so that we actually accumulate all the delayed diagnostics. Do
this so that we can restore those diagnostics to good standing
if it turns out that we were wrong to suppress, e.g. if the
tag specifier is actually an elaborated type specifier and not
a declaration.
llvm-svn: 156291
cases in switch statements. Also add a [[clang::fallthrough]] attribute, which
can be used to suppress the warning in the case of intentional fallthrough.
Patch by Alexander Kornienko!
The handling of C++11 attribute namespaces in this patch is temporary, and will
be replaced with a cleaner mechanism in a subsequent patch.
llvm-svn: 156086
refactorings in that revision, and some of the subsequent bugfixes, which
seem to be relevant even without delayed exception specification parsing.
llvm-svn: 156031
victim. Don't crash if we have a delay-parsed exception specification for a
class member which is invalid in a way which precludes building a FunctionDecl.
llvm-svn: 155788
t.c:3:9: error: expected expression
if (x)) {
^
.. which isn't even true - a statement or expression is fine. After:
t.c:3:9: error: extraneous ')' after condition, expected a statement
if (x)) {
^
This is the second part of PR12595
llvm-svn: 155762
us to improve this diagnostic (telling us to insert another ")":
t.c:2:19: error: expected ';' at end of declaration
int x = 4+(5-12));
^
;
to:
t.c:2:19: error: extraneous ')' before ';'
int x = 4+(5-12));
^
...telling us to remove the ")". This is PR12595. There are more uses of ExpectAndConsumeSemi
that could be switched over, but I don't hit them on a daily basis :)
llvm-svn: 155759
followed by an identifier as declaration specificer (except for ObjC).
This allows e.g. an out-of-line C++ member function definitions to be
recognized as functions and not as variable declarations if the type
name for the first parameter is not recognized as a type--say, when there
is a function name shadowing an enum type name and the parameter is
missing the "enum" keyword needed to distinguish the two.
Note that returning TPResult::Error() instead of TPResult::True()
appears to have the same end result, while TPResult::Ambiguous()
results in a crash.
llvm-svn: 155163
exception specifications on member functions until after the closing
'}' for the containing class. This allows, for example, a member
function to throw an instance of its own class. Fixes PR12564 and a
fairly embarassing oversight in our C++98/03 support.
llvm-svn: 154844
in the declaration of a non-static member function after the
(optional) cv-qualifier-seq, which in practice means in the exception
specification and late-specified return type.
The new scheme here used to manage 'this' outside of a member function
scope is more general than the Scope-based mechanism previously used
for non-static data member initializers and late-parsesd attributes,
because it can also handle the cv-qualifiers on the member
function. Note, however, that a separate pass is required for static
member functions to determine whether 'this' was used, because we
might not know that we have a static function until after declaration
matching.
Finally, this introduces name mangling for 'this' and for the implicit
'this', which is intended to match GCC's mangling. Independent
verification for the new mangling test case would be appreciated.
Fixes PR10036 and PR12450.
llvm-svn: 154799
Instead, make it the allocation function's responsibility to add them
to a list and clear it when a top-level decl is finished.
This plugs leakage of TemplateAnnotationIds. DelayedCleanupPool is
ugly and unused, remove it.
llvm-svn: 154743
attached. Since we do not support any attributes which appertain to a statement
(yet), testing of this is necessarily quite minimal.
Patch by Alexander Kornienko!
llvm-svn: 154723
* Alternative tokens (such as 'compl') are treated as identifiers in
attribute names.
* An attribute-list can start with a comma.
* An ellipsis may not be used with either of our currently-supported
C++11 attributes.
llvm-svn: 154381
* In C++11, '[[' is ill-formed unless it starts an attribute-specifier. Reject
array sizes and array indexes which begin with a lambda-expression. Recover by
parsing the lambda as a lambda.
* In Objective-C++11, either '[' could be the start of a message-send.
Fully disambiguate this case: it turns out that the grammars of message-sends,
lambdas and attributes do not actually overlap. Accept any occurrence of '[['
where either '[' starts a message send, but reject a lambda in an array index
just like in C++11 mode.
Implement a couple of changes to the attribute wording which occurred after our
attributes implementation landed:
* In a function-declaration, the attributes go after the exception specification,
not after the right paren.
* A reference type can have attributes applied.
* An 'identifier' in an attribute can also be a keyword. Support for alternative
tokens (iso646 keywords) in attributes to follow.
And some bug fixes:
* Parse attributes after declarator-ids, even if they are not simple identifiers.
* Do not accept attributes after a parenthesized declarator.
* Accept attributes after an array size in a new-type-id.
* Partially disamiguate 'delete' followed by a lambda. More work is required
here for the case where the lambda-introducer is '[]'.
llvm-svn: 154369
Specifically, using a an integer outside [0, 1] as a boolean constant seems to
be an easy mistake to make with things like "x == a || b" where the author
intended "x == a || x == b".
The bug caused by calling SkipUntil with three token kinds was also identified
by a VC diagnostic & reported by Francois Pichet as review feedback for my
commit r154163. I've included test cases to verify the error recovery that was
broken/poorly implemented due to this bug.
The other fix (lib/Sema/SemaExpr.cpp) seems like that code was never actually
reached in any of Clang's tests & is related to Objective C features I'm not
familiar with, so I've not been able to construct a test case for it. Perhaps
someone else can.
llvm-svn: 154325
In a few cases clang emitted a rather content-free diagnostic: 'parse error'.
This change replaces two actual cases (template parameter parsing and K&R
parameter declaration parsing) with more specific diagnostics and removes a
third dead case of this in the BalancedDelimiterTracker (the ctor already
checked the invariant necessary to ensure that the diag::parse_error was never
actually used).
llvm-svn: 154224
The warning this inhibits, -Wobjc-root-class, is opt-in for now. However, all clang unit tests that would trigger
the warning have been updated to use -Wno-objc-root-class. <rdar://problem/7446698>
llvm-svn: 154187
Based on Doug's feedback to r153887 this omits the FixIt if the following token
isn't syntactically valid for the context. (not a comma, '...', identifier,
'>', or '>>')
There's a bunch of work to handle the '>>' case, but it makes for a much more
pleasant diagnostic in this case.
llvm-svn: 154163
a type specifier and can be combined with unsigned. This allows libstdc++4.7 to
be used with clang in c++98 mode.
Several other changes are still required for libstdc++4.7 to work with clang in
c++11 mode.
llvm-svn: 153999
The diagnostic message correctly informs the user that they have omitted the
'class' keyword, but neither suggests this insertion as a fixit, nor attempts
to recover as if they had provided the keyword.
This fixes the recovery, adds the fixit, and adds a separate diagnostic and
corresponding replacement fixit for cases where the user wrote 'struct' or
'typename' instead of 'class' (suggested by Richard Smith as a possible common
mistake).
I'm not sure the diagnostic message for either the original or new cases feel
very Clang-esque, so I'm open to suggestions there. The fixit hints make it
fairly easy to see what's required, though.
llvm-svn: 153887
constructor, but X is not a known typename, check whether the tokens could
possibly match the syntax of a declarator before concluding that it isn't
a constructor. If it's definitely ill-formed, assume it is a constructor.
Empirical evidence suggests that this pattern is much more often a
constructor with a typoed (or not-yet-declared) type name than any of the
other possibilities, so the extra cost of the check is not expected to be
problematic.
llvm-svn: 153488
Fariborz Jahanian