Commit Graph

12 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Serge Pavlov 09f9924acf Fix to PR8880 (clang dies processing a for loop)
Due to statement expressions supported as GCC extension, it is possible
to put 'break' or 'continue' into a loop/switch statement but outside
its body, for example:

    for ( ; ({ if (first) { first = 0; continue; } 0; }); )

This code is rejected by GCC if compiled in C mode but is accepted in C++
code. GCC bug 44715 tracks this discrepancy. Clang used code generation
that differs from GCC in both modes: only statement of the third
expression of 'for' behaves as if it was inside loop body.

This change makes code generation more close to GCC, considering 'break'
or 'continue' statement in condition and increment expressions of a
loop as it was inside the loop body. It also adds error for the cases
when 'break'/'continue' appear outside loop due to this syntax. If
code generation differ from GCC, warning is issued.

Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2518

llvm-svn: 199897
2014-01-23 15:05:00 +00:00
Chandler Carruth b3b8ea8007 Revert r193073 and the attempt to fix it in r193170.
This patch wasn't reviewed, and isn't correctly preserving the behaviors
relied upon by QT. I don't have a direct example of fallout, but it
should go through the standard code review process. For example, it
should never have removed the QT test case that was added when fixing
those users.

llvm-svn: 193174
2013-10-22 18:07:04 +00:00
Serge Pavlov 65d9468435 Reenable 'break' in 'for' specifier to allow compilation of QT macro 'foreach'
This is a fix to PR17649, caused by fix in r193073. QT uses 'break' statement
to implement their 'foreach' macro. To enable build of QT, this fix reenables
break but only in 'for' statement specifier and only in the third expression.

llvm-svn: 193170
2013-10-22 17:14:47 +00:00
Serge Pavlov 6652921d5a Fix to PR8880 (clang dies processing a for loop).
Due to statement expressions supported as GCC extension, it is possible
to put 'break' or 'continue' into a loop/switch statement but outside its
body, for example:

    for ( ; ({ if (first) { first = 0; continue; } 0; }); )

Such usage must be diagnosed as an error, GCC rejects it. To recognize
this and similar patterns the flags BreakScope and ContinueScope are
temporarily turned off while parsing condition expression.

Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D1762

llvm-svn: 193073
2013-10-21 09:34:44 +00:00
Daniel Dunbar 8fbe78f6fc Update tests to use %clang_cc1 instead of 'clang-cc' or 'clang -cc1'.
- 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
2009-12-15 20:14:24 +00:00
Mike Stump 753d120975 Prep for new warning.
llvm-svn: 76709
2009-07-22 00:43:08 +00:00
Daniel Dunbar a45cf5b6b0 Rename clang to clang-cc.
Tests and drivers updated, still need to shuffle dirs.

llvm-svn: 67602
2009-03-24 02:24:46 +00:00
Chris Lattner 5e4c75f4ef rename -parse-ast-print to -ast-print
rename -parse-ast-dump to -ast-dump
remove -parse-ast, which is redundant with -fsyntax-only

llvm-svn: 42852
2007-10-11 00:18:28 +00:00
Ted Kremenek 0883fd5817 Removed option "-parse-ast-check" from clang driver. This is now implemented
using "-parse-ast -verify".

Updated all test cases (using a sed script) that invoked -parse-ast-check to
now use -parse-ast -verify.

Fixed a bug where using "-verify" instead of "-parse-ast-check" would not
correctly create the DiagClient needed to accumulate diagnostics.

llvm-svn: 42365
2007-09-26 20:14:22 +00:00
Bill Wendling eb2def66be Submitted by: Bill Wendling
- Converted to use the -parse-ast-check flag.

llvm-svn: 39681
2007-06-27 04:30:12 +00:00
Chris Lattner 017865fb62 adjust test
llvm-svn: 39201
2006-11-21 04:06:06 +00:00
Chris Lattner 33ad2cacc9 Make Scope keep track of the kind of scope it is. Properly scope loop and
switch statements.  Make break/continue check that they are inside of an
appropriate control-flow construct.  This implements Parser/bad-control.c.

llvm-svn: 39136
2006-11-05 23:47:55 +00:00