This patch implements P0634r3 that removes the need for 'typename' in certain contexts.
For example,
```
template <typename T>
using foo = T::type; // ok
```
This is also allowed in previous language versions as an extension, because I think it's pretty useful. :)
Reviewed By: #clang-language-wg, erichkeane
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D53847
This patch rewords the static assert diagnostic output. Failing a
_Static_assert in C should not report that static_assert failed. This
changes the wording to be more like GCC and uses "static assertion"
when possible instead of hard coding the name. This also changes some
instances of 'static_assert' to instead be based on the token in the
source code.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D129048
Looks like we again are going to have problems with libcxx tests that
are overly specific in their dependency on clang's diagnostics.
This reverts commit 6542cb55a3.
This patch is basically the rewording of the static assert statement's
output(error) on screen after failing. Failing a _Static_assert in C
should not report that static_assert failed. It’d probably be better to
reword the diagnostic to be more like GCC and say “static assertion”
failed in both C and C++.
consider a c file having code
_Static_assert(0, "oh no!");
In clang the output is like:
<source>:1:1: error: static_assert failed: oh no!
_Static_assert(0, "oh no!");
^ ~
1 error generated.
Compiler returned: 1
Thus here the "static_assert" is not much good, it will be better to
reword it to the "static assertion failed" to more generic. as the gcc
prints as:
<source>:1:1: error: static assertion failed: "oh no!"
1 | _Static_assert(0, "oh no!");
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Compiler returned: 1
The above can also be seen here. This patch is about rewording
the static_assert to static assertion.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D129048
This reverts commit b7e77ff25f.
Reason: Broke sanitizer builds bots + libcxx. 'static assertion
expression is not an integral constant expression'. More details
available in the Phabricator review: https://reviews.llvm.org/D129048
This patch rewords the static assert diagnostic output. Failing a
_Static_assert in C should not report that static_assert failed. This
changes the wording to be more like GCC and uses "static assertion"
when possible instead of hard coding the name. This also changes some
instances of 'static_assert' to instead be based on the token in the
source code.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D129048
Given a dependent `T` (maybe an undeduced `auto`),
Before:
new T(z) --> new T((z)) # changes meaning with more args
new T{z} --> new T{z}
T(z) --> T(z)
T{z} --> T({z}) # forbidden if T is auto
After:
new T(z) --> new T(z)
new T{z} --> new T{z}
T(z) --> T(z)
T{z} --> T{z}
Depends on D113393
Reviewed By: aaron.ballman
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D120608
See PR48656.
The implementation of the template instantiation of requires expressions
was incorrectly trying to get the expression from an 'ExprRequirement'
before checking if it was an error state.
Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com>
Reviewed By: rsmith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D107399
See PR45088.
Compound requirement type constraints were using decltype(E) instead of
decltype((E)), as per `[expr.prim.req]p1.3.3`.
Since neither instantiation nor type dependence should matter for
the constraints, this uses an approach where a `decltype` type is not built,
and just the canonical type of the expression after template instantiation
is used on the requirement.
Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com>
Reviewed By: rsmith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D98160
Summary:
Before this PR, `modernize-use-using` would transform the typedef in
```
template <typename a> class TemplateKeyword {
typedef typename a::template f<> e;
typedef typename a::template f<>::d e2;
};
```
into
```
template <typename a> class TemplateKeyword {
using d = typename a::b<>;
using d2 = typename a::template a::b<>::c;
};
```
The first one is missing the `template` keyword,
the second one has an extra `a::` scope. Both result
in compilation errors.
Reviewers: aaron.ballman, alexfh, hokein, njames93
Subscribers: xazax.hun, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78139
As per P1980R0, constraint expressions are unevaluated operands, and their constituent atomic
constraints only become constant evaluated during satisfaction checking.
Change the evaluation context during parsing and instantiation of constraints to unevaluated.
Now with concepts support merged and mostly complete, we do not need -fconcepts-ts
(which was also misleading as we were not implementing the TS) and can enable
concepts features under C++2a. A warning will be generated if users still attempt
to use -fconcepts-ts.
Implement support for C++2a requires-expressions.
Re-commit after compilation failure on some platforms due to alignment issues with PointerIntPair.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D50360
Nicolas Lesser