Summary: @rsmith Is there a better place to put this test?
Reviewers: GorNishanov, rsmith
Reviewed By: GorNishanov
Subscribers: cfe-commits, rsmith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33660
llvm-svn: 304331
Summary:
The expression `await_ready` is required to be contextually convertible to bool and `await_suspend` must be a prvalue of either `void` or `bool`.
This patch adds diagnostics for when those requirements are violated.
It also correctly performs the contextual conversion to bool on the result of `await_ready`
Reviewers: GorNishanov, rsmith
Reviewed By: GorNishanov
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33625
llvm-svn: 304094
We were leaving the SubobjectDesignator in a surprising situation, where
it was allegedly valid but didn't actually refer to a type. This caused
a crash later on.
This patch fills out the SubobjectDesignator with the pointee type (as
happens in other evaluations of constant pointers) so that we don't
crash later.
llvm-svn: 303957
member function" context notes to registering an entry on the context stack.
Also reorder the steps within defining special members to be consistent.
This has a few benefits: if multiple diagnostics are produced while checking
such a member, the note is now attached to the first such diagnostic rather
than the last, this prepares us for persisting these diagnostics between the
point at which we require the implicit instantiation of a template and the
point at which that instantiation is actually performed, and this fixes some
cases where we would fail to produce a full note stack leading back to user
code in the case of such a diagnostic.
The reordering exposed a case where we could recursively attempt to define a
defaulted destructor while we're already defining one (and other such cases
also appear to be possible, with or without this change), so this change also
reuses the "willHaveBody" flag on function declarations to track that we're in
the middle of synthesizing a body for the function and bails out if we try to
define a function that we're already defining.
llvm-svn: 303930
Summary:
According to the PDTS it's perfectly legal to have a promise type that defines neither `return_value` nor `return_void`. However a coroutine that uses such a promise type will almost always have UB, because it can never `co_return`.
This patch changes Clang to diagnose such cases as an error. It also cleans up some of the diagnostic messages relating to member lookup in the promise type.
Reviewers: GorNishanov, rsmith
Reviewed By: GorNishanov
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33534
llvm-svn: 303868
Summary:
This patch fixes a number of issues with the analysis warnings emitted when a coroutine may reach the end of the function w/o returning.
* Fix bug where coroutines with `return_value` are incorrectly diagnosed as missing `co_return`'s.
* Rework diagnostic message to no longer say "non-void coroutine", because that implies the coroutine doesn't have a void return type, which it might. In this case a non-void coroutine is one who's promise type does not contain `return_void()`
As a side-effect of this patch, coroutine bodies that contain an invalid coroutine promise objects are marked as invalid.
Reviewers: GorNishanov, rsmith, aaron.ballman, majnemer
Reviewed By: GorNishanov
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33532
llvm-svn: 303831
Summary: Now we helpfully provide a note pointing at the promise_type in question.
Reviewers: EricWF, GorNishanov
Reviewed By: GorNishanov
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33481
llvm-svn: 303752
C++14 added user-defined literal support for complex numbers so that you can
write something like "complex<double> val = 2i". However, there is an existing
GNU extension supporting this syntax and interpreting the result as a _Complex
type.
This changes parsing so that such literals are interpreted in terms of C++14's
operators if an overload is present but otherwise falls back to the original
GNU extension.
llvm-svn: 303694
Summary:
If unhandled_exception member function is present in the coroutine promise,
wrap the body of the coroutine in:
```
try {
body
} catch(...) { promise.unhandled_exception(); }
```
Reviewers: EricWF, rnk, rsmith
Reviewed By: rsmith
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31692
llvm-svn: 303583
Summary:
1. build declaration of the gro local variable that keeps the result of get_return_object.
2. build return statement returning the gro variable
3. emit them during CodeGen
4. sema and CodeGen tests updated
Reviewers: EricWF, rsmith
Reviewed By: rsmith
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31646
llvm-svn: 303573
This patch ensures that clang processes the expression-nodes that are generated when disambiguating between types and expressions within template arguments as constant-expressions by installing the ConstantEvaluated ExpressionEvaluationContext just before attempting the disambiguation - and then making sure that Context carries through into ParseConstantExpression (by refactoring it out into a function that does not create its own EvaluationContext: ParseConstantExpressionInExprEvalContext)
Note, prior to this patch, trunk would correctly disambiguate and identify the expression as an expression - and while it would annotate the token with the expression - it would fail to complete the odr-use processing (specifically, failing to trigger Sema::UpdateMarkingForLValueToRValue as is done for all Constant Expressions, which would remove it from being considered odr-used). By installing the ConstantExpression Evaluation Context prior to disambiguation, and making sure it carries though, we ensure correct processing of the expression-node.
For e.g:
template<int> struct X { };
void f() {
const int N = 10;
X<N> x; // should be OK.
[] { return X<N>{}; }; // Should be OK - no capture - but clang errors!
}
See a related bug: https://bugs.llvm.org//show_bug.cgi?id=25627
In summary (and reiteration), the fix is as follows:
- Remove the EnteredConstantEvaluatedContext action from ParseTemplateArgumentList (relying on ParseTemplateArgument getting it right)
- Add the EnteredConstantEvaluatedContext action just prior to undergoing the disambiguating parse, and if the parse succeeds for an expression, carry the context though into a refactored version of ParseConstantExpression that does not create its own ExpressionEvaluationContext.
See https://reviews.llvm.org/D31588 for additional context regarding some of the more fragile and complicated approaches attempted, and Richard's feedback that eventually shaped the simpler and more robust rendition that is being committed.
Thanks Richard!
llvm-svn: 303492
inferring based on the current module at the point of creation.
This should result in no functional change except when building a preprocessed
module (or more generally when using #pragma clang module begin/end to switch
module in the middle of a file), in which case it allows us to correctly track
the owning module for declarations. We can't map from FileID to module in the
preprocessed module case, since all modules would have the same FileID.
There are still a couple of remaining places that try to infer a module from a
source location; I'll clean those up in follow-up changes.
llvm-svn: 303322
This commit fixes a bug that's tracked by PR 10758 and duplicates like PR 30343.
The bug causes clang to crash with a stack overflow while recursing infinitely
trying to perform copy-initialization on a type without a copy constructor but
with a constructor that accepts another type that can be constructed using the
original type.
The commit fixes this bug by detecting the recursive behavior and failing
correctly with an appropriate error message. It also tries to provide a
meaningful diagnostic note about the constructor which leads to this behavior.
rdar://28483944
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D25051
llvm-svn: 303156
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32933
Turns out clang wasn't really handling vla's (*) in C++11's for-range entirely correctly.
For e.g. This would lead to generation of buggy IR:
void foo(int b) {
int vla[b];
b = -1; // This store would affect the '__end = vla + b'
for (int &c : vla)
c = 0;
}
Additionally, code-gen would get confused when VLA's were reference-captured by lambdas, and then used in a for-range, which would result in an attempt to generate IR for '__end = vla + b' within the lambda's body - without any capture of 'b' - hence the assertion.
This patch modifies clang, so that for VLA's it translates the end pointer approximately into:
__end = __begin + sizeof(vla)/sizeof(vla->getElementType())
As opposed to the __end = __begin + b;
I considered passing a magic value into codegen - or having codegen special case the '__end' variable when it referred to a variably-modified type, but I decided against that approach, because it smelled like I would be increasing a complicated form of coupling, that I think would be even harder to maintain than the above approach (which can easily be optimized (-O1) to refer to the run-time bound that was calculated upon array's creation or copied into the lambda's closure object).
(*) why oh why gcc would you enable this by default?! ;)
llvm-svn: 303026
This patch teaches clang to perform implicit scalar to vector conversions
when one of the operands of a binary vector expression is a scalar which
can be converted to the element type of the vector without truncation
following GCC's implementation.
If the (constant) scalar is can be casted safely, it is implicitly casted to the
vector elements type and splatted to produce a vector of the same type.
Contributions from: Petar Jovanovic
Reviewers: bruno, vkalintiris
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D25866
llvm-svn: 302935
Diagnostics related to redefinition errors that point to the same header
file do not provide much information that helps users fixing the issue.
- In the modules context, it usually happens because of non modular
includes.
- When modules aren't involved it might happen because of the lack of
header guards.
Enhance diagnostics in these scenarios.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28832
rdar://problem/31669175
llvm-svn: 302765
When an undeclared identifier in a context that requires a type is followed by
'<', only look for type templates when typo-correcting, tweak the diagnostic
text to say that a template name (not a type name) was undeclared, and parse
the template arguments when recovering from the error.
llvm-svn: 302732
The heuristic that we use here is:
* the left-hand side must be a simple identifier or a class member access
* the right-hand side must be '<' followed by either a '>' or by a type-id that
cannot be an expression (in particular, not followed by '(' or '{')
* there is a '>' token matching the '<' token
The second condition guarantees the expression would otherwise be ill-formed.
If we're confident that the user intended the name before the '<' to be
interpreted as a template, diagnose the fact that we didn't interpret it
that way, rather than diagnosing that the template arguments are not valid
expressions.
llvm-svn: 302615
This fixes the bug: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32638
int main()
{
[](auto x) noexcept(noexcept(x)) { } (0);
}
In the above code, prior to this patch, when substituting into the noexcept expression, i.e. transforming the DeclRefExpr that represents 'x' - clang attempts to capture 'x' because Sema's CurContext is still pointing to the pattern FunctionDecl (i.e. the templated-decl set in FinishTemplateArgumentDeduction) which does not match the substituted 'x's DeclContext, which leads to an attempt to capture and an assertion failure.
We fix this by adjusting Sema's CurContext to point to the substituted FunctionDecl under which the noexcept specifier's argument should be transformed, and so the ParmVarDecl that 'x' refers to has the same declcontext and no capture is attempted.
I briefly investigated whether the SwitchContext should occur right after VisitMethodDecl creates the new substituted FunctionDecl, instead of only during instantiating the exception specification - but seeing no other code that seemed to rely on that, I decided to leave it just for the duration of the exception specification instantiation.
llvm-svn: 302507
We were sometimes doing a function->pointer conversion in
Sema::CheckPlaceholderExpr, which isn't the job of CheckPlaceholderExpr.
So, when we saw typeof(OverloadedFunctionName), where
OverloadedFunctionName referenced a name with only one function that
could have its address taken, we'd give back a function pointer type
instead of a function type. This is incorrect.
I kept the logic for doing the function pointer conversion in
resolveAndFixAddressOfOnlyViableOverloadCandidate because it was more
consistent with existing ResolveAndFix* methods.
llvm-svn: 302506
Add an opt-in warning that fires when 0 is used as a null pointer.
gcc has this warning, and there's some demand for it.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D32914
llvm-svn: 302247
Summary:
First, getCurFunction looks through blocks and lambdas, which is wrong.
Inside a lambda, va_start should refer to the lambda call operator
prototype. This fixes PR32737.
Second, we shouldn't use any of the getCur* methods, because they look
through contexts that we don't want to look through (EnumDecl,
CapturedStmtDecl). We can use CurContext directly as the calling
context.
Finally, this code assumed that CallExprs would never appear outside of
code contexts (block, function, obj-c method), which is wrong. Struct
member initializers are an easy way to create and parse exprs in a
non-code context.
Reviewers: rsmith
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32761
llvm-svn: 302188
- this is added just for completeness sake (though the general case should be represented by the test added in the revision to that patch: https://reviews.llvm.org/rL301972 )
llvm-svn: 301973
When computing the appropriate cv-qualifiers for the 'this' capture, we have to examine each enclosing lambda - but when using the FunctionScopeInfo stack we have to ensure that the lambda below (outer) is the decl-context of the closure-class of the current lambda.
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32831
This patch was initially committed here: https://reviews.llvm.org/rL301735
Then reverted here: https://reviews.llvm.org/rL301916
The issue with the original patch was a failure to check that the closure type has been created within the LambdaScopeInfo before querying its DeclContext - instead of just assuming it has (silly!). A reduced example such as this highlights the problem:
struct X {
int data;
auto foo() { return [] { return [] -> decltype(data) { return 0; }; }; }
};
When 'data' within decltype(data) tries to determine the type of 'this', none of the LambdaScopeInfo's have their closure types created at that point.
llvm-svn: 301972
handling of constexprs with unknown bounds.
This triggers a corner case of the language where it's not yet clear
whether this should be an error:
struct A {
static void *const a[];
static void *const b[];
};
constexpr void *A::a[] = {&b[0]};
constexpr void *A::b[] = {&a[0]};
When discovering the initializer for A::a, the bounds of A::b aren't known yet.
It is unclear whether warning about errors should be deferred until the end of
the translation unit, possibly resolving errors that can be resolved. In
practice, the compiler can know the bounds of all arrays in this example.
Credits for reproducers and explanation go to Richard Smith. Richard, please
add more info in case my explanation is wrong.
llvm-svn: 301963
It leads to clang crashing, e.g. on this short code fragment (added to
test/SemaCXX/warn-thread-safety-parsing.cpp):
class SomeClass {
public:
void foo() {
auto l = [this] { auto l = [] EXCLUSIVE_LOCKS_REQUIRED(mu_) {}; };
}
Mutex mu_;
};
llvm-svn: 301916
The fix is that ExprEvaluatorBase::VisitInitListExpr should handle transparent exprs instead of exprs with one element. Fixing that uncovers one testcase failure because the AST for "constexpr _Complex float test2 = {1};" is wrong (the _Complex prvalue should not be const-qualified), and a number of test failures in test/OpenMP where the captured stmt contains an InitListExpr that is in syntactic form.
llvm-svn: 301891
Do not spuriously reject constexpr functions that access elements of an array
of unknown bound; this may later become valid once the bound is known. Permit
array-to-pointer decay on such arrays, but disallow pointer arithmetic (since
we do not know whether it will have defined behavior).
The standard is not clear on how this should work, but this seems to be a
decent answer.
Patch by Robert Haberlach!
llvm-svn: 301822
When computing the appropriate cv-qualifiers for the 'this' capture, we have to examine each enclosing lambda - but when using the FunctionScopeInfo stack we have to ensure that the lambda below (outer) is the decl-context of the closure-class of the current lambda.
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32831
llvm-svn: 301735
The previous algorithm processed one character at a time, which is very
painful on a modern CPU. Replace it with xxHash64, which both already
exists in the codebase and is fairly fast.
Patch from Scott Smith!
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32509
llvm-svn: 301487
isMicrosoftMissingTypename() uses a Type pointer without first checking
that it's non-null. PR32750 reports a case where the pointer is in fact
null. This patch adds in a defensive check and a regression test.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32519
llvm-svn: 301420
This switches from the prototype syntax in P0273R0 ('module' and 'module
implementation') to the consensus syntax 'export module' and 'module'.
In passing, drop the "module declaration must be first" enforcement, since EWG
seems to have changed its mind on that.
llvm-svn: 301056
clang-cl sets MicrosoftCompat. In that mode, we always give enums a fixed
underlying type, and for enums with fixed underlying type we never enter the
block that tries to emit ext_ms_forward_ref_enum. Fix this by requiring an
explicit underlying type when we're skipping this diagnostic.
We had a test for this warning, but it only ran in C++98 mode. clang-cl always
enables -std=c++14, so MicrosoftCompatibiliy-cxx98.cpp is a fairly useless
test. Fold it into MicrosoftCompatibility.cpp -- that way, the test checks if
-Wmicrosoft-enum-forward-reference can fire in clang-cl builds.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D32369
llvm-svn: 301032
The original idea was that if the attribute on an operator,
that the return-value unused-ness wouldn't matter. However,
all of the operators except postfix inc/dec return
references! References don't result in this warning
anyway, so those are already excluded.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32207
llvm-svn: 300764
Summary:
This patch implements [dcl.fct.def.coroutine]p8:
> The unqualified-id get_return_object_on_allocation_failure is looked up in the scope of
> class P by class member access lookup (3.4.5). If a declaration is found, ..., and if a
> global allocation function is selected, the ::operator new(size_t, nothrow_t) form shall be used.
> [...]
> The allocation function used in this case must have a non-throwing noexcept-specification.
Reviewers: GorNishanov, rsmith, majnemer, aaron.ballman
Reviewed By: GorNishanov
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31562
llvm-svn: 300524
Summary:
Certain implicitly generated coroutine statements, such as the calls to 'return_value()' or `return_void()` or `get_return_object_on_allocation_failure()`, cannot be built until the promise type is no longer dependent. This means they are not built until after the coroutine body statement has been transformed.
This patch fixes an issue where these statements would never be built for coroutine templates.
It also fixes a small issue where diagnostics about `get_return_object_on_allocation_failure()` were incorrectly suppressed.
Reviewers: rsmith, majnemer, GorNishanov, aaron.ballman
Reviewed By: GorNishanov
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31487
llvm-svn: 300504
Summary:
This patch implements [dcl.fct.def.coroutine]p8:
> The unqualified-id get_return_object_on_allocation_failure is looked up in the scope of
> class P by class member access lookup (3.4.5). If a declaration is found, ..., and if a
> global allocation function is selected, the ::operator new(size_t, nothrow_t) form shall be used.
> [...]
> The allocation function used in this case must have a non-throwing noexcept-specification.
Reviewers: GorNishanov, rsmith, majnemer, aaron.ballman
Reviewed By: GorNishanov
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31562
llvm-svn: 300420
This reverts an attempt to check that types match when matching a
dependently-typed non-type template parameter. (This comes up when matching the
parameters of a template template parameter against the parameters of a
template template argument.)
The matching rules here are murky at best. Our behavior after this revert is
definitely wrong for certain C++17 features (for 'auto' template parameter
types within the parameter list of a template template argument in particular),
but our behavior before this revert is wrong for some pre-existing testcases,
so reverting to our prior behavior seems like our best option.
llvm-svn: 300262
We need to address cases (breaking libc++) such as
template <class _Up> static int __test(...);
template<typename _Tp>
auto v = __test<_Tp>(0);
llvm-svn: 299956
Follow-up to r299363 "Enhance -Wshadow to warn when shadowing typedefs or type
aliases".
Patch by Ahmed Asadi.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31235
llvm-svn: 299522
Summary:
Certain implicitly generated coroutine statements, such as the calls to 'return_value()' or `return_void()` or `get_return_object_on_allocation_failure()`, cannot be built until the promise type is no longer dependent. This means they are not built until after the coroutine body statement has been transformed.
This patch fixes an issue where these statements would never be built for coroutine templates.
It also fixes a small issue where diagnostics about `get_return_object_on_allocation_failure()` were incorrectly suppressed.
Reviewers: rsmith, majnemer, GorNishanov, aaron.ballman
Reviewed By: GorNishanov
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31487
llvm-svn: 299380
GCC has the alloc_align attribute, which is similar to assume_aligned, except the attribute's parameter is the index of the integer parameter that needs aligning to.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29599
llvm-svn: 299117
Summary:
If promise_type has get_return_object_on_allocation_failure defined,
check if an allocation function returns nullptr, and if so,
return the result of get_return_object_on_allocation_failure().
Reviewers: rsmith, EricWF
Reviewed By: EricWF
Subscribers: mehdi_amini, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31399
llvm-svn: 298891
Summary:
This patch implements parsing of [[clang::suppress(rule, ...)]]
and [[gsl::suppress(rule, ...)]] attributes.
C++ Core Guidelines depend heavily on tool support for
rule enforcement. They also propose a way to suppress
warnings [1] which is by annotating any ancestor in AST
with the C++11 attribute [[gsl::suppress(rule1,...)]].
To have a mechanism to suppress non-C++ Core
Guidelines specific, an additional spelling of [[clang::suppress]]
is defined.
For example, to suppress the warning cppcoreguidelines-slicing,
one could do
```
[[clang::suppress("cppcoreguidelines-slicing")]]
void f() { ... code that does slicing ... }
```
or
```
void g() {
Derived b;
[[clang::suppress("cppcoreguidelines-slicing")]]
Base a{b};
[[clang::suppress("cppcoreguidelines-slicing")]] {
doSomething();
Base a2{b};
}
}
```
This parsing can then be used by clang-tidy, which includes multiple
C++ Core Guidelines rules, to suppress warnings (see
https://reviews.llvm.org/D24888).
For the exact naming of the rule in the attribute, there
are different possibilities, which will be defined in the
corresponding clang-tidy patch.
Currently, clang-tidy supports suppressing of warnings through "//
NOLINT" comments. There are some advantages that the attribute has:
- Suppressing specific warnings instead of all warnings
- Suppressing warnings in a block (namespace, function, compound
statement)
- Code formatting may split a statement into multiple lines,
thus a "// NOLINT" comment may be on the wrong line
I'm looking forward to your comments!
[1] https://github.com/isocpp/CppCoreGuidelines/blob/master/CppCoreGuidelines.md#inforce-enforcement
Reviewers: alexfh, aaron.ballman, rsmith
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24886
llvm-svn: 298880
for unused values.
This fixes a regression caused by r298676, where constructor calls to
classes with non-trivial dtor were marked as unused if the first
argument is an initializer list. This is inconsistent (as the test
shows) and also warns on a reasonbly common code pattern where people
just call constructors to create and immediately destroy an object.
llvm-svn: 298853
This change fixes a crash on initialization of a reference from ({}) during
template instantiation and incidentally improves diagnostics.
This reverts a prior attempt to handle this in r286721. Instead, we teach the
initialization code that initialization cannot be performed if a source type
is required and the initializer is an initializer list (which is not an
expression and does not have a type), and likewise for function-style cast
expressions.
llvm-svn: 298676
Correct class-template deprecation behavior
Based on the comment in the test, and my reading of the standard, a deprecated warning should be issued in the following case:
template<typename T> [[deprecated]] class Foo{}; Foo<int> f;
This was not the case, because the ClassTemplateSpecializationDecl creation did not also copy the deprecated attribute.
Note: I did NOT audit the complete set of attributes to see WHICH ones should be copied, so instead I simply copy ONLY the deprecated attribute.
Previous DiffRev: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27486, was reverted.
This patch fixes the issues brought up here by the reverter: https://reviews.llvm.org/rL298410
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31245
llvm-svn: 298634
Summary:
This patch adopts the recent changes that renamed `set_exception(exception_pointer)` to `unhandled_exception()`.
Additionally `unhandled_exception()` is now required, and so an error is emitted when exceptions are enabled but the promise type does not provide the member.
When exceptions are disabled a warning is emitted instead of an error, The warning notes that the `unhandled_exception()` function is required when exceptions are enabled.
Reviewers: rsmith, GorNishanov, aaron.ballman, majnemer
Reviewed By: GorNishanov
Subscribers: mehdi_amini, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30859
llvm-svn: 298565
We don't know whether some other instantiation of the template might be able to
reach the annotation, so warning on it has a high chance of false positives.
Patch by Ahmed Asadi!
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31069
llvm-svn: 298477
The alias was only ever used on darwin and had some issues there,
and isn't used in practice much. Also fixes a problem with -mno-altivec
not turning off -maltivec.
Also add a diagnostic for faltivec/fno-altivec that directs users to use
maltivec options and include the altivec.h file explicitly.
llvm-svn: 298449
Based on the comment in the test, and my reading of the standard, a deprecated warning should be issued in the following case:
template<typename T> [[deprecated]] class Foo{}; Foo<int> f;
This was not the case, because the ClassTemplateSpecializationDecl creation did not also copy the deprecated attribute.
Note: I did NOT audit the complete set of attributes to see WHICH ones should be copied, so instead I simply copy ONLY the deprecated attribute.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27486
llvm-svn: 298410
This commit adds support for a new attribute that will be used to
distinguish between extensible and inextensible enums. There are three
main purposes of this attribute:
1. Give better control over when enum-related warnings are issued.
For example, in the code below, clang will not issue a -Wassign-enum
warning if the enum is marked "open":
enum __attribute__((enum_extensibility(closed))) EnumClosed {
B0 = 1, B1 = 10
};
enum __attribute__((enum_extensibility(open))) EnumOpen {
C0 = 1, C1 = 10
};
enum EnumClosed ec = 100; // warning issued
enum EnumOpen eo = 100; // no warning
2. Enable code-completion and debugging tools to offer better
suggestions.
3. Make it easier for swift's clang importer to determine which swift
type an enum should be mapped to.
For more details, see the discussion I started on cfe-dev:
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2017-February/052748.html
rdar://problem/12764379
rdar://problem/23145650
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30766
llvm-svn: 298332
This adds -Wbitfield-enum-conversion, which warns on implicit
conversions that happen on bitfield assignment that change the value of
some enumerators.
Values of enum type typically take on a very small range of values, so
they are frequently stored in bitfields. Unfortunately, there is no
convenient way to calculate the minimum number of bits necessary to
store all possible values at compile time, so users usually hard code a
bitwidth that works today and widen it as necessary to pass basic
testing and validation. This is very error-prone, and leads to stale
widths as enums grow. This warning aims to catch such bugs.
This would have found two real bugs in clang and two instances of
questionable code. See r297680 and r297654 for the full description of
the issues.
This warning is currently disabled by default while we investigate its
usefulness outside of LLVM.
The major cause of false positives with this warning is this kind of
enum:
enum E { W, X, Y, Z, SENTINEL_LAST };
The last enumerator is an invalid value used to validate inputs or size
an array. Depending on the prevalance of this style of enum across a
codebase, this warning may be more or less feasible to deploy. It also
has trouble on sentinel values such as ~0U.
Reviewers: rsmith, rtrieu, thakis
Reviewed By: thakis
Subscribers: hfinkel, voskresensky.vladimir, sashab, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30923
llvm-svn: 297761
Summary:
Some coroutine diagnostics need to point to the location of the first coroutine keyword in the function, like when diagnosing a `return` inside a coroutine. Previously we did this by storing each *valid* coroutine statement in a list and select the first one to use in diagnostics. However if every coroutine statement is invalid we would have no location to point to.
This patch fixes the storage of the first coroutine statement location, ensuring that it gets stored even when the resulting AST node would be invalid.
This patch also removes the `CoroutineStmts` list in `FunctionScopeInfo` because it was unused.
Reviewers: rsmith, GorNishanov, aaron.ballman
Reviewed By: GorNishanov
Subscribers: mehdi_amini, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30776
llvm-svn: 297547
Printing typedefs or type aliases using clang_getTypeSpelling() is missing the
namespace they are defined in. This is in contrast to other types that always
yield the full typename including namespaces.
Patch by Michael Reiher!
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29944
llvm-svn: 297465
Summary:
A `co_await arg` expression has a dependent type whenever the promise type is still dependent, even if the argument to co_await is not. This is because we cannot attempt the `await_transform(<arg>)` until after we know the promise type.
This patch fixes an assertion in the constructor of `DependentCoawaitExpr` that asserted that `arg` must also be dependent.
Reviewers: rsmith, GorNishanov, aaron.ballman
Reviewed By: GorNishanov
Subscribers: mehdi_amini, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30772
llvm-svn: 297358
Summary:
This patch adds passing a coroutine_handle object to await_suspend calls.
It builds the coroutine_handle using coroutine_handle<PromiseType>::from_address(__builtin_coro_frame()).
(a revision of https://reviews.llvm.org/D26316 that for some reason refuses to apply via arc patch)
Reviewers: GorNishanov
Subscribers: mehdi_amini, cfe-commits, EricWF
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30769
llvm-svn: 297356
Summary:
The changes contained in this patch are:
1. Defines a new AST node `CoawaitDependentExpr` for representing co_await expressions while the promise type is still dependent.
2. Correctly detect and transform the 'co_await' operand to `p.await_transform(<expr>)` when possible.
3. Change the initial/final suspend points to build during the initial parse, so they have the correct operator co_await lookup results.
4. Fix transformation of the CoroutineBodyStmt so that it doesn't re-build the final/initial suspends.
@rsmith: This change is a little big, but it's not trivial for me to split it up. Please let me know if you would prefer this submitted as multiple patches.
Reviewers: rsmith, GorNishanov
Reviewed By: rsmith
Subscribers: ABataev, rsmith, mehdi_amini, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26057
llvm-svn: 297093
Previously when a coroutine was building the implicit setup/destroy
constructs it would emit diagostics about failures on the first co_await/co_return/co_yield
it encountered. This was confusing because that construct may not itself be ill-formed.
This patch moves the diagnostics to the function start instead.
llvm-svn: 297089
Summary:
Don't warn about unused lambda captures that involve copying a
value of a type that cannot be trivially copied and destroyed.
Fixes PR31977
Reviewers: rsmith, aaron.ballman
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30327
llvm-svn: 296602
The exisiting warning for inconsistent overrides does not include the destructor
as it was noted in review that it was too noisy. Instead, add to a separate
warning group that is off by default for users who want consistent warnings
between methods and destructors.
llvm-svn: 296572
Essentially, as a base class constructor does not construct virtual bases, such
a constructor for an abstract class does not need the corresponding base class
construction to be valid, and likewise for destructors.
This creates an awkward situation: clang will sometimes generate references to
the complete object and deleting destructors for an abstract class (it puts
them in the construction vtable for a derived class). But we can't generate a
"correct" version of these because we can't generate references to base class
constructors any more (if they're template specializations, say, we might not
have instantiated them and can't assume any other TU will emit a copy).
Fortunately, we don't need to, since no correct program can ever invoke them,
so instead emit symbols that just trap.
We should stop emitting references to these symbols, but still need to emit
definitions for compatibility.
llvm-svn: 296275
Rather than attempting to compare whether the previous and current top of
context stack are "equal" (which fails for a number of reasons, such as the
context stack entries containing pointers to objects on the stack, or reaching
the same "top of stack" entry through two different paths), track the depth of
context stack at which we last emitted a note and invalidate it when we pop the
context stack to less than that depth.
This causes us to emit some missing "in instantiation of" notes and to stop
emitting redundant "in instantiation of" stacks matching the previous stack in
rare cases.
llvm-svn: 295921
This is necessary in order for the evaluation of an _Atomic initializer for
those types to have an associated object, which an initializer for class or
array type needs.
llvm-svn: 295886
We need to look through the PackExpansionType in the parameter type when
deducing, and we need to consider the possibility of deducing arguments for
packs that are not lexically mentioned in the pattern (but are nonetheless
deducible) when figuring out which packs are covered by a pack deduction scope.
llvm-svn: 295790
case where the class template has a parameter pack.
Checking of the template arguments expects an "as-written" template argument
list, which in particular does not have any parameter packs. So flatten the
packs into separate arguments before passing them in.
llvm-svn: 295710
Eric Fiselier