1) Suppress diagnostics as soon as we form the code-completion
token, so we don't get any error/warning spew from the early
end-of-file.
2) If we consume a code-completion token when we weren't expecting
one, go into a code-completion recovery path that produces the best
results it can based on the context that the parser is in.
llvm-svn: 104585
for the purposes of parsing default arguments. In effect, we would
re-introduce the parameter with a default argument N times (where N is
the number of parameters preceding the parameter with a default
argument). This showed up when a defaulted parameter of a member
function of a local class shadowed a parameter of the enclosing
function. Fixes PR6383.
llvm-svn: 97534
*not* entering the context of the nested-name-specifier. This was
causing us to look into an uninstantiated template that we shouldn't
look into. Fixes PR6376.
llvm-svn: 97524
an *almost* always incorrect case. This only does the lookahead
in the insanely unlikely case, so it shouldn't impact performance.
On this testcase:
struct foo {
}
typedef int x;
Before:
t.c:3:9: error: cannot combine with previous 'struct' declaration specifier
typedef int x;
^
After:
t.c:2:2: error: expected ';' after struct
}
^
;
llvm-svn: 97403
propagating error conditions out of the various annotate-me-a-snowflake
routines. Generally (but not universally) removes redundant diagnostics
as well as, you know, not crashing on bad code. On the other hand,
I have just signed myself up to fix fiddly parser errors for the next
week. Again.
llvm-svn: 97221
now cope with the destruction of types named as dependent templates,
e.g.,
y->template Y<T>::~Y()
Nominally, we implement C++0x [basic.lookup.qual]p6. However, we don't
follow the letter of the standard here because that would fail to
parse
template<typename T, typename U>
X0<T, U>::~X0() { }
properly. The problem is captured in core issue 339, which gives some
(but not enough!) guidance. I expect to revisit this code when the
resolution of 339 is clear, and/or we start capturing better source
information for DeclarationNames.
Fixes PR6152.
llvm-svn: 96367
we would just leak them all over the place, with no clear ownership of
these objects at all. AttributeList objects would get leaked on both
error and non-error paths.
Note: I introduced the usage of llvm::OwningPtr<AttributeList> to
manage these objects, which is particularly useful for methods with
multiple return sites. In at least one method I used them even when
they weren't strictly necessary because it clarified the ownership
semantics and made the code easier to read. Should the excessive
'take()' and 'reset()' calls become a performance issue we can always
re-evaluate.
Note+1: I believe I have not introduced any double-frees, but it would
be nice for someone to review this.
This fixes <rdar://problem/7635046>.
llvm-svn: 95847
forgetting a ';' at the end of a struct. For something like:
class c {
}
void foo() {}
we now produce:
t.cc:3:2: error: expected ';' after class
}
^
;
instead of:
t.cc:4:1: error: cannot combine with previous 'class' declaration specifier
void foo() {}
^
t.cc:2:7: error: 'class c' can not be defined in the result type of a function
class c {
^
GCC produces:
t.cc:4: error: new types may not be defined in a return type
t.cc:4: note: (perhaps a semicolon is missing after the definition of ‘c’)
t.cc:4: error: two or more data types in declaration of ‘foo’
I *think* I got the follow set right, but if I forgot anything, we'll start
getting spurious "expected ';' after class" errors, let me know if you see
any.
llvm-svn: 95042
t.cc:4:3: error: expected ';' at end of declaration list
int y;
^
t.cc:6:1: error: expected ';' at end of declaration list
};
^
After:
t.cc:3:8: error: expected ';' at end of declaration list
int x
^
;
t.cc:5:8: error: expected ';' at end of declaration list
int z
^
;
llvm-svn: 95039
(necessarily simultaneous) changes:
- CXXBaseOrMemberInitializer now contains only a single initializer
rather than a set of initialiation arguments + a constructor. The
single initializer covers all aspects of initialization, including
constructor calls as necessary but also cleanup of temporaries
created by the initializer (which we never handled
before!).
- Rework + simplify code generation for CXXBaseOrMemberInitializers,
since we can now just emit the initializer as an initializer.
- Switched base and member initialization over to the new
initialization code (InitializationSequence), so that it
- Improved diagnostics for the new initialization code when
initializing bases and members, to match the diagnostics produced
by the previous (special-purpose) code.
- Simplify the representation of type-checked constructor initializers in
templates; instead of keeping the fully-type-checked AST, which is
rather hard to undo at template instantiation time, throw away the
type-checked AST and store the raw expressions in the AST. This
simplifies instantiation, but loses a little but of information in
the AST.
- When type-checking implicit base or member initializers within a
dependent context, don't add the generated initializers into the
AST, because they'll look like they were explicit.
- Record in CXXConstructExpr when the constructor call is to
initialize a base class, so that CodeGen does not have to infer it
from context. This ensures that we call the right kind of
constructor.
There are also a few "opportunity" fixes here that were needed to not
regress, for example:
- Diagnose default-initialization of a const-qualified class that
does not have a user-declared default constructor. We had this
diagnostic specifically for bases and members, but missed it for
variables. That's fixed now.
- When defining the implicit constructors, destructor, and
copy-assignment operator, set the CurContext to that constructor
when we're defining the body.
llvm-svn: 94952
the tag kind (union, struct, class, enum) over to the name of the tag,
if there is a name, since most clients want to point at the name.
llvm-svn: 94424
distinguish between nested classes (whose member functions cannot be
parsed until the innermost non-nested class is complete) and local
classes (that are defined within a function but are not necessarily
nested). The upshot of this change, which fixes PR5764, is that the
bodies of member functions of local (non-nested) classes need to be
parsed when the local class is complete (and no later), since they may
refer to function-local static variables, typedefs, enums, etc.
llvm-svn: 93653
name a template, when they occur in a base-specifier. This is one of
the (few) places where we know for sure that an identifier followed by
a '<' must be a template name, so we can diagnose and recover well:
test/SemaTemplate/dependent-base-classes.cpp:9:16: error: missing
'template'
keyword prior to dependent template name 'T::apply'
struct X1 : T::apply<U> { }; // expected-error{{missing 'template' ...
^
template
test/SemaTemplate/dependent-base-classes.cpp:12:13: error: unknown
template name
'vector'
struct X2 : vector<T> { }; // expected-error{{unknown template name
'vector'}}
^
2 diagnostics generated.
llvm-svn: 93257
initializers. This isn't actually in the C++ grammar (in any version),
but that's clearly an oversight: both GCC and EDG support this syntax,
and it's used within Boost code. I'll file a core issue proposing
precisely the change made here. Fixes PR6008.
llvm-svn: 93243
Because of the rules of base-class lookup* and the restrictions on typedefs, it
was actually impossible for this to cause any problems more serious than the
spurious acceptance of
template <class T> class A : B<A> { ... };
instead of
template <class T> class A : B<A<T> > { ... };
but I'm sure we can all agree that that is a very important restriction which
is well worth making another Parser->Sema call for.
(*) n.b. clang++ does not implement these rules correctly; we are not ignoring
non-type names
llvm-svn: 91792
is difficult because they're so terribly, terribly ambiguous.
We implement access declarations in terms of using declarations, which is
quite reasonable. However, we should really persist the access/using
distinction in the AST and use the appropriate name in diagnostics. This
isn't a priority, so I'll just file a PR and hope someone else does it. :)
llvm-svn: 91095
intended. On the first testcase in the bug, we now produce:
cxx-decl.cpp:12:2: error: unexpected ':' in nested name specifier
y:a a2;
^
::
instead of:
t.cc:8:1: error: C++ requires a type specifier for all declarations
x:a a2;
^
t.cc:8:2: error: invalid token after top level declarator
x:a a2;
^
;
t.cc:9:11: error: use of undeclared identifier 'a2'
x::a a3 = a2;
^
llvm-svn: 90713
John McCall