This already works, but somewhat by accident (due to the order of
emission in clang, the location is set to the loop header (during the
emission of the iteratior increment) before the loop backedge is
emitted), so let's just add a test for symmetry and future-proofing.
llvm-svn: 216298
Similar to r215768 (which fixed the same case for while loops). To quote
r215768's commit message:
"A little test case simplification - this could be simplified further,
though there are certainly interesting connections to the if/else
construct so I'm hesitant to remove that entirely though it does appear
somewhat unrelated.
(similar fix to r215766, related to PR19864)"
llvm-svn: 216297
for loops introduce two scopes - one for the outer loop variable and its
initialization, and another for the body of the loop, including any
variable declared inside the loop condition.
llvm-svn: 216288
The Itanium ABI will give out the same mangling number for two different
lambdas if their call operators have different types. The MS ABI cannot
do the same because it does not mangle the return type into it's
lambdas.
This fixes PR20719.
llvm-svn: 216259
Normally we mark all members of exported classes referenced to get them emitted.
However, MSVC doesn't do this for class templates that are implicitly specialized or
just have an explicit instantiation declaration. For such specializations, the members
are emitted when referenced.
The exception is the case when the dllexport attribute is propagated from a base class
to a base class template that doesn't have an explicit attribute: in this case all
methods of the base class template do get instantiated.
llvm-svn: 216145
MSVC "14" CTP 3 has fixed it's mangling for alias templates when used as
template-template arguments; update clang to be compatible with this
mangling.
llvm-svn: 215972
This fixes PR20671, see the bug for details. In short, ActOnTranslationUnit()
calls DefineUsedVTables() and only then PerformPendingInstantiations(). But
PerformPendingInstantiations() is what does delayed template parsing, so
vtables only references from late-parsed templates weren't marked used.
As a fix, move the SavePendingInstantiationsAndVTableUsesRAII in
PerformPendingInstantiations() up above the delayed template parsing code.
That way, vtables referenced from templates end up in the RAII object, and the
call to DefineUsedVTables() in PerformPendingInstantiations() marks them used.
llvm-svn: 215786
A little test case simplification - this could be simplified further,
though there are certainly interesting connections to the if/else
construct so I'm hesitant to remove that entirely though it does appear
somewhat unrelated.
(similar fix to r215766, related to PR19864)
llvm-svn: 215768
This avoids debuggers stepping to strange places (like the last
statement in the loop body, or the first statement in the if).
This is not the whole answer, though - similar bugs no doubt exist in
other loops (patches to follow) and attributing exception handling code
to the correct line is also tricky (based on the previous fix to
PR19864, exception handling is still erroneously attributed to the 'if'
line).
llvm-svn: 215766
C++11 allows this qualifiers to exist on function types when used in
template arguments. Previously, I believed it wasn't possible because
MSVC rejected declarations like: S<int () const &> s;
However, it turns out MSVC properly allows them in using declarations;
updated clang to be compatible with this mangling.
llvm-svn: 215464
Previously, assigning an inheritance model to a derived class would
trigger further assiginments to the various bases of the class. This
was done to fix a bug where we couldn't handle an implicit
base-to-derived conversion for pointers-to-members when the conversion
was ambiguous at an earlier point.
However, this is not how the MS scheme works. Instead, assign
inheritance models to *just* the class which owns to declaration we
ended up referencing.
N.B. This result is surprising in many ways. It means that it is
possible for a base to have a "larger" inheritance model than it's
derived classes. It also means that bases in the conversion path do not
get assigned a model.
struct A { void f(); void f(int); };
struct B : A {};
struct C : B {};
void f() { void (C::*x)() = &A::f; }
We can only begin to assign an inheritance model *after* we've seen the
address-of but *before* we've done the implicit conversion the more
derived pointer-to-member type. After that point, both 'A' and 'C' will
have an inheritance model but 'B' will not. Surprising, right?
llvm-svn: 215174
There are no vtable offset offsets in the MS ABI, but vbtable offsets
are analogous. There are no consumers of this information yet, but at
least we don't crash now.
llvm-svn: 215149
This reverts commit r215137.
This doesn't work at all, an offset-offset is probably different than an
offset. I'm scared that this passed our normal test suite.
llvm-svn: 215141
It is possible for lambdas to get the same mangling number because they
may exist in different mangling contexts. To handle this correctly,
mangle the context into the name as well.
llvm-svn: 214947
The MS mangling scheme apparently has separate manglings for type and
non-type parameter packs when they are empty. Match template arguments
with parameters during mangling; check the parameter to see if it was
destined to hold type-ish things or nontype-ish things.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D4792
llvm-svn: 214932
to instruct the code generator to not enforce a higher alignment
than the given number (of bytes) when accessing memory via an opaque
pointer or reference. Patch reviewed by John McCall (with post-commit
review pending). rdar://16254558
llvm-svn: 214911
This matches MSVC's logic, which seems to be that when the friend
declaration is qualified, it cannot be a declaration of a new symbol
and so the dll linkage doesn't change.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D4764
llvm-svn: 214774
or a class derived from T. We already supported this when initializing
_Atomic(T) from T for most (and maybe all) other reasonable values of T.
llvm-svn: 214390
A templated using declaration may be used as a template-template
argument.
Unfortunately, the VS "14" chooses '?' as the sole marker for the
argument. This is problematic because it presupposes the possibility of
using more than one template-aliases as arguments to the same template.
This fixes PR20047.
llvm-svn: 214290
This broke the following gdb tests:
gdb.base__annota1.exp
gdb.base__consecutive.exp
gdb.python__py-symtab.exp
gdb.reverse__consecutive-precsave.exp
gdb.reverse__consecutive-reverse.exp
I will look into this.
This reverts commit 214162.
llvm-svn: 214163
This allows us to give more precise diagnostics.
Diego kindly tested the impact on debug info size: "The increase on average
debug sizes is 0.1%. The total file size increase is ~0%."
llvm-svn: 214162
This moves some memptr specific code into the generic thunk emission
codepath.
Fixes PR20053.
Reviewers: majnemer
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D4613
llvm-svn: 214004
Previously we were building up the inalloca struct in the usual pattern
of return type followed by arguments. However, on Windows, 'this'
always precedes the 'sret' parameter, so we need to insert it into the
struct first as a special case.
llvm-svn: 213990
The target method of the thunk will perform the cleanup. This can't be
tested in 32-bit x86 yet because passing something by value would create
an inalloca, and we refuse to generate broken code for that.
llvm-svn: 213976
it through the normal TreeTransform logic for Exprs (which will strip off
implicit parts of the initialization and never re-create them).
llvm-svn: 213913
While -fno-rtti-data would correctly avoid referencing the RTTI complete
object locator in the VFTable itself, it would emit them anyway.
llvm-svn: 213841
Summary:
This pragma is very rare. We could *hypothetically* lower some uses of
it down to @llvm.global_ctors, but given that GlobalOpt isn't able to
optimize prioritized global ctors today, there's really no point.
If we wanted to do this in the future, I would check if the section used
in the pragma started with ".CRT$XC" and had up to two characters after
it. Those two characters could form the 16-bit initialization priority
that we support in @llvm.global_ctors. We would have to teach LLVM to
lower prioritized global ctors on COFF as well.
This should let us compile some silly uses of this pragma in WebKit /
Blink.
Reviewers: rsmith, majnemer
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D4549
llvm-svn: 213593
Hans Wennborg