This bug was found via self-build on lld, and worked around
here: https://reviews.llvm.org/rL316180
The issue is that the 'using' causes the lookup to pick up the
first decl. However, when setting inherited default parameters,
we only update 'forward', not 'backward'. SO, only the newest param
list has all the information about the default arguments.
This patch ensures that the list of parameters we look through checks
the newest decl's template parameter list so it doesn't miss a default.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D39127
llvm-svn: 316405
In order to identify the copy deduction candidate, I considered two approaches:
- attempt to determine whether an implicit guide is a copy deduction candidate by checking certain properties of its subsituted parameter during overload-resolution.
- using one of the many bits (WillHaveBody) from FunctionDecl (that CXXDeductionGuideDecl inherits from) that are otherwise irrelevant for deduction guides
After some brittle gymnastics w the first strategy, I settled on the second, although to avoid confusion and to give that bit a better name, i turned it into a member of an anonymous union.
Given this identification 'bit', the tweak to overload resolution was a simple reordering of the deduction guide checks (in SemaOverload.cpp::isBetterOverloadCandidate), in-line with Jason Merrill's p0620r0 drafting which made it into the working paper. Concordant with that, I made sure the copy deduction candidate is always added.
References:
See https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34970
See http://wg21.link/p0620r0
llvm-svn: 316292
When declaring an entity in the "purview" of a module, it's never a
redeclaration of an entity in the purview of a default module or in no module
("in the global module"). Don't consider those other declarations as possible
redeclaration targets if they're not visible, and reject any cases where we
pick a prior visible declaration that violates this rule.
This reinstates r315251 and r315256, reverted in r315309 and r315308
respectively, tweaked to avoid triggering a linkage calculation when declaring
implicit special members (this exposed our pre-existing issue with typedef
names for linkage changing the linkage of types whose linkage has already been
computed and cached in more cases). A testcase for that regression has been
added in r315366.
llvm-svn: 315379
When declaring an entity in the "purview" of a module, it's never a
redeclaration of an entity in the purview of a default module or in no module
("in the global module"). Don't consider those other declarations as possible
redeclaration targets if they're not visible, and reject any cases where we
pick a prior visible declaration that violates this rule.
llvm-svn: 315251
This patch relates to: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33666 This adds support
for template parameters to be passed to the address_space attribute.
The main goal is to add further flexibility to the attribute and allow
for it to be used easily with templates.
The main additions are a new type (DependentAddressSpaceType) alongside
its TypeLoc and its mangling. As well as the logic required to support
dependent address spaces which mainly resides in TreeTransform.h and
SemaType.cpp.
llvm-svn: 314649
When a static_assert fails, dig out a specific condition to diagnose,
using the same logic that we use to find the enable_if condition to
diagnose.
llvm-svn: 313315
Summary:
r306137 made dllimport pointers to member functions non-constant. This
is correct because a load must be executed to resolve any dllimported
data. However, r306137 did not account for the use of dllimport member
function pointers used as template arguments.
This change re-lands r306137 with a template instantiation fix.
This fixes PR33570.
Reviewers: rnk, majnemer
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34714
llvm-svn: 307446
When enable_if disables a particular overload resolution candidate,
rummage through the enable_if condition to find the specific condition
that caused the failure. For example, if we have something like:
template<
typename Iter,
typename = std::enable_if_t<Random_access_iterator<Iter> &&
Comparable<Iterator_value_type<Iter>>>>
void mysort(Iter first, Iter last) {}
and we call "mysort" with "std::list<int>" iterators, we'll get a
diagnostic saying that the "Random_access_iterator<Iter>" requirement
failed. If we call "mysort" with
"std::vector<something_not_comparable>", we'll get a diagnostic saying
that the "Comparable<...>" requirement failed.
llvm-svn: 307196
definition or non-reference class type.
The crash occurs when there is a template parameter list in a class that
is missing the closing angle bracket followed by a definition of a
struct. For example:
class C0 {
public:
template<typename T, typename T1 = T // missing closing angle bracket
struct S0 {};
C0() : m(new S0<int>) {}
S0<int> *m;
};
This happens because the parsed struct is added to the scope of the
enclosing class without having its access specifier set, which results
in an assertion failure in SemaAccess.cpp later.
This commit fixes the crash by adding the parsed struct to the enclosing
file scope and marking structs as invalid if they are defined in
template parameter lists.
rdar://problem/31783961
rdar://problem/19570630
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33606
llvm-svn: 306317
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
When we parse a redefinition of an entity for which we have a hidden existing
declaration, make it visible in the current module instead of mapping the
current source location to its containing module.
llvm-svn: 302842
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 improves our behavior in a few ways:
* We now guarantee that if a member is marked as being a member
specialization, there will actually be a member specialization declaration
somewhere on its redeclaration chain. This fixes a crash in modules builds
where we would try to check that there was a visible declaration of the
member specialization and be surprised to not find any declaration of it at
all.
* We don't set the source location of the in-class declaration of the member
specialization to the out-of-line declaration's location until we have
actually finished merging them. This fixes some very silly looking
diagnostics, where we'd point a "previous declaration is here" note at the
same declaration we're complaining about. Ideally we wouldn't mess with the
prior declaration's location at all, but too much code assumes that the
first declaration of an entity is a reasonable thing to use as an indication
of where it was declared, and that's not really true for a member
specialization unless we fake it like this.
llvm-svn: 302596
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
- also replace direct equality checks against the ConstantEvaluated enumerator with isConstantEvaluted(), in anticipation of adding finer granularity to the various ConstantEvaluated contexts and reinstating certain restrictions on where lambda expressions can occur in C++17.
- update the clang tablegen backend that uses these Enumerators, and add the relevant scope where needed.
llvm-svn: 299316
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
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
A 'decltype(auto)' parameter can match any other kind of non-type template
parameter, so should be usable in place of any other parameter in a template
template argument. The standard is sadly extremely unclear on how this is
supposed to work, but this seems like the obviously-correct result.
It's less clear whether an 'auto' parameter should be able to match
'decltype(auto)', since the former cannot be used if the latter turns out to be
used for a reference type, but if we disallow that then consistency suggests we
should also disallow 'auto' matching 'T' for the same reason, defeating
intended use cases of the feature.
llvm-svn: 295866
template deduction guides for class template argument deduction.
Ensure that we have a local instantiation scope for tracking the instantiated
parameters. Additionally, unusually, we're substituting at depth 1 and leaving
depth 0 alone; make sure that we don't reduce template parameter depth by 2 for
inner parameters in the process. (This is probably also broken for alias
templates in the case where they're expanded within a dependent context, but
this patch doesn't fix that.)
llvm-svn: 295696
instantiation.
In preparation for converting the template stack to a more general context
stack (so we can include context notes for other kinds of context).
llvm-svn: 295686
guide from a constructor.
The purpose of this change is to avoid triggering instantiation of the class
when substituting back into the deduction guide if it uses a typedef member.
We will still instantiate the class if the constructor (explicitly or
implicitly, directly or indirectly) uses the current instantiation in a way
that we can't canonicalize out, but that seems unavoidable.
llvm-svn: 295016
such guides below explicit ones, and ensure that references to the class's
template parameters are not treated as forwarding references.
We make a few tweaks to the wording in the current standard:
1) The constructor parameter list is copied faithfully to the deduction guide,
without losing default arguments or a varargs ellipsis (which the standard
wording loses by omission).
2) If the class template declares no constructors, we add a T() -> T<...> guide
(which will only ever work if T has default arguments for all non-pack
template parameters).
3) If the class template declares nothing that looks like a copy or move
constructor, we add a T(T<...>) -> T<...> guide.
#2 and #3 follow from the "pretend we had a class type with these constructors"
philosophy for deduction guides.
llvm-svn: 295007
Summary:
This adds associated constraints as a property of class templates.
An error is produced if redeclarations are not similarly constrained.
Reviewers: rsmith, faisalv, aaron.ballman
Reviewed By: rsmith
Subscribers: cfe-commits, nwilson
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D25674
llvm-svn: 294697
name. If the dependent name happened to end in a template-id (X<T>::Y<U>), we
would fail to notice that the 'typename' keyword is missing when resolving it
to a type.
It turns out that GCC has a similar bug. If this shows up in much real code, we
can easily downgrade this to an ExtWarn.
llvm-svn: 293815
This change adds a new type node, DeducedTemplateSpecializationType, to
represent a type template name that has been used as a type. This is modeled
around AutoType, and shares a common base class for representing a deduced
placeholder type.
We allow deduced class template types in a few more places than the standard
does: in conditions and for-range-declarators, and in new-type-ids. This is
consistent with GCC and with discussion on the core reflector. This patch
does not yet support deduced class template types being named in typename
specifiers.
llvm-svn: 293207
Under this defect resolution, the injected-class-name of a class or class
template cannot be used except in very limited circumstances (when declaring a
constructor, in a nested-name-specifier, in a base-specifier, or in an
elaborated-type-specifier). This is apparently done to make parsing easier, but
it's a pain for us since we don't know whether a template-id using the
injected-class-name is valid at the point when we annotate it (we don't yet
know whether the template-id will become part of an elaborated-type-specifier).
As a tentative resolution to a perceived language defect, mem-initializer-ids
are added to the list of exceptions here (they generally follow the same rules
as base-specifiers).
When the reference to the injected-class-name uses the 'typename' or 'template'
keywords, we permit it to be used to name a type or template as an extension;
other compilers also accept some cases in this area. There are also a couple of
corner cases with dependent template names that we do not yet diagnose, but
which will also get this treatment.
llvm-svn: 292518
Erich Keane