Then, switch users of PropertyIfSetterOrGetter and LookupPropertyDecl
(the latter by name) over to findPropertyDecl. This actually makes
-Wreceiver-is-weak a bit stronger than it was before.
llvm-svn: 165628
Old algorithm:
1. See if the name looks like a getter or setter.
2. Use the name to look up a property in the current ObjCContainer
and all its protocols.
3. If the current container is an interface, also look in all categories
and superclasses (and superclass categories, and so on).
New algorithm:
1. See if the method is marked as a property accessor. If so, look through
all properties in the current container and find one that has a matching
selector.
2. Find all overrides of the method using ObjCMethodDecl's
getOverriddenMethods. This collects methods in superclasses and protocols
(as well as superclass categories, which isn't really necessary), and
checks if THEY are accessors. This part is not done recursively, since
getOverriddenMethods is already recursive.
This lets us handle getters and setters that do not match the property
names.
llvm-svn: 165627
This more accurately reflects its use: this flag is set when a method
matches the getter or setter name for a property in the same class,
and does not actually specify whether or not the definition of the method
will be synthesized (either implicitly or explicitly with @synthesize).
This renames the setter and backing field as well, and changes the
(soon-to-be-obsolete?) XML dump format to use 'property_accessor'
instead of 'synthesized'.
llvm-svn: 165626
write out the macro history for that macro. Similarly, we need to cope
with reading a macro definition that has been #undef'd.
Take advantage of this new ability so that global code-completion
results can refer to #undef'd macros, rather than losing them
entirely. For multiply defined/#undef'd macros, we will still get the
wrong result, but it's better than getting no result.
llvm-svn: 165502
This appears to be consistent with GCC's implementation of the same warning
under -Wparentheses. Suppressing a << b + c for cases where 'a' is a user
defined type for compatibility with C++ stream IO. Otherwise suggest
parentheses around the addition or subtraction subexpression.
(this came up when MSVC was complaining (incorrectly, so far as I can tell)
about a perceived violation of this within the LLVM codebase, PR14001)
llvm-svn: 165283
a non-inline namespace, then reopens it as inline to try to add its symbols to
the surrounding namespace. In this one special case, permit the namespace to be
reopened as inline, and patch up the name lookup tables to match.
llvm-svn: 165263
For GNU attributes, instead of reusing attribute source
location for the scope location, use SourceLocation() since
GNU attributes don not have scope tokens.
llvm-svn: 165234
- General C++11 attributes were previously parsed and ignored. Now they are parsed and stored in AST.
- Add support to parse arguments of attributes that in 'gnu' namespace.
- Differentiate unknown attributes and known attributes that can't be applied to statements when emitting diagnostic.
llvm-svn: 165082
Clang will now honor the FP_CONTRACT pragma and emit LLVM
fmuladd intrinsics for expressions of the form A * B + C (when they occur in a
single statement).
llvm-svn: 164989
Also applies to -Wnonnull, -Wtype-safety, and -Wnon-pod-varargs.
All of these can be better checked at instantiation time.
This change does not actually affect regular CallExpr function calls,
since the checks there only happen after overload resolution.
However, it will affect Objective-C method calls.
<rdar://problem/12373934>
llvm-svn: 164984
-Allow Sema to do more processing on the initial Expr before checking it.
-Remove the special conditions in HandleExpr()
-Move the code so that only one call site is needed.
-Removed the function from Sema and only call it locally.
-Warn on potentially evaluated reference variables, not just casts to r-values.
-Update tests.
llvm-svn: 164951
Summary:
When issuing a diagnostic message for the -Wimplicit-fallthrough diagnostics, always try to find the latest macro, defined at the point of fallthrough, which is immediately expanded to "[[clang::fallthrough]]", and use it's name instead of the actual sequence.
Known issues:
* uses PP.getSpelling() to compare macro definition with a string (anyone can suggest a convenient way to fill a token array, or maybe lex it in runtime?);
* this can be generalized and used in other similar cases, any ideas where it should reside then?
Reviewers: doug.gregor, rsmith
Reviewed By: rsmith
CC: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D50
llvm-svn: 164858
New output:
warning: weak property may be unpredictably set to nil
note: property declared here
note: assign the value to a strong variable to keep the object alive
during use
<rdar://problem/12277204>
llvm-svn: 164857
The infrastructure for -Warc-repeated-use-of-weak got a little too heavy
to leave sitting at the top of Sema.cpp.
No functionality change.
llvm-svn: 164856
Like properties, loading from a weak ivar twice in the same function can
give you inconsistent results if the object is deallocated between the
two loads. It is safer to assign to a strong local variable and use that.
Second half of <rdar://problem/12280249>.
llvm-svn: 164855
The motivating example:
if (self.weakProp)
use(self.weakProp);
As with any non-atomic test-then-use, it is possible a weak property to be
non-nil at the 'if', but be deallocated by the time it is used. The correct
way to write this example is as follows:
id tmp = self.weakProp;
if (tmp)
use(tmp);
The warning is controlled by -Warc-repeated-use-of-receiver, and uses the
property name and base to determine if the same property on the same object
is being accessed multiple times. In cases where the base is more
complicated than just a single Decl (e.g. 'foo.bar.weakProp'), it picks a
Decl for some degree of uniquing and reports the problem under a subflag,
-Warc-maybe-repeated-use-of-receiver. This gives a way to tune the
aggressiveness of the warning for a particular project.
The warning is not on by default because it is not flow-sensitive and thus
may have a higher-than-acceptable rate of false positives, though it is
less noisy than -Wreceiver-is-weak. On the other hand, it will not warn
about some cases that may be legitimate issues that -Wreceiver-is-weak
will catch, and it does not attempt to reason about methods returning weak
values.
Even though this is not a real "analysis-based" check I've put the bug
emission code in AnalysisBasedWarnings for two reasons: (1) to run on
every kind of code body (function, method, block, or lambda), and (2) to
suggest that it may be enhanced by flow-sensitive analysis in the future.
The second (smaller) half of this work is to extend it to weak locals
and weak ivars. This should use most of the same infrastructure.
Part of <rdar://problem/12280249>
llvm-svn: 164854