Before this commit, we emit unavailable errors for calls to functions during
overload resolution, and for references to all other declarations in
DiagnoseUseOfDecl. The early checks during overload resolution aren't as good as
the DiagnoseAvailabilityOfDecl based checks, as they error on the code from
PR40991. This commit fixes this by removing the early checking.
llvm.org/PR40991
rdar://48564179
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59394
llvm-svn: 356599
Similar to the template cases in r262050, when a C++ method in an
unavailable struct/class calls unavailable API, don't diagnose an error.
I.e., this case was failing:
void foo() __attribute__((unavailable));
struct __attribute__((unavailable)) A {
void bar() { foo(); }
};
Since A is unavailable, A::bar is allowed to call foo. However, we were
emitting a diagnostic here. This commit checks up the context chain
from A::bar, in a manner inspired by SemaDeclAttr.cpp:isDeclUnavailable.
I expected to find other related issues but failed to trigger them:
- I wondered if DeclBase::getAvailability should check for
`TemplateDecl` instead of `FunctionTemplateDecl`, but I couldn't find
a way to trigger this. I left behind a few extra tests to make sure
we don't regress.
- I wondered if Sema::isFunctionConsideredUnavailable should be
symmetric, checking up the context chain of the callee (this commit
only checks up the context chain of the caller). However, I couldn't
think of a testcase that didn't require first referencing the
unavailable type; this, we already diagnose.
rdar://problem/25030656
llvm-svn: 262921
If the availability context is `FunctionTemplateDecl`, we should look
through it to the `FunctionDecl`. This prevents a diagnostic in the
following case:
class C __attribute__((unavailable));
template <class T> void foo(C&) __attribute__((unavailable));
This adds tests for availability in templates in many other cases, but
that was the only case that failed before this patch.
I added a feature `__has_feature(attribute_availability_in_templates)`
so users can test for this.
rdar://problem/24561029
llvm-svn: 262050
Fixes <rdar://problem/15584219> and <rdar://problem/12241361>.
This change looks large, but all it does is reuse and consolidate
the delayed diagnostic logic for deprecation warnings with unavailability
warnings. By doing so, it showed various inconsistencies between the
diagnostics, which were close, but not consistent. It also revealed
some missing "note:"'s in the deprecated diagnostics that were showing
up in the unavailable diagnostics, etc.
This change also changes the wording of the core deprecation diagnostics.
Instead of saying "function has been explicitly marked deprecated"
we now saw "'X' has been been explicitly marked deprecated". It
turns out providing a bit more context is useful, and often we
got the actual term wrong or it was not very precise
(e.g., "function" instead of "destructor"). By just saying the name
of the thing that is deprecated/deleted/unavailable we define
this issue away. This diagnostic can likely be further wordsmithed
to be shorter.
llvm-svn: 197627
which versions of an OS provide a certain facility. For example,
void foo()
__attribute__((availability(macosx,introduced=10.2,deprecated=10.4,obsoleted=10.6)));
says that the function "foo" was introduced in 10.2, deprecated in
10.4, and completely obsoleted in 10.6. This attribute ties in with
the deployment targets (e.g., -mmacosx-version-min=10.1 specifies that
we want to deploy back to Mac OS X 10.1). There are several concrete
behaviors that this attribute enables, as illustrated with the
function foo() above:
- If we choose a deployment target >= Mac OS X 10.4, uses of "foo"
will result in a deprecation warning, as if we had placed
attribute((deprecated)) on it (but with a better diagnostic)
- If we choose a deployment target >= Mac OS X 10.6, uses of "foo"
will result in an "unavailable" warning (in C)/error (in C++), as
if we had placed attribute((unavailable)) on it
- If we choose a deployment target prior to 10.2, foo() is
weak-imported (if it is a kind of entity that can be weak
imported), as if we had placed the weak_import attribute on it.
Naturally, there can be multiple availability attributes on a
declaration, for different platforms; only the current platform
matters when checking availability attributes.
The only platforms this attribute currently works for are "ios" and
"macosx", since we already have -mxxxx-version-min flags for them and we
have experience there with macro tricks translating down to the
deprecated/unavailable/weak_import attributes. The end goal is to open
this up to other platforms, and even extension to other "platforms"
that are really libraries (say, through a #pragma clang
define_system), but that hasn't yet been designed and we may want to
shake out more issues with this narrower problem first.
Addresses <rdar://problem/6690412>.
As a drive-by bug-fix, if an entity is both deprecated and
unavailable, we only emit the "unavailable" diagnostic.
llvm-svn: 128127
GCC emits a warning instead of an error when using an unavailable Objective-C protocol, so now
Clang's behavior is more strict in this case, but more consistent. We will need to see how much
this fires on real code and determine whether this case should be downgraded to a warning.
Fixes <rdar://problem/8213093>.
llvm-svn: 109033
not just the viable ones. This is reasonable because the most common use of
deleted functions is to exclude some implicit conversion during calls; users
therefore will want to figure out why some other options were excluded.
Started sorting overload results. Right now it just sorts by location in the
translation unit (after putting viable functions first), but we can do better than
that.
Changed bool OnlyViable parameter to PrintOverloadCandidates to an enum for better
self-documentation.
llvm-svn: 92990
- 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
(as GCC does), except when we've performed overload resolution and
found an unavailable function: in this case, we actually error.
Merge the checking of unavailable functions with the checking for
deprecated functions. This unifies a bit of code, and makes sure that
we're checking for unavailable functions in the right places. Also,
this check can cause an error. We may, eventually, want an option to
make "unavailable" warnings into errors.
Implement much of the logic needed for C++0x deleted functions, which
are effectively the same as "unavailable" functions (but always cause
an error when referenced). However, we don't have the syntax to
specify deleted functions yet :)
llvm-svn: 64955
to do in this area, since there are other places that reference
FunctionDecls.
Don't allow "overloadable" functions (in C) to be declared without a
prototype.
llvm-svn: 64897
Erik Pilkington