llvm-project/clang/test/Sema/for.c

// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify %s

// Check C99 6.8.5p3
void b1 (void) { for (void (*f) (void);;); }
void b2 (void) { for (void f (void);;); }   // expected-error {{non-variable declaration in 'for' loop}}
void b3 (void) { for (static int f;;); }    // expected-error {{declaration of non-local variable}}
void b4 (void) { for (typedef int f;;); }   // expected-error {{non-variable declaration in 'for' loop}}
void b5 (void) { for (struct { int i; } s;;); }
void b6 (void) { for (enum { zero, ten = 10 } i;;); }
void b7 (void) { for (struct s { int i; };;); } // expected-error {{non-variable declaration in 'for' loop}}
void b8 (void) { for (static struct { int i; } s;;); } // expected-error {{declaration of non-local variable}}
void b9 (void) { for (struct { int i; } (*s)(struct { int j; } o) = 0;;); }
void b10(void) { for (typedef struct { int i; } (*s)(struct { int j; });;); } // expected-error {{non-variable declaration in 'for' loop}}
Update tests to use %clang_cc1 instead of 'clang-cc' or 'clang -cc1'. - This is designed to make it obvious that %clang_cc1 is a "test variable" which is substituted. It is '%clang_cc1' instead of '%clang -cc1' because it can be useful to redefine what gets run as 'clang -cc1' (for example, to set a default target). llvm-svn: 91446 2009-12-16 04:14:24 +08:00			`// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify %s`
now that all the infrastructure is in place, enforce C99 6.8.5p3. Note the FIXME: we need some way to mark a decl erroneous :) llvm-svn: 41524 2007-08-28 13:03:08 +08:00
			`// Check C99 6.8.5p3`
			`void b1 (void) { for (void (*f) (void);;); }`
No longer reject tag declarations in the clause-1 of a for loop. We currently reject this valid C construct by claiming it declares a non-local variable: for (struct { int i; } s={0}; s.i != 0; s.i--) ; We expected all declaration in the clause-1 declaration statement to be a local VarDecl, but there can be other declarations involved such as a tag declaration. This fixes PR35757. 2020-12-18 20:53:39 +08:00			`void b2 (void) { for (void f (void);;); } // expected-error {{non-variable declaration in 'for' loop}}`
now that all the infrastructure is in place, enforce C99 6.8.5p3. Note the FIXME: we need some way to mark a decl erroneous :) llvm-svn: 41524 2007-08-28 13:03:08 +08:00			`void b3 (void) { for (static int f;;); } // expected-error {{declaration of non-local variable}}`
No longer reject tag declarations in the clause-1 of a for loop. We currently reject this valid C construct by claiming it declares a non-local variable: for (struct { int i; } s={0}; s.i != 0; s.i--) ; We expected all declaration in the clause-1 declaration statement to be a local VarDecl, but there can be other declarations involved such as a tag declaration. This fixes PR35757. 2020-12-18 20:53:39 +08:00			`void b4 (void) { for (typedef int f;;); } // expected-error {{non-variable declaration in 'for' loop}}`
			`void b5 (void) { for (struct { int i; } s;;); }`
			`void b6 (void) { for (enum { zero, ten = 10 } i;;); }`
			`void b7 (void) { for (struct s { int i; };;); } // expected-error {{non-variable declaration in 'for' loop}}`
			`void b8 (void) { for (static struct { int i; } s;;); } // expected-error {{declaration of non-local variable}}`
			`void b9 (void) { for (struct { int i; } (*s)(struct { int j; } o) = 0;;); }`
			`void b10(void) { for (typedef struct { int i; } (*s)(struct { int j; });;); } // expected-error {{non-variable declaration in 'for' loop}}`