just the extremely specific case of a trailing array element that couldn't be
initialized because the default constructor for the element type is deleted.
Also reword the diagnostic to better match our other context diagnostics and to
prepare for the implementation of core issue 1070.
llvm-svn: 210083
diagnostic message are compared. If either is a substring of the other, then
no error is given. This gives rise to an unexpected case:
// expect-error{{candidate function has different number of parameters}}
will match the following error messages from Clang:
candidate function has different number of parameters (expected 1 but has 2)
candidate function has different number of parameters
It will also match these other error messages:
candidate function
function has different number of parameters
number of parameters
This patch will change so that the verification string must be a substring of
the diagnostic message before accepting. Also, all the failing tests from this
change have been corrected. Some stats from this cleanup:
87 - removed extra spaces around verification strings
70 - wording updates to diagnostics
40 - extra leading or trailing characters (typos, unmatched parens or quotes)
35 - diagnostic level was included (error:, warning:, or note:)
18 - flag name put in the warning (-Wprotocol)
llvm-svn: 146619
therefore not creating ElaboratedTypes, which are still pretty-printed
with the written tag).
Most of these testcase changes were done by script, so don't feel too
sorry for my fingers.
llvm-svn: 98149
why the candidate is non-viable. There's a lot we can do to improve this, but
it's a good start. Further improvements should probably be integrated with the
bad-initialization reporting routines.
llvm-svn: 93277
InitializationSequence. Specially, switch initialization of a C++
class type (either copy- or direct-initialization).
Also, make sure that we create an elidable copy-construction when
performing copy initialization of a C++ class variable. Fixes PR5826.
llvm-svn: 91750
- 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
such initializations properly convert constructor arguments and fill
in default arguments where necessary. This also makes the ownership
model more clear.
llvm-svn: 81394
extension. The interaction with designated initializers is a
bit... interesting... but we follow GNU's lead and don't permit too
much crazy code in this area.
Also, make the "excess initializers" error message a bit more
informative.
Addresses PR2561: http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=2561
llvm-svn: 63785
sequence. Previously, we weren't permitting the second step to call
copy constructors, which left user-defined conversion sequences
surprisingly broken.
Now, we perform overload resolution among all of the constructors, but
only accept the result if it makes the conversion a standard
conversion. Note that this behavior is different from both GCC and EDG
(which don't agree with each other, either); I've submitted a core
issue on the matter.
llvm-svn: 63450
- Support initialization of reference members; complain if any
reference members are left uninitialized.
- Use C++ copy-initialization for initializing each element (falls
back to constraint checking in C)
- Make sure we diagnose when one tries to provide an initializer
list for a non-aggregate.
- Don't complain about empty initializers in C++ (they are permitted)
- Unrelated but necessary: don't bother trying to convert the
decl-specifier-seq to a type when we're dealing with a C++
constructor, destructor, or conversion operator; it results in
spurious warnings.
llvm-svn: 63431
Richard Smith