constructors and destructors. This is a requirement of
DeclarationNameTable::getCXXSpecialName that we weren't assert()'ing,
so it should have been caught much earlier :(
Big thanks to Anders for the test case.
llvm-svn: 71895
- Skip semantic analysis of the "if" condition if it is type-dependent.
- Added the location of the "else" keyword into IfStmt, so that we can
provide it for type-checking after template instantiation.
llvm-svn: 71875
template to the FunctionDecls from which they were instantiated. This
is a necessary first step to support instantiation of the definitions
of such functions, but by itself does essentially nothing.
llvm-svn: 71792
template<typename T>
struct X {
struct Inner;
};
template struct X<int>::Inner;
This change is larger than it looks because it also fixes some
a problem with nested-name-specifiers and tags. We weren't requiring
the DeclContext associated with the scope specifier of a tag to be
complete. Therefore, when looking for something like "struct
X<int>::Inner", we weren't instantiating X<int>.
This, naturally, uncovered a problem with member pointers, where we
were requiring the left-hand side of a member pointer access
expression (e.g., x->*) to be a complete type. However, this is wrong:
the semantics of this expression does not require a complete type (EDG
agrees).
Stuart vouched for me. Blame him.
llvm-svn: 71756
of class members (recursively). Only member classes are actually
instantiated; the instantiation logic for member functions and
variables are just stubs.
llvm-svn: 71713
templates. In particular:
- An explicit instantiation can follow an implicit instantiation (we
were improperly diagnosing this as an error, previously).
- In C++0x, an explicit instantiation that follows an explicit
specialization of the same template specialization is ignored. In
C++98, we just emit an extension warning.
- In C++0x, an explicit instantiation must be in a namespace
enclosing the original template. C++98 has no such requirement.
Also, fixed a longstanding FIXME regarding the integral type that is
used for the size of a constant array type when it is being instantiated.
llvm-svn: 71689
still aren't instantiating the definitions of class template members,
and core issues 275 and 259 will both affect the checking that we do
for explicit instantiations (but are not yet implemented).
llvm-svn: 71613
template class X<int>;
This also cleans up the propagation of template information through
declaration parsing, which is used to improve some diagnostics.
llvm-svn: 71608
parse just a single declaration and provide a reasonable diagnostic
when the "only one declarator per template declaration" rule is
violated. This eliminates some ugly, ugly hackery where we used to
require thatn the layout of a DeclGroup of a single element be the
same as the layout of a single declaration.
llvm-svn: 71596
specialization" within a C++ template, and permit name lookup into the
current instantiation. For example, given:
template<typename T, typename U>
struct X {
typedef T type;
X* x1; // current instantiation
X<T, U> *x2; // current instantiation
X<U, T> *x3; // not current instantiation
::X<type, U> *x4; // current instantiation
X<typename X<type, U>::type, U>: *x5; // current instantiation
};
llvm-svn: 71471
template. The injected-class-name is either a type or a template,
depending on whether a '<' follows it. As a type, the
injected-class-name's template argument list contains its template
parameters in declaration order.
As part of this, add logic for canonicalizing declarations, and be
sure to canonicalize declarations used in template names and template
arguments.
A TagType is dependent if the declaration it references is dependent.
I'm not happy about the rather complicated protocol needed to use
ASTContext::getTemplateSpecializationType.
llvm-svn: 71408
nested name specifiers. Now we emit stuff like:
t.cpp:8:13: error: unknown type name 'X'
static foo::X P;
~~~~ ^
instead of:
t.cpp:8:16: error: invalid token after top level declarator
static foo::X P;
^
This is inspired by a really awful error message I got from
g++ when I misspelt diag::kind as diag::Kind.
llvm-svn: 69086
failures that involve malformed types, e.g., "typename X::foo" where
"foo" isn't a type, or "std::vector<void>" that doens't instantiate
properly.
Similarly, be a bit smarter in our handling of ambiguities that occur
in Sema::getTypeName, to eliminate duplicate error messages about
ambiguous name lookup.
This eliminates two XFAILs in test/SemaCXX, one of which was crying
out to us, trying to tell us that we were producing repeated error
messages.
llvm-svn: 68251
heuristics to determine when it's useful to desugar a type for display
to the user. Introduce two C++-specific heuristics:
- For a qualified type (like "foo::bar"), only produce a new
desugred type if desugaring the qualified type ("bar", in this
case) produces something interesting. For example, if "foo::bar"
refers to a class named "bar", don't desugar. However, if
"foo::bar" refers to a typedef of something else, desugar to that
something else. This gives some useful desugaring such as
"foo::bar (aka 'int')".
- Don't desugar class template specialization types like
"basic_string<char>" down to their underlying "class
basic_string<char, char_traits<char>, allocator<char>>, etc.";
it's better just to leave such types alone.
Update diagnostics.html with some discussion and examples of type
preservation in C++, showing qualified names and class template
specialization types.
llvm-svn: 68207
template template parameters and dependent template names. For
example, the oft-mentioned
typename MetaFun::template apply<T1, T2>::type
can now be instantiated, with the appropriate name lookup for "apply".
llvm-svn: 68128
within nested-name-specifiers, e.g., for the "apply" in
typename MetaFun::template apply<T1, T2>::type
At present, we can't instantiate these nested-name-specifiers, so our
testing is sketchy.
llvm-svn: 68081
instantiation for C++ typename-specifiers such as
typename T::type
The parsing of typename-specifiers is relatively easy thanks to
annotation tokens. When we see the "typename", we parse the
typename-specifier and produce a typename annotation token. There are
only a few places where we need to handle this. We currently parse the
typename-specifier form that terminates in an identifier, but not the
simple-template-id form, e.g.,
typename T::template apply<U, V>
Parsing of nested-name-specifiers has a similar problem, since at this
point we don't have any representation of a class template
specialization whose template-name is unknown.
Semantic analysis is only partially complete, with some support for
template instantiation that works for simple examples.
llvm-svn: 67875
specializations can be treated as a template. Finally, we can parse
and process the first implementation of Fibonacci I wrote!
Note that this code does not handle all of the cases where
injected-class-names can be treated as templates. In particular,
there's an ambiguity case that we should be able to handle (but
can't), e.g.,
template <class T> struct Base { };
template <class T> struct Derived : Base<int>, Base<char> {
typename Derived::Base b; // error: ambiguous
typename Derived::Base<double> d; // OK
};
llvm-svn: 67720
templates, including in-class initializers. For example:
template<typename T, T Divisor>
class X {
public:
static const T value = 10 / Divisor;
};
instantiated with, e.g.,
X<int, 5>::value
to get the value '2'.
llvm-svn: 67715
the declarations of member classes are instantiated when the owning
class template is instantiated. The definitions of such member classes
are instantiated when a complete type is required.
This change also introduces the injected-class-name into a class
template specialization.
llvm-svn: 67707
a class template. At present, we can only instantiation normal
methods, but not constructors, destructors, or conversion operators.
As ever, this contains a bit of refactoring in Sema's type-checking. In
particular:
- Split ActOnFunctionDeclarator into ActOnFunctionDeclarator
(handling the declarator itself) and CheckFunctionDeclaration
(checking for the the function declaration), the latter of which
is also used by template instantiation.
- We were performing the adjustment of function parameter types in
three places; collect those into a single new routine.
- When the type of a parameter is adjusted, allocate an
OriginalParmVarDecl to keep track of the type as it was written.
- Eliminate a redundant check for out-of-line declarations of member
functions; hide more C++-specific checks on function declarations
behind if(getLangOptions().CPlusPlus).
llvm-svn: 67575
dependent qualified-ids such as
Fibonacci<N - 1>::value
where N is a template parameter. These references are "unresolved"
because the name is dependent and, therefore, cannot be resolved to a
declaration node (as we would do for a DeclRefExpr or
QualifiedDeclRefExpr). UnresolvedDeclRefExprs instantiate to
DeclRefExprs, QualifiedDeclRefExprs, etc.
Also, be a bit more careful about keeping only a single set of
specializations for a class template, and instantiating from the
definition of that template rather than a previous declaration. In
general, we need a better solution for this for all TagDecls, because
it's too easy to accidentally look at a declaration that isn't the
definition.
We can now process a simple Fibonacci computation described as a
template metaprogram.
llvm-svn: 67308
specialization names. This way, we keep track of sugared types like
std::vector<Real>
I believe we are now using QualifiedNameTypes everywhere we can. Next
step: QualifiedDeclRefExprs.
llvm-svn: 67268
qualified name, e.g.,
foo::x
so that we retain the nested-name-specifier as written in the source
code and can reproduce that qualified name when printing the types
back (e.g., in diagnostics). This is PR3493, which won't be complete
until finished the other tasks mentioned near the end of this commit.
The parser's representation of nested-name-specifiers, CXXScopeSpec,
is now a bit fatter, because it needs to contain the scopes that
precede each '::' and keep track of whether the global scoping
operator '::' was at the beginning. For example, we need to keep track
of the leading '::', 'foo', and 'bar' in
::foo::bar::x
The Action's CXXScopeTy * is no longer a DeclContext *. It's now the
opaque version of the new NestedNameSpecifier, which contains a single
component of a nested-name-specifier (either a DeclContext * or a Type
*, bitmangled).
The new sugar type QualifiedNameType composes a sequence of
NestedNameSpecifiers with a representation of the type we're actually
referring to. At present, we only build QualifiedNameType nodes within
Sema::getTypeName. This will be extended to other type-constructing
actions (e.g., ActOnClassTemplateId).
Also on the way: QualifiedDeclRefExprs will also store a sequence of
NestedNameSpecifiers, so that we can print out the property
nested-name-specifier. I expect to also use this for handling
dependent names like Fibonacci<I - 1>::value.
llvm-svn: 67265
quite as great as it sounds, because, while we can refer to the
enumerator values outside the template, e.g.,
adder<long, 3, 4>::value
we can't yet refer to them with dependent names, so no Fibonacci
(yet).
InstantiateClassTemplateSpecialization is getting messy; next commit
will put it into a less-ugly state.
llvm-svn: 67092
always, refactored the existing logic to tease apart the parser action
and the semantic analysis shared by the parser and template
instantiation.
llvm-svn: 66987
- C++ function casts, e.g., T(foo)
- sizeof(), alignof()
More importantly, this allows us to verify that we're performing
overload resolution during template instantiation, with
argument-dependent lookup and the "cached" results of name lookup from
the template definition.
llvm-svn: 66947
class members to the corresponding in-class declaration.
Diagnose the erroneous use of 'static' on out-of-line definitions of
class members.
llvm-svn: 66740
template. More importantly, start to sort out the issues regarding
complete types and nested-name-specifiers, especially the question of:
when do we instantiate a class template specialization that occurs to
the left of a '::' in a nested-name-specifier?
llvm-svn: 66662
context of a template-id for which we need to instantiate default
template arguments.
In the TextDiagnosticPrinter, don't suppress the caret diagnostic if
we are producing a non-note diagnostic that follows a note diagnostic
with the same location, because notes are (conceptually) a part of the
warning or error that comes before them.
llvm-svn: 66572
only print the template instantiation backtrace for the first error.
Also, if a base class has failed to type-check during instantiation,
just drop that base class and continue on to check other base classes.
llvm-svn: 66563
'struct A<double, int>'
In the "template instantiation depth exceeded" message, print
"-ftemplate-depth-N" rather than "-ftemplate-depth=N".
An unnamed tag type that is declared with a typedef, e.g.,
typedef struct { int x, y; } Point;
can be used as a template argument. Allow this, and check that we get
sensible pretty-printing for such things.
llvm-svn: 66560
to a diagnostic that will be invoked after the diagnostic (if it is
not suppressed). The hooks are allowed to produce additional
diagnostics (typically notes) that provide more information. We should
be able to use this to help diagnostic clients link notes back to the
diagnostic they clarify. Comments welcome; I'll write up documentation
and convert other clients (e.g., overload resolution failures) if
there are no screams of protest.
As the first client of post-diagnostic hooks, we now produce a
template instantiation backtrace when a failure occurs during template
instantiation. There's still more work to do to make this output
pretty, if that's even possible.
llvm-svn: 66557
(default: 99). Beyond this limit, produce an error and consider the
current template instantiation a failure.
The stack we're building to track the instantiations will, eventually,
be used to produce instantiation backtraces from diagnostics within
template instantiation. However, we're not quite there yet.
This adds a new Clang driver option -ftemplate-depth=NNN, which should
eventually be generated from the GCC command-line operation
-ftemplate-depth-NNN (note the '-' rather than the '='!). I did not
make the driver changes to do this mapping.
llvm-svn: 66513
such as replacing 'T' in vector<T>. There are a few aspects to this:
- Extend TemplateArgument to allow arbitrary expressions (an
Expr*), and switch ClassTemplateSpecializationType to store
TemplateArguments rather than it's own type-or-expression
representation.
- ClassTemplateSpecializationType can now store dependent types. In
that case, the canonical type is another
ClassTemplateSpecializationType (with default template arguments
expanded) rather than a declaration (we don't build Decls for
dependent types).
- Split ActOnClassTemplateId into ActOnClassTemplateId (called from
the parser) and CheckClassTemplateId (called from
ActOnClassTemplateId and InstantiateType). They're smart enough to
handle dependent types, now.
llvm-svn: 66509
response to attempts to diagnose an "incomplete" type. This will force
us to use DiagnoseIncompleteType more regularly (rather than looking at
isIncompleteType), but that's also a good thing.
Implicit instantiation is still very simplistic, and will create a new
definition for the class template specialization (as it should) but it
only actually instantiates the base classes and attaches
those. Actually instantiating class members will follow.
Also, instantiate the types of non-type template parameters before
checking them, allowing, e.g.,
template<typename T, T Value> struct Constant;
to work properly.
llvm-svn: 65924
array types. Semantic checking for the construction of these types has
been factored out of GetTypeForDeclarator and into separate
subroutines (BuildPointerType, BuildReferenceType,
BuildArrayType). We'll be doing the same thing for all other types
(and declarations and expressions).
As part of this, moved the type-instantiation functions into a class
in an anonymous namespace.
llvm-svn: 65663
stubs for those types we don't yet know how to instantiate (everything
that isn't a template parameter!).
We now instantiate default arguments for template type parameters when
needed. This will be our testbed while I fill out the remaining
type-instantiation logic.
llvm-svn: 65649
know how to recover from an error, we can attach a hint to the
diagnostic that states how to modify the code, which can be one of:
- Insert some new code (a text string) at a particular source
location
- Remove the code within a given range
- Replace the code within a given range with some new code (a text
string)
Right now, we use these hints to annotate diagnostic information. For
example, if one uses the '>>' in a template argument in C++98, as in
this code:
template<int I> class B { };
B<1000 >> 2> *b1;
we'll warn that the behavior will change in C++0x. The fix is to
insert parenthese, so we use code insertion annotations to illustrate
where the parentheses go:
test.cpp:10:10: warning: use of right-shift operator ('>>') in template
argument will require parentheses in C++0x
B<1000 >> 2> *b1;
^
( )
Use of these annotations is partially implemented for HTML
diagnostics, but it's not (yet) producing valid HTML, which may be
related to PR2386, so it has been #if 0'd out.
In this future, we could consider hooking this mechanism up to the
rewriter to actually try to fix these problems during compilation (or,
after a compilation whose only errors have fixes). For now, however, I
suggest that we use these code modification hints whenever we can, so
that we get better diagnostics now and will have better coverage when
we find better ways to use this information.
This also fixes PR3410 by placing the complaint about missing tokens
just after the previous token (rather than at the location of the next
token).
llvm-svn: 65570
vector<vector<double>> Matrix;
In C++98/03, this token always means "right shift". However, if we're in
a context where we know that it can't mean "right shift", provide a
friendly reminder to put a space between the two >'s and then treat it
as two >'s as part of recovery.
In C++0x, this token is always broken into two '>' tokens.
llvm-svn: 65484
decls. Test and document the semantic location of class template
specialization definitions that occur within a scope enclosing the
scope of the class template.
llvm-svn: 65478
specializations. In particular:
- Make sure class template specializations have a "template<>"
header, and complain if they don't.
- Make sure class template specializations are declared/defined
within a valid context. (e.g., you can't declare a specialization
std::vector<MyType> in the global namespace).
llvm-svn: 65476
std::vector<int>::allocator_type
When we parse a template-id that names a type, it will become either a
template-id annotation (which is a parsed representation of a
template-id that has not yet been through semantic analysis) or a
typename annotation (where semantic analysis has resolved the
template-id to an actual type), depending on the context. We only
produce a type in contexts where we know that we only need type
information, e.g., in a type specifier. Otherwise, we create a
template-id annotation that can later be "upgraded" by transforming it
into a typename annotation when the parser needs a type. This occurs,
for example, when we've parsed "std::vector<int>" above and then see
the '::' after it. However, it means that when writing something like
this:
template<> class Outer::Inner<int> { ... };
We have two tokens to represent Outer::Inner<int>: one token for the
nested name specifier Outer::, and one template-id annotation token
for Inner<int>, which will be passed to semantic analysis to define
the class template specialization.
Most of the churn in the template tests in this patch come from an
improvement in our error recovery from ill-formed template-ids.
llvm-svn: 65467
information about types. We often print diagnostics where we say
"foo_t" is bad, but the user doesn't know how foo_t is declared
(because it is a typedef). Fix this by expanding sugar when present
in a diagnostic (and not one of a few special cases, like vectors).
Before:
t.m:5:2: error: invalid operands to binary expression ('typeof(P)' and 'typeof(F)')
MAX(P, F);
^~~~~~~~~
t.m:1:78: note: instantiated from:
#define MAX(A,B) ({ __typeof__(A) __a = (A); __typeof__(B) __b = (B); __a < __b ? __b : __a; })
^
After:
t.m:5:2: error: invalid operands to binary expression ('typeof(P)' (aka 'struct mystruct') and 'typeof(F)' (aka 'float'))
MAX(P, F);
^~~~~~~~~
t.m:1:78: note: instantiated from:
#define MAX(A,B) ({ __typeof__(A) __a = (A); __typeof__(B) __b = (B); __a < __b ? __b : __a; })
^
llvm-svn: 65081
specialization of class templates, e.g.,
template<typename T> class X;
template<> class X<int> { /* blah */ };
Each specialization is a different *Decl node (naturally), and can
have different members. We keep track of forward declarations and
definitions as for other class/struct/union types.
This is only the basic framework: we still have to deal with checking
the template headers properly, improving recovery when there are
failures, handling nested name specifiers, etc.
llvm-svn: 64848
CXXRecordDecl that is used to represent class template
specializations. These are canonical declarations that can refer to
either an actual class template specialization in the code, e.g.,
template<> class vector<bool> { };
or to a template instantiation. However, neither of these features is
actually implemented yet, so really we're just using (and uniqing) the
declarations to make sure that, e.g., A<int> is a different type from
A<float>. Note that we carefully distinguish between what the user
wrote in the source code (e.g., "A<FLOAT>") and the semantic entity it
represents (e.g., "A<float, int>"); the former is in the sugared Type,
the latter is an actual Decl.
llvm-svn: 64716
for non-external names whose address becomes the template
argument. This completes C++ [temp.arg.nontype]p1.
Note that our interpretation of C++ [temp.arg.nontype]p1b3 differs
from EDG's interpretation (we're stricter, and GCC agrees with
us). They're opening a core issue about the matter.
llvm-svn: 64317
template specialization (e.g., std::vector<int> would now be
well-formed, since it relies on a default argument for the Allocator
template parameter).
This is much less interesting than one might expect, since (1) we're
not actually using the default arguments for anything important, such
as naming an actual Decl, and (2) we'll often need to instantiate the
default arguments to check their well-formedness. The real fun will
come later.
llvm-svn: 64310
pointer-to-member-data non-type template parameters. Also, get
consistent about what it means to returned a bool from
CheckTemplateArgument.
llvm-svn: 64305
non-type template parameters that are references to functions or
pointers to member functions. Did a little bit of refactoring so that
these two cases, along with the handling of non-type template
parameters that are pointers to functions, are handled by the same
path.
Also, tweaked FixOverloadedFunctionReference to cope with member
function pointers. This is a necessary step for getting all of the fun
member pointer conversions working outside of template arguments, too.
llvm-svn: 64277
non-type template parameters of pointer-to-object and
pointer-to-function type. The most fun part of this is the use of
overload resolution to pick a function from the set of overloaded
functions that comes in as a template argument.
Also, fixed two minor bugs in this area:
- We were allowing non-type template parameters of type pointer to
void.
- We weren't patching up an expression that refers to an overloaded
function set via "&f" properly.
We're still not performing complete checking of the expression to be
sure that it is referring to an object or function with external
linkage (C++ [temp.arg.nontype]p1).
llvm-svn: 64266
arguments. This commit covers checking and merging default template
arguments from previous declarations, but it does not cover the actual
use of default template arguments when naming class template
specializations.
llvm-svn: 64229
disambiguation contexts, so that we properly parse template arguments
such as
A<int()>
as type-ids rather than as expressions. Since this can be confusing
(especially when the template parameter is a non-type template
parameter), we try to give a friendly error message.
Almost, eliminate a redundant error message (that should have been a
note) and add some ultra-basic checks for non-type template
arguments.
llvm-svn: 64189
to a class template. For example, the template-id 'vector<int>' now
has a nice, sugary type in the type system. What we can do now:
- Parse template-ids like 'vector<int>' (where 'vector' names a
class template) and form proper types for them in the type system.
- Parse icky template-ids like 'A<5>' and 'A<(5 > 0)>' properly,
using (sadly) a bool in the parser to tell it whether '>' should
be treated as an operator or not.
This is a baby-step, with major problems and limitations:
- There are currently two ways that we handle template arguments
(whether they are types or expressions). These will be merged, and,
most likely, TemplateArg will disappear.
- We don't have any notion of the declaration of class template
specializations or of template instantiations, so all template-ids
are fancy names for 'int' :)
llvm-svn: 64153
redeclarations. For example, checks that a class template
redeclaration has the same template parameters as previous
declarations.
Detangled class-template checking from ActOnTag, whose logic was
getting rather convoluted because it tried to handle C, C++, and C++
template semantics in one shot.
Made some inroads toward eliminating extraneous "declaration does not
declare anything" errors by adding an "error" type specifier.
llvm-svn: 63973
Douglas Gregor