add some simple designator testcases. Reject things like this:

struct foo Y[10] = {
  [4] .arr [2] 4  // expected-error {{expected '=' or another designator}}
};

because the "missing equals" extension only is valid if there 
is exactly one array designator.

llvm-svn: 58215
This commit is contained in:
Chris Lattner 2008-10-26 23:22:23 +00:00
parent 8aafd35c79
commit 46dcba6d2d
4 changed files with 36 additions and 7 deletions

View File

@ -311,6 +311,8 @@ DIAG(ext_gnu_array_range, EXTENSION,
"use of GNU array range extension")
DIAG(ext_gnu_missing_equal_designator, EXTENSION,
"use of GNU 'missing =' extension in designator")
DIAG(err_expected_equal_designator, ERROR,
"expected '=' or another designator")
DIAG(ext_gnu_old_style_field_designator, EXTENSION,
"use of GNU old-style field designator extension")
DIAG(ext_gnu_case_range, EXTENSION,

View File

@ -151,7 +151,13 @@ public:
/// AddDesignator - Add a designator to the end of this list.
void AddDesignator(Designator D) {
Designators.push_back(D);
}
}
unsigned getNumDesignators() const { return Designators.size(); }
const Designator &getDesignator(unsigned Idx) const {
assert(Idx < Designators.size());
return Designators[Idx];
}
/// ClearExprs - Null out any expression references, which prevents them from
/// being 'delete'd later.

View File

@ -176,6 +176,7 @@ ParseInitializerWithPotentialDesignator(InitListDesignations &Designations,
// at least one designator, because the only case we can get into this method
// without a designator is when we have an objc message send. That case is
// handled and returned from above.
assert(Desig && "Designator didn't get created?");
// Handle a normal designator sequence end, which is an equal.
if (Tok.is(tok::equal)) {
@ -184,15 +185,18 @@ ParseInitializerWithPotentialDesignator(InitListDesignations &Designations,
}
// We read some number of designators and found something that isn't an = or
// an initializer. If we have exactly one array designator [TODO CHECK], this
// an initializer. If we have exactly one array designator, this
// is the GNU 'designation: array-designator' extension. Otherwise, it is a
// parse error.
SourceLocation Loc = Tok.getLocation();
ExprResult Init = ParseInitializer();
if (Init.isInvalid) return Init;
if (Desig->getNumDesignators() == 1 &&
(Desig->getDesignator(0).isArrayDesignator() ||
Desig->getDesignator(0).isArrayRangeDesignator())) {
Diag(Tok, diag::ext_gnu_missing_equal_designator);
return ParseInitializer();
}
Diag(Tok, diag::ext_gnu_missing_equal_designator);
return Init;
Diag(Tok, diag::err_expected_equal_designator);
return true;
}

View File

@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
// RUN: clang -fsyntax-only %s -verify -pedantic
int X[] = {
[4]4, // expected-warning {{use of GNU 'missing =' extension in designator}}
[5] = 7
};
struct foo {
int arr[10];
};
struct foo Y[10] = {
[4] .arr [2] = 4,
// This is not the GNU array init designator extension.
[4] .arr [2] 4 // expected-error {{expected '=' or another designator}}
};