user interface and documentation, and update __cplusplus for C++20.
WG21 considers the C++20 standard to be finished (even though it still
has some more steps to pass through in the ISO process).
The old flag names are accepted for compatibility, as usual, and we
still have lots of references to C++2a in comments and identifiers;
those can be cleaned up separately.
has a constexpr destructor.
For constexpr variables, reject if the variable does not have constant
destruction. In all cases, do not emit runtime calls to the destructor
for variables with constant destruction.
llvm-svn: 373159
appropriate during constant evaluation.
Note that the evaluator is sometimes invoked on incomplete expressions.
In such cases, if an object is constructed but we never reach the point
where it would be destroyed (and it has non-trivial destruction), we
treat the expression as having an unmodeled side-effect.
llvm-svn: 372538
Summary:
Microsoft seems to do this regardless of the language mode, so we must
also do it in order to be ABI compatible.
Fixes PR36125
Reviewers: thakis
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D47956
llvm-svn: 371642
This is mostly the same as the
[[clang::require_constant_initialization]] attribute, but has a couple
of additional syntactic and semantic restrictions.
In passing, I added a warning for the attribute form being added after
we have already seen the initialization of the variable (but before we
see the definition); that case previously slipped between the cracks and
the attribute was silently ignored.
llvm-svn: 370972
check the formal rules rather than seeing if the normal checks produce a
diagnostic.
This fixes the handling of C++2a extensions in lambdas in C++17 mode,
as well as some corner cases in earlier language modes where we issue
diagnostics for things other than not satisfying the formal constexpr
requirements.
llvm-svn: 367254
As passed in the Cologne meeting and treated by Core as a DR,
[[nodiscard]] was applied to constructors so that they can be diagnosed
in cases where the user forgets a variable name for a type.
The intent is to enable the library to start using this on the
constructors of scope_guard/lock_guard.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D64914
llvm-svn: 367027
evaluation.
This reinstates r360559, reverted in r360580, with a fix to avoid
crashing if evaluation-for-overflow mode encounters a virtual call on an
object of a class with a virtual base class, and to generally not try to
resolve virtual function calls to objects whose (notional) vptrs are not
readable. (The standard rules are unclear here, but this seems like a
reasonable approach.)
llvm-svn: 360635
When a function returns a type and that type was declared [[nodiscard]], we diagnose any unused results from that call as though the function were marked nodiscard. The same behavior should apply to calls through a function pointer.
This addresses PR31526.
llvm-svn: 350317
Implement support for try-catch blocks in constexpr functions, as
proposed in http://wg21.link/P1002 and voted in San Diego for c++20.
The idea is that we can still never throw inside constexpr, so the catch
block is never entered. A try-catch block like this:
try { f(); } catch (...) { }
is then morally equivalent to just
{ f(); }
Same idea should apply for function/constructor try blocks.
rdar://problem/45530773
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55097
llvm-svn: 348789
in some member function calls.
Specifically, when calling a conversion function, we would fail to
create the AST node representing materialization of the class object.
llvm-svn: 338135
Summary:
As the title says, this makes following code compile:
```
template<typename> struct Foo {};
Foo() -> Foo<void>;
Foo f; // ok
```
Thanks Nicolas Lesser for coining the fix.
Reviewers: rsmith, lichray
Reviewed By: rsmith, lichray
Subscribers: lichray, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38216
llvm-svn: 328409
The tests that failed on a windows host have been fixed.
Original message:
Start setting dso_local for COFF.
With this there are still some GVs where we don't set dso_local
because setGVProperties is never called. I intend to fix that in
followup commits. This is just the bare minimum to teach
shouldAssumeDSOLocal what it should do for COFF.
llvm-svn: 325940
Summary:
According to the C++11 standard [dcl.type.simple]p4:
The type denoted by decltype(e) is defined as follows:
- if e is an unparenthesized id-expression or an unparenthesized
class member access (5.2.5), decltype(e) is the type of the entity
named by e.
Currently Clang handles the 'member access' case incorrectly for
static data members (decltype returns T& instead of T). This patch
fixes the issue.
Reviewers: faisalv, rsmith, rogfer01
Reviewed By: rogfer01
Subscribers: rogfer01, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D42969
llvm-svn: 325117
This also clarifies some terminology used by the diagnostic (methods -> Objective-C methods, fields -> non-static data members, etc).
Many of the tests needed to be updated in multiple places for the diagnostic wording tweaks. The first instance of the diagnostic for that attribute is fully specified and subsequent instances cut off the complete list (to make it easier if additional subjects are added in the future for the attribute).
llvm-svn: 319002
Clang makes check for function redefinition after it merged the new
declaration with the existing one. As a result, it produces poor
diagnostics in the case of a friend function defined inline, as in
the code:
```
void func() {}
class C { friend void func() {} };
```
Error message in this case states that `inline declaration of 'func'
follows non-inline definition`, which is misleading, as `func` does
not have explicit `inline` specifier.
With this changes compiler reports function redefinition if the new
function is a friend defined inline and it does not have explicit
`inline` specifier.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26065
llvm-svn: 304964
Correct class-template deprecation behavior
Based on the comment in the test, and my reading of the standard, a deprecated warning should be issued in the following case:
template<typename T> [[deprecated]] class Foo{}; Foo<int> f;
This was not the case, because the ClassTemplateSpecializationDecl creation did not also copy the deprecated attribute.
Note: I did NOT audit the complete set of attributes to see WHICH ones should be copied, so instead I simply copy ONLY the deprecated attribute.
Previous DiffRev: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27486, was reverted.
This patch fixes the issues brought up here by the reverter: https://reviews.llvm.org/rL298410
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31245
llvm-svn: 298634
Based on the comment in the test, and my reading of the standard, a deprecated warning should be issued in the following case:
template<typename T> [[deprecated]] class Foo{}; Foo<int> f;
This was not the case, because the ClassTemplateSpecializationDecl creation did not also copy the deprecated attribute.
Note: I did NOT audit the complete set of attributes to see WHICH ones should be copied, so instead I simply copy ONLY the deprecated attribute.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27486
llvm-svn: 298410
It's actually meaningful and useful to allow such variables to have no
initializer, but we are strictly following the standard here until the C++
committee reaches consensus on allowing this.
llvm-svn: 294785
This change adds a new type node, DeducedTemplateSpecializationType, to
represent a type template name that has been used as a type. This is modeled
around AutoType, and shares a common base class for representing a deduced
placeholder type.
We allow deduced class template types in a few more places than the standard
does: in conditions and for-range-declarators, and in new-type-ids. This is
consistent with GCC and with discussion on the core reflector. This patch
does not yet support deduced class template types being named in typename
specifiers.
llvm-svn: 293207
Diasllow a declaration using the 'auto' type specifier from using two different
meanings of it at once, or from declaring multiple functions with deduced
return types or introducing multiple trailing return types.
The standard does not technically disallow the multiple trailing return types
case if all the declarators declare variables (such as function pointers with
trailing return types), but we disallow that too, following the clear intent.
llvm-svn: 291880
The rule we use is that a construction of a class type T from an argument of
type U cannot use an inherited constructor if U is the same as T or is derived
from T (or if the initialization would first convert it to such a type). This
(approximately) matches the rule in use by GCC, and matches the current proposed
DR resolution.
llvm-svn: 291403
* a dependent non-type using-declaration within a function template can be
valid, as it can refer to an enumerator, so don't reject it in the template
definition
* we can partially substitute into a dependent using-declaration if it appears
within a (local class in a) generic lambda within a function template, which
means an UnresolvedUsing*Decl doesn't necessarily instantiate to a UsingDecl.
llvm-svn: 290071
Other compilers accept invalid code here that we reject, and we need a
better error message to try to convince users that the code is really
incorrect. Consider:
class Foo {
typedef MyIterHelper<Foo> iterator;
friend class iterator;
};
Previously our wording was "elaborated type refers to a typedef".
"elaborated type" isn't widely known terminology, so the new diagnostic
says "typedef 'iterator' cannot be referenced with class specifier".
Reviewers: rsmith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D25216
llvm-svn: 289259
Richard Smith