08:00
TEST(ConvertingRVRef);
struct ConvertingCLVRef {
ConvertingCLVRef();
ConvertingCLVRef(ConvertingCLVRef &);
struct X {};
[clang] C++98 implicit moves are back with a vengeance After taking C++98 implicit moves out in D104500, we put it back in, but now in a new form which preserves compatibility with pure C++98 programs, while at the same time giving almost all the goodies from P1825. * We use the exact same rules as C++20 with regards to which id-expressions are move eligible. The previous incarnation would only benefit from the proper subset which is copy ellidable. This means we can implicit move, in addition: * Parameters. * RValue references. * Exception variables. * Variables with higher-than-natural required alignment. * Objects with different type from the function return type. * We preserve the two-overload resolution, with one small tweak to the first one: If we either pick a (possibly converting) constructor which does not take an rvalue reference, or a user conversion operator which is not ref-qualified, we abort into the second overload resolution. This gives C++98 almost all the implicit move patterns which we had created test cases for, while at the same time preserving the meaning of these three patterns, which are found in pure C++98 programs: * Classes with both const and non-const copy constructors, but no move constructors, continue to have their non-const copy constructor selected. * We continue to reject as ambiguous the following pattern: ``` struct A { A(B &); }; struct B { operator A(); }; A foo(B x) { return x; } ``` * We continue to pick the copy constructor in the following pattern: ``` class AutoPtrRef { }; struct AutoPtr { AutoPtr(AutoPtr &); AutoPtr(); AutoPtr(AutoPtrRef); operator AutoPtrRef(); }; AutoPtr test_auto_ptr() { AutoPtr p; return p; } ``` Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com> Reviewed By: Quuxplusone Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105756
2021-07-10 08:34:17 +08:00
ConvertingCLVRef(X &&); // cxx98_2b-note {{passing argument to parameter here}}
operator X() const &;
[clang] C++98 implicit moves are back with a vengeance After taking C++98 implicit moves out in D104500, we put it back in, but now in a new form which preserves compatibility with pure C++98 programs, while at the same time giving almost all the goodies from P1825. * We use the exact same rules as C++20 with regards to which id-expressions are move eligible. The previous incarnation would only benefit from the proper subset which is copy ellidable. This means we can implicit move, in addition: * Parameters. * RValue references. * Exception variables. * Variables with higher-than-natural required alignment. * Objects with different type from the function return type. * We preserve the two-overload resolution, with one small tweak to the first one: If we either pick a (possibly converting) constructor which does not take an rvalue reference, or a user conversion operator which is not ref-qualified, we abort into the second overload resolution. This gives C++98 almost all the implicit move patterns which we had created test cases for, while at the same time preserving the meaning of these three patterns, which are found in pure C++98 programs: * Classes with both const and non-const copy constructors, but no move constructors, continue to have their non-const copy constructor selected. * We continue to reject as ambiguous the following pattern: ``` struct A { A(B &); }; struct B { operator A(); }; A foo(B x) { return x; } ``` * We continue to pick the copy constructor in the following pattern: ``` class AutoPtrRef { }; struct AutoPtr { AutoPtr(AutoPtr &); AutoPtr(); AutoPtr(AutoPtrRef); operator AutoPtrRef(); }; AutoPtr test_auto_ptr() { AutoPtr p; return p; } ``` Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com> Reviewed By: Quuxplusone Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105756
2021-07-10 08:34:17 +08:00
operator X() && = delete; // cxx98_2b-note {{marked deleted here}}
};
[clang] C++98 implicit moves are back with a vengeance After taking C++98 implicit moves out in D104500, we put it back in, but now in a new form which preserves compatibility with pure C++98 programs, while at the same time giving almost all the goodies from P1825. * We use the exact same rules as C++20 with regards to which id-expressions are move eligible. The previous incarnation would only benefit from the proper subset which is copy ellidable. This means we can implicit move, in addition: * Parameters. * RValue references. * Exception variables. * Variables with higher-than-natural required alignment. * Objects with different type from the function return type. * We preserve the two-overload resolution, with one small tweak to the first one: If we either pick a (possibly converting) constructor which does not take an rvalue reference, or a user conversion operator which is not ref-qualified, we abort into the second overload resolution. This gives C++98 almost all the implicit move patterns which we had created test cases for, while at the same time preserving the meaning of these three patterns, which are found in pure C++98 programs: * Classes with both const and non-const copy constructors, but no move constructors, continue to have their non-const copy constructor selected. * We continue to reject as ambiguous the following pattern: ``` struct A { A(B &); }; struct B { operator A(); }; A foo(B x) { return x; } ``` * We continue to pick the copy constructor in the following pattern: ``` class AutoPtrRef { }; struct AutoPtr { AutoPtr(AutoPtr &); AutoPtr(); AutoPtr(AutoPtrRef); operator AutoPtrRef(); }; AutoPtr test_auto_ptr() { AutoPtr p; return p; } ``` Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com> Reviewed By: Quuxplusone Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105756
2021-07-10 08:34:17 +08:00
TEST(ConvertingCLVRef); // cxx98_2b-error {{invokes a deleted function}}
struct SubSubMove {};
struct SubMove : SubSubMove {
SubMove();
[clang] C++98 implicit moves are back with a vengeance After taking C++98 implicit moves out in D104500, we put it back in, but now in a new form which preserves compatibility with pure C++98 programs, while at the same time giving almost all the goodies from P1825. * We use the exact same rules as C++20 with regards to which id-expressions are move eligible. The previous incarnation would only benefit from the proper subset which is copy ellidable. This means we can implicit move, in addition: * Parameters. * RValue references. * Exception variables. * Variables with higher-than-natural required alignment. * Objects with different type from the function return type. * We preserve the two-overload resolution, with one small tweak to the first one: If we either pick a (possibly converting) constructor which does not take an rvalue reference, or a user conversion operator which is not ref-qualified, we abort into the second overload resolution. This gives C++98 almost all the implicit move patterns which we had created test cases for, while at the same time preserving the meaning of these three patterns, which are found in pure C++98 programs: * Classes with both const and non-const copy constructors, but no move constructors, continue to have their non-const copy constructor selected. * We continue to reject as ambiguous the following pattern: ``` struct A { A(B &); }; struct B { operator A(); }; A foo(B x) { return x; } ``` * We continue to pick the copy constructor in the following pattern: ``` class AutoPtrRef { }; struct AutoPtr { AutoPtr(AutoPtr &); AutoPtr(); AutoPtr(AutoPtrRef); operator AutoPtrRef(); }; AutoPtr test_auto_ptr() { AutoPtr p; return p; } ``` Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com> Reviewed By: Quuxplusone Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105756
2021-07-10 08:34:17 +08:00
SubMove(SubMove &) = delete;
SubMove(SubSubMove &&);
};
[clang] C++98 implicit moves are back with a vengeance After taking C++98 implicit moves out in D104500, we put it back in, but now in a new form which preserves compatibility with pure C++98 programs, while at the same time giving almost all the goodies from P1825. * We use the exact same rules as C++20 with regards to which id-expressions are move eligible. The previous incarnation would only benefit from the proper subset which is copy ellidable. This means we can implicit move, in addition: * Parameters. * RValue references. * Exception variables. * Variables with higher-than-natural required alignment. * Objects with different type from the function return type. * We preserve the two-overload resolution, with one small tweak to the first one: If we either pick a (possibly converting) constructor which does not take an rvalue reference, or a user conversion operator which is not ref-qualified, we abort into the second overload resolution. This gives C++98 almost all the implicit move patterns which we had created test cases for, while at the same time preserving the meaning of these three patterns, which are found in pure C++98 programs: * Classes with both const and non-const copy constructors, but no move constructors, continue to have their non-const copy constructor selected. * We continue to reject as ambiguous the following pattern: ``` struct A { A(B &); }; struct B { operator A(); }; A foo(B x) { return x; } ``` * We continue to pick the copy constructor in the following pattern: ``` class AutoPtrRef { }; struct AutoPtr { AutoPtr(AutoPtr &); AutoPtr(); AutoPtr(AutoPtrRef); operator AutoPtrRef(); }; AutoPtr test_auto_ptr() { AutoPtr p; return p; } ``` Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com> Reviewed By: Quuxplusone Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105756
2021-07-10 08:34:17 +08:00
TEST(SubMove);