3 lines of code and improve a bunch of information in the libclang view
of the code.
Updates the two tests that exercise this with the new data, checking
that each new source location actually points back to the declared
template parameter.
llvm-svn: 130656
template specialization types. This also required some parser tweaks,
since we were losing track of the nested-name-specifier's source
location information in several places in the parser. Other notable
changes this required:
- Sema::ActOnTagTemplateIdType now type-checks and forms the
appropriate type nodes (+ source-location information) for an
elaborated-type-specifier ending in a template-id. Previously, we
used a combination of ActOnTemplateIdType and
ActOnTagTemplateIdType that resulted in an ElaboratedType wrapped
around a DependentTemplateSpecializationType, which duplicated the
keyword ("class", "struct", etc.) and nested-name-specifier
storage.
- Sema::ActOnTemplateIdType now gets a nested-name-specifier, which
it places into the returned type-source location information.
- Sema::ActOnDependentTag now creates types with source-location
information.
llvm-svn: 126808
nested-name-speciciers within elaborated type names, e.g.,
enum clang::NestedNameSpecifier::SpecifierKind
Fixes in this iteration include:
(1) Compute the type-source range properly for a dependent template
specialization type that starts with "template template-id ::", as
in a member access expression
dep->template f<T>::f()
This is a latent bug I triggered with this change (because now we're
checking the computed source ranges for dependent template
specialization types). But the real problem was...
(2) Make sure to set the qualifier range on a dependent template
specialization type appropriately. This will go away once we push
nested-name-specifier locations into dependent template
specialization types, but it was the source of the
valgrind errors on the buildbots.
llvm-svn: 126765
information for qualifier type names throughout the parser to address
several problems.
The commit message from r126737:
Push nested-name-specifier source location information into elaborated
name types, e.g., "enum clang::NestedNameSpecifier::SpecifierKind".
Aside from the normal changes, this also required some tweaks to the
parser. Essentially, when we're looking at a type name (via
getTypeName()) specifically for the purpose of creating an annotation
token, we pass down the flag that asks for full type-source location
information to be stored within the returned type. That way, we retain
source-location information involving nested-name-specifiers rather
than trying to reconstruct that information later, long after it's
been lost in the parser.
With this change, test/Index/recursive-cxx-member-calls.cpp is showing
much improved results again, since that code has lots of
nested-name-specifiers.
llvm-svn: 126748
name types, e.g., "enum clang::NestedNameSpecifier::SpecifierKind".
Aside from the normal changes, this also required some tweaks to the
parser. Essentially, when we're looking at a type name (via
getTypeName()) specifically for the purpose of creating an annotation
token, we pass down the flag that asks for full type-source location
information to be stored within the returned type. That way, we retain
source-location information involving nested-name-specifiers rather
than trying to reconstruct that information later, long after it's
been lost in the parser.
With this change, test/Index/recursive-cxx-member-calls.cpp is showing
much improved results again, since that code has lots of
nested-name-specifiers.
llvm-svn: 126737
DependentNameTypeLoc. Teach the recursive AST visitor and libclang how to
walk DependentNameTypeLoc nodes.
Also, teach libclang about TypedefDecl source ranges, so that we get
those. The massive churn in test/Index/recursive-cxx-member-calls.cpp
is a good thing: we're annotating a lot more of this test correctly
now.
llvm-svn: 126729
an implicit "this"; it causes clang_getCursor() to find the implicit
"this" expression (which isn't written in the source!) rather than the
actual member.
llvm-svn: 119516
Now we explicitly memset all of its values.
This bug was uncovered by the 'Index/recursive-cxx-member-calls.cpp', which exhibited an assertion
on an i386 darwin build of clang. Adding this test case back since the assertion is now resolved.
llvm-svn: 118881
is gradually becoming more data recursive, AnnotateTokensVisitor does its own recursive call
within the visitor that can still blow out the stack. This can potentially be reworked to avoid this,
but for now just do token annotation on a separate thread.
llvm-svn: 118783
Douglas Gregor