Turn it into a variant class instead. This conversion does indeed save some code
but there's a plan to add support for more kinds of terminators that aren't
necessarily based on statements, and with those in mind it becomes more and more
confusing to have CFGTerminators implicitly convertible to a Stmt *.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D61814
llvm-svn: 361586
Summary:
The idea is that the code here isn't written, so doesn't indicate a bug.
Similar to code expanded from macros.
This means the warning no longer fires on this code:
for (auto C : collection) {
process(C);
return;
}
handleEmptyCollection();
Unclear whether this is more often a bug or not in practice, I think it's a
reasonable idiom in some cases.
Either way, if we want to warn on "loop that doesn't loop", I think it should be
a separate warning, and catch `while(1) break;`
Reviewers: ilya-biryukov, ioeric
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D58134
llvm-svn: 354102
The description of what the various Expr::Ignore* do has drifted from the
actual implementation.
Inspection reveals that IgnoreParenImpCasts() is not equivalent to doing
IgnoreParens() + IgnoreImpCasts() until reaching a fixed point, but
IgnoreParenCasts() is equivalent to doing IgnoreParens() + IgnoreCasts()
until reaching a fixed point. There is also a fair amount of duplication
in the various Expr::Ignore* functions which increase the chance of further
future inconsistencies. In preparation for the next patch which will factor
out the implementation of the various Expr::Ignore*, do the following cleanups:
Remove Stmt::IgnoreImplicit, in favor of Expr::IgnoreImplicit. IgnoreImplicit
is the only function among all of the Expr::Ignore* which is available in Stmt.
There are only a few users of Stmt::IgnoreImplicit. They can just use instead
Expr::IgnoreImplicit like they have to do for the other Ignore*.
Move Expr::IgnoreImpCasts() from Expr.h to Expr.cpp. This made no difference
in the run-time with my usual benchmark (-fsyntax-only on all of Boost).
While we are at it, make IgnoreParenNoopCasts take a const reference to the
ASTContext for const correctness.
Update the comments to match what the Expr::Ignore* are actually doing.
I am not sure that listing exactly what each Expr::Ignore* do is optimal,
but it certainly looks better than the current state which is in my opinion
between misleading and just plain wrong.
The whole patch is NFC (if you count removing Stmt::IgnoreImplicit as NFC).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57266
Reviewed By: aaron.ballman
llvm-svn: 353006
to reflect the new license.
We understand that people may be surprised that we're moving the header
entirely to discuss the new license. We checked this carefully with the
Foundation's lawyer and we believe this is the correct approach.
Essentially, all code in the project is now made available by the LLVM
project under our new license, so you will see that the license headers
include that license only. Some of our contributors have contributed
code under our old license, and accordingly, we have retained a copy of
our old license notice in the top-level files in each project and
repository.
llvm-svn: 351636
This patch should not introduce any behavior changes. It consists of
mostly one of two changes:
1. Replacing fall through comments with the LLVM_FALLTHROUGH macro
2. Inserting 'break' before falling through into a case block consisting
of only 'break'.
We were already using this warning with GCC, but its warning behaves
slightly differently. In this patch, the following differences are
relevant:
1. GCC recognizes comments that say "fall through" as annotations, clang
doesn't
2. GCC doesn't warn on "case N: foo(); default: break;", clang does
3. GCC doesn't warn when the case contains a switch, but falls through
the outer case.
I will enable the warning separately in a follow-up patch so that it can
be cleanly reverted if necessary.
Reviewers: alexfh, rsmith, lattner, rtrieu, EricWF, bollu
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D53950
llvm-svn: 345882
The implementation is in AnalysisDeclContext.cpp and the class is called
AnalysisDeclContext.
Making those match up has numerous benefits, including:
- Easier jump from header to/from implementation.
- Easily identify filename from class.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37500
llvm-svn: 312671
the same source range and use the unary operator fixit only when it
actually silences the warning.
rdar://24570531
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28231
llvm-svn: 291757
The patch is generated using this command:
$ tools/extra/clang-tidy/tool/run-clang-tidy.py -fix \
-checks=-*,llvm-namespace-comment -header-filter='llvm/.*|clang/.*' \
work/llvm/tools/clang
To reduce churn, not touching namespaces spanning less than 10 lines.
llvm-svn: 240270
Sorry for the noise, I managed to miss a bunch of recent regressions of
include orderings here. This should actually sort all the includes for
Clang. Again, no functionality changed, this is just a mechanical
cleanup that I try to run periodically to keep the #include lines as
regular as possible across the project.
llvm-svn: 225979
This change is a precondition to the proposed change to handle temporary
dtors correctly.
The idea is to explicitly search for the next return that doesn't have other
paths into it (that is, if the current block is dead, the block containing the
return must be dead, too). Thus, introducing non-control-flow block
transitions will not break the logic.
llvm-svn: 209531
Taking a hint from -Wparentheses, use an extra '()' as a sigil that
a dead condition is intentionally dead. For example:
if ((0)) { dead }
When this sigil is found, do not emit a dead code warning. When the
analysis sees:
if (0)
it suggests inserting '()' as a Fix-It.
llvm-svn: 205069
The exception is return statements that include control-flow,
which are clearly doing something "interesting".
99% of the cases I examined for -Wunreachable-code that fired
on return statements were not interesting enough to warrant
being in -Wunreachable-code by default. Thus the move to
include them in -Wunreachable-code-return.
This simplifies a bunch of logic, including removing the ad hoc
logic to look for std::string literals.
llvm-svn: 204307
Also relax unreachable 'break' and 'return' to not check for being
preceded by a call to 'noreturn'. That turns out to not be so
interesting in practice.
llvm-svn: 204000
Recent work on -Wunreachable-code has focused on suppressing uninteresting
unreachable code that center around "configuration values", but
there are still some set of cases that are sometimes interesting
or uninteresting depending on the codebase. For example, a dead
"break" statement may not be interesting for a particular codebase,
potentially because it is auto-generated or simply because code
is written defensively.
To address these workflow differences, -Wunreachable-code is now
broken into several diagnostic groups:
-Wunreachable-code: intended to be a reasonable "default" for
most users.
and then other groups that turn on more aggressive checking:
-Wunreachable-code-break: warn about dead break statements
-Wunreachable-code-trivial-return: warn about dead return statements
that return "trivial" values (e.g., return 0). Other return
statements that return non-trivial values are still reported
under -Wunreachable-code (this is an area subject to more refinement).
-Wunreachable-code-aggressive: supergroup that enables all these
groups.
The goal is to eventually make -Wunreachable-code good enough to
either be in -Wall or on-by-default, thus finessing these warnings
into different groups helps achieve maximum signal for more users.
TODO: the tests need to be updated to reflect this extra control
via diagnostic flags.
llvm-svn: 203994
This can possibly be refined later, but right now the experience
is so incomprehensible for a user to understand what is going on
this isn't a useful warning.
llvm-svn: 203336
I had forgotten that the same reachability code is used by both -Wreturn-type
and -Wunreachable-code, so the heuristics applied to the latter were indirectly
impacting the former.
To address this, the reachability code is more refactored so that whiled
the logic at its core is shared, the intention of the clients are better
captured and segregated in helper APIs.
Fixes PR19074, and also some false positives reported offline to me
by Nick Lewycky.
llvm-svn: 203209
I have mixed feelings about this one. It's used all over the codebase,
and is analogous to the current heuristic for ordinary C string literals.
This requires some ad hoc pattern matching of the AST. While the
test case mirrors what we see std::string in libc++, it's not really
testing the libc++ headers.
llvm-svn: 203091
Sometimes do..while() is used to create a scope that can be left early.
In such cases, the unreachable 'while()' test is not usually interesting
unless it actually does something that is observable.
llvm-svn: 203051
Sometimes do..while() is used to create a scope that can be left early.
In such cases, the unreachable 'while()' test is not usually interesting
unless it actually does something that is observable.
llvm-svn: 203036
Previously we only pruned dead returns preceded by a call to a
'noreturn' function. After looking at the results of the LLVM codebase,
there are many others that should be pruned as well.
llvm-svn: 203029
Some unreachable code is only "sometimes unreachable" because it
is guarded by a configuration value that is determined at compile
time and is always constant. Sometimes those represent real bugs,
but often they do not. This patch causes the reachability analysis
to cover such branches even if they are technically unreachable
in the CFG itself. There are some conservative heuristics at
play here to determine a "configuration value"; these are intended
to be refined over time.
llvm-svn: 202912
Artem Dergachev