Based on post-commit review discussion on
2bd8493847 with Richard Smith.
Other uses of forcing HasEmptyPlaceHolder to false seem OK to me -
they're all around pointer/reference types where the pointer/reference
token will appear at the rightmost side of the left side of the type
name, so they make nested types (eg: the "int" in "int *") behave as
though there is a non-empty placeholder (because the "*" is essentially
the placeholder as far as the "int" is concerned).
This was originally committed in 277623f4d5
Reverted in f9ad1d1c77 due to breakages
outside of clang - lldb seems to have some strange/strong dependence on
"char [N]" versus "char[N]" when printing strings (not due to that name
appearing in DWARF, but probably due to using clang to stringify type
names) that'll need to be addressed, plus a few other odds and ends in
other subprojects (clang-tools-extra, compiler-rt, etc).
Looks like lldb has some issues with this - somehow it causes lldb to
treat a "char[N]" type as an array of chars (prints them out
individually) but a "char [N]" is printed as a string. (even though the
DWARF doesn't have this string in it - it's something to do with the
string lldb generates for itself using clang)
This reverts commit 277623f4d5.
Based on post-commit review discussion on
2bd8493847 with Richard Smith.
Other uses of forcing HasEmptyPlaceHolder to false seem OK to me -
they're all around pointer/reference types where the pointer/reference
token will appear at the rightmost side of the left side of the type
name, so they make nested types (eg: the "int" in "int *") behave as
though there is a non-empty placeholder (because the "*" is essentially
the placeholder as far as the "int" is concerned).
callee in constant evaluation.
We previously made a deep copy of function parameters of class type when
passing them, resulting in the destructor for the parameter applying to
the original argument value, ignoring any modifications made in the
function body. This also meant that the 'this' pointer of the function
parameter could be observed changing between the caller and the callee.
This change completely reimplements how we model function parameters
during constant evaluation. We now model them roughly as if they were
variables living in the caller, albeit with an artificially reduced
scope that covers only the duration of the function call, instead of
modeling them as temporaries in the caller that we partially "reparent"
into the callee at the point of the call. This brings some minor
diagnostic improvements, as well as significantly reduced stack usage
during constant evaluation.
callee in constant evaluation.
We previously made a deep copy of function parameters of class type when
passing them, resulting in the destructor for the parameter applying to
the original argument value, ignoring any modifications made in the
function body. This also meant that the 'this' pointer of the function
parameter could be observed changing between the caller and the callee.
This change completely reimplements how we model function parameters
during constant evaluation. We now model them roughly as if they were
variables living in the caller, albeit with an artificially reduced
scope that covers only the duration of the function call, instead of
modeling them as temporaries in the caller that we partially "reparent"
into the callee at the point of the call. This brings some minor
diagnostic improvements, as well as significantly reduced stack usage
during constant evaluation.
callee in constant evaluation.
We previously made a deep copy of function parameters of class type when
passing them, resulting in the destructor for the parameter applying to
the original argument value, ignoring any modifications made in the
function body. This also meant that the 'this' pointer of the function
parameter could be observed changing between the caller and the callee.
This change completely reimplements how we model function parameters
during constant evaluation. We now model them roughly as if they were
variables living in the caller, albeit with an artificially reduced
scope that covers only the duration of the function call, instead of
modeling them as temporaries in the caller that we partially "reparent"
into the callee at the point of the call. This brings some minor
diagnostic improvements, as well as significantly reduced stack usage
during constant evaluation.
In the following code:
struct A { static const int sz; };
template<class T> void f() { T arr[A::sz]; }
the array 'arr' is represented as a variable size array in the template.
If 'A::sz' gets value below in the translation unit, the array in
instantiation can turn into constant size array.
This change fixes PR18633.
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2688
llvm-svn: 200899
have a direct mismatch between some component of the template and some
component of the argument. The diagnostic now says what the mismatch was, but
doesn't yet say which part of the template doesn't match.
llvm-svn: 174039
GCC implements -Wvla as "warn on every VLA" (this is useful to find every VLA,
for example, if they are forbidden by coding guidelines). Currently Clang
implements -Wvla as "warn on VLA when it is an extension".
The attached patch makes our behavior match GCC. The existing vla extwarn is
moved under -Wvla-extension and is still included into -Wgnu.
This fixes PR5953.
llvm-svn: 173286
as constant size arrays. This has slightly different semantics in some insane cases, but allows
us to accept some constructs that GCC does. Continue to be pedantic in -std=c99 and other
modes. This addressed rdar://8733881 - error "variable-sized object may not be initialized"; g++ accepts same code
llvm-svn: 132983
expressions. Fixes PR8209 in the narrowest way possible. I'm still
considering whether I want to implement the extension that permits the
use of VLA types in a 'new' expression.
llvm-svn: 115790
VLA restrictions so that one can use VLAs in templates (even
accidentally), but not as part of a non-type template parameter (which
would be very bad).
llvm-svn: 104471
in several important ways:
- VLAs of non-POD types are not permitted.
- VLAs cannot be used in conjunction with C++ templates.
These restrictions are intended to keep VLAs out of the parts of the
C++ type system where they cause the most trouble. Fixes PR5678 and
<rdar://problem/8013618>.
llvm-svn: 104443
David Blaikie