information about types. We often print diagnostics where we say
"foo_t" is bad, but the user doesn't know how foo_t is declared
(because it is a typedef). Fix this by expanding sugar when present
in a diagnostic (and not one of a few special cases, like vectors).
Before:
t.m:5:2: error: invalid operands to binary expression ('typeof(P)' and 'typeof(F)')
MAX(P, F);
^~~~~~~~~
t.m:1:78: note: instantiated from:
#define MAX(A,B) ({ __typeof__(A) __a = (A); __typeof__(B) __b = (B); __a < __b ? __b : __a; })
^
After:
t.m:5:2: error: invalid operands to binary expression ('typeof(P)' (aka 'struct mystruct') and 'typeof(F)' (aka 'float'))
MAX(P, F);
^~~~~~~~~
t.m:1:78: note: instantiated from:
#define MAX(A,B) ({ __typeof__(A) __a = (A); __typeof__(B) __b = (B); __a < __b ? __b : __a; })
^
llvm-svn: 65081
specialization of class templates, e.g.,
template<typename T> class X;
template<> class X<int> { /* blah */ };
Each specialization is a different *Decl node (naturally), and can
have different members. We keep track of forward declarations and
definitions as for other class/struct/union types.
This is only the basic framework: we still have to deal with checking
the template headers properly, improving recovery when there are
failures, handling nested name specifiers, etc.
llvm-svn: 64848
CXXRecordDecl that is used to represent class template
specializations. These are canonical declarations that can refer to
either an actual class template specialization in the code, e.g.,
template<> class vector<bool> { };
or to a template instantiation. However, neither of these features is
actually implemented yet, so really we're just using (and uniqing) the
declarations to make sure that, e.g., A<int> is a different type from
A<float>. Note that we carefully distinguish between what the user
wrote in the source code (e.g., "A<FLOAT>") and the semantic entity it
represents (e.g., "A<float, int>"); the former is in the sugared Type,
the latter is an actual Decl.
llvm-svn: 64716
for non-external names whose address becomes the template
argument. This completes C++ [temp.arg.nontype]p1.
Note that our interpretation of C++ [temp.arg.nontype]p1b3 differs
from EDG's interpretation (we're stricter, and GCC agrees with
us). They're opening a core issue about the matter.
llvm-svn: 64317
template specialization (e.g., std::vector<int> would now be
well-formed, since it relies on a default argument for the Allocator
template parameter).
This is much less interesting than one might expect, since (1) we're
not actually using the default arguments for anything important, such
as naming an actual Decl, and (2) we'll often need to instantiate the
default arguments to check their well-formedness. The real fun will
come later.
llvm-svn: 64310
pointer-to-member-data non-type template parameters. Also, get
consistent about what it means to returned a bool from
CheckTemplateArgument.
llvm-svn: 64305
non-type template parameters that are references to functions or
pointers to member functions. Did a little bit of refactoring so that
these two cases, along with the handling of non-type template
parameters that are pointers to functions, are handled by the same
path.
Also, tweaked FixOverloadedFunctionReference to cope with member
function pointers. This is a necessary step for getting all of the fun
member pointer conversions working outside of template arguments, too.
llvm-svn: 64277
non-type template parameters of pointer-to-object and
pointer-to-function type. The most fun part of this is the use of
overload resolution to pick a function from the set of overloaded
functions that comes in as a template argument.
Also, fixed two minor bugs in this area:
- We were allowing non-type template parameters of type pointer to
void.
- We weren't patching up an expression that refers to an overloaded
function set via "&f" properly.
We're still not performing complete checking of the expression to be
sure that it is referring to an object or function with external
linkage (C++ [temp.arg.nontype]p1).
llvm-svn: 64266
arguments. This commit covers checking and merging default template
arguments from previous declarations, but it does not cover the actual
use of default template arguments when naming class template
specializations.
llvm-svn: 64229
disambiguation contexts, so that we properly parse template arguments
such as
A<int()>
as type-ids rather than as expressions. Since this can be confusing
(especially when the template parameter is a non-type template
parameter), we try to give a friendly error message.
Almost, eliminate a redundant error message (that should have been a
note) and add some ultra-basic checks for non-type template
arguments.
llvm-svn: 64189
to a class template. For example, the template-id 'vector<int>' now
has a nice, sugary type in the type system. What we can do now:
- Parse template-ids like 'vector<int>' (where 'vector' names a
class template) and form proper types for them in the type system.
- Parse icky template-ids like 'A<5>' and 'A<(5 > 0)>' properly,
using (sadly) a bool in the parser to tell it whether '>' should
be treated as an operator or not.
This is a baby-step, with major problems and limitations:
- There are currently two ways that we handle template arguments
(whether they are types or expressions). These will be merged, and,
most likely, TemplateArg will disappear.
- We don't have any notion of the declaration of class template
specializations or of template instantiations, so all template-ids
are fancy names for 'int' :)
llvm-svn: 64153
redeclarations. For example, checks that a class template
redeclaration has the same template parameters as previous
declarations.
Detangled class-template checking from ActOnTag, whose logic was
getting rather convoluted because it tried to handle C, C++, and C++
template semantics in one shot.
Made some inroads toward eliminating extraneous "declaration does not
declare anything" errors by adding an "error" type specifier.
llvm-svn: 63973
Chris Lattner