(as GCC does), except when we've performed overload resolution and
found an unavailable function: in this case, we actually error.
Merge the checking of unavailable functions with the checking for
deprecated functions. This unifies a bit of code, and makes sure that
we're checking for unavailable functions in the right places. Also,
this check can cause an error. We may, eventually, want an option to
make "unavailable" warnings into errors.
Implement much of the logic needed for C++0x deleted functions, which
are effectively the same as "unavailable" functions (but always cause
an error when referenced). However, we don't have the syntax to
specify deleted functions yet :)
llvm-svn: 64955
any named parameters, e.g., this is accepted in C:
void f(...) __attribute__((overloadable));
although this would be rejected:
void f(...);
To do this, moved the checking of the "ellipsis without any named
arguments" condition from the parser into Sema (where it belongs anyway).
llvm-svn: 64902
to do in this area, since there are other places that reference
FunctionDecls.
Don't allow "overloadable" functions (in C) to be declared without a
prototype.
llvm-svn: 64897
given name in a given scope is marked as "overloadable", every
function declaration and definition with that same name and in that
same scope needs to have the "overloadable" attribute. Essentially,
the "overloadable" attribute is not part of attribute merging, so it
must be specified even for redeclarations. This keeps users from
trying to be too sneaky for their own good:
double sin(double) __attribute__((overloadable)); // too sneaky
#include <math.h>
Previously, this would have made "sin" overloadable, and therefore
given it a mangled name. Now, we get an error inside math.h when we
see a (re)declaration of "sin" that doesn't have the "overloadable"
attribute.
llvm-svn: 64414
Douglas Gregor