The problem is as follows: C++11 has contexts which are not
potentially-evaluated, and yet in which we are required or encouraged to
perform constant evaluation. In such contexts, we are not permitted to
implicitly define special member functions for literal types, therefore
we cannot evalaute those constant expressions.
Punt on this in one more context for now by skipping checking constexpr
variable initializers if they occur in dependent contexts.
llvm-svn: 166956
Previously, the warning would erroneously fire on this:
for (Test *a in someArray)
use(a.weakProp);
...because it looks like the same property is being accessed over and over.
However, clearly this is not the case. We now ignore loops like this for
local variables, but continue to warn if the base object is a parameter,
global variable, or instance variable, on the assumption that these are
not repeatedly usually assigned to within loops.
Additionally, do-while loops where the condition is 'false' are not really
loops at all; usually they're just used for semicolon-swallowing macros or
using "break" like "goto".
<rdar://problem/12578785&12578849>
llvm-svn: 166942
whether the initializer is value-dependent rather than whether we are in a
dependent context. This allows us to detect some errors sooner, and fixes a
crash-on-invalid if a dependent type leaks out to a non-dependent context in
error recovery.
llvm-svn: 166898
might have been used in constant expressions, rather than suppressing it for
variables which are const. The important thing here is that such variables
can have their values used without actually being marked as 'used'.
llvm-svn: 166896
This code checks the ASM string to see if the output size is able to fit within
the variable specified as the output. For instance, scalar-to-vector conversions
may not really work. It's on by default, but can be turned off with a flag if
you think you know what you're doing.
This is placed under a flag ('-Wasm-operand-widths') and flag group ('-Wasm').
<rdar://problem/12284092>
llvm-svn: 166737
defined without a previous declaration. This is similar to
-Wmissing-prototypes, but for variables instead of functions.
Patch by Ed Schouten.
llvm-svn: 166498
libraries have an incorrect definition of std::common_type (inherited from a
bug in the standard -- see LWG issue 2141), whereby they produce reference
types when they should not.
If we instantiate a typedef named std::common_type<...>::type, which is defined
in a system header as decltype(... ? ... : ...), and the decltype produces a
reference type, convert it to the non-reference type. (This doesn't affect any
LWG2141-conforming implementation of common_type, such as libc++'s, because the
default implementation of common_type<...>::type isn't supposed to produce a
reference type.)
This is horrible. I'm really sorry. :( Better ideas appreciated!
llvm-svn: 166455
found: if an overloaded operator& is present before a template definition,
the expression &T::foo is represented as a CXXOperatorCallExpr, not as a
UnaryOperator, so we didn't notice that it's permitted to reference a non-static
data member of an unrelated class.
While investigating this, I discovered another problem in this area: we are
treating template default arguments as unevaluated contexts during substitution,
resulting in performing incorrect checks for uses of non-static data members in
C++11. That is not fixed by this patch (I'll look into this soon; it's related
to the failure to correctly instantiate constexpr function templates), but was
resulting in this bug not firing in C++11 mode (except with -Wc++98-compat).
Original message:
PR14124: When performing template instantiation of a qualified-id outside of a
class, diagnose if the qualified-id instantiates to a non-static class member.
llvm-svn: 166385
since it also has an implicit exception specification. Downgrade the error to
an extwarn, since at least for operator delete, system headers like to declare
it as 'noexcept' whereas the implicit definition does not have an explicit
exception specification. Move the exception specification for user-declared
'operator delete' functions from the type-as-written into the type, to reflect
reality and to allow us to detect whether there was an implicit exception spec
or not.
llvm-svn: 166372
initialized by a reference constant expression.
Our odr-use modeling still needs work here: we don't yet implement the 'set of
potential results of an expression' DR.
llvm-svn: 166361
Also, unify ObjCShouldCallSuperDealloc and ObjCShouldCallSuperFinalize.
The two have identical behavior and will never be active at the same time.
There's one last simplification now, which is that if we see a call to
[super foo] and we are currently in a method named 'foo', we will
/unconditionally/ clear the ObjCShouldCallSuper flag, rather than check
first to see if we're in a method where calling super is required. There's
no reason to pay the extra lookup price here.
llvm-svn: 166285
source locations in places where it is necessary for diagnostics. By itself,
this causes assertions, so while I'm here, also fix property synthesis
for properties of C++ class type so we use so we properly set up a scope
and mark variable declarations.
<rdar://problem/12514189>.
llvm-svn: 166219
Within the body of the loop the underlying map may be modified via
Sema::AddOverloadCandidate
-> Sema::CompareReferenceRelationship
-> Sema::RequireCompleteType
to avoid the use of invalid iterators the sequence is copied first.
A reliable, though large, test case is available - it will be reduced and
committed shortly.
Patch by Robert Muth. Review by myself, Nico Weber, and Rafael Espindola.
llvm-svn: 166188
GCC and Clang both do not warn on:
struct a { virtual void func(); };
struct b: a { virtual void func(); void func(int); };
struct c: b { void func(int); using b::func; };
but if the "using" was using a::func GCC would still remain silent where Clang
would warn. This change makes Clang consistent with GCC's existing behavior.
llvm-svn: 166154
Quentin Colombet