This reapplies r334224 and adds explicit triples to some tests to fix
them on Windows (where otherwise they would have run with the default
windows-msvc triple, which I'm changing the behavior for).
Original commit message:
The body of a `@finally` needs to be executed on both exceptional and
non-exceptional paths. On landingpad platforms, this is straightforward:
the `@finally` body is emitted as a normal (non-exceptional) cleanup,
and then a catch-all is emitted which branches to that cleanup (the
cleanup has code to conditionally re-throw based on a flag which is set
by the catch-all).
Unfortunately, we can't use the same approach for MSVC exceptions, where
the catch-all will be emitted as a catchpad. We can't just branch to the
cleanup from within the catchpad, since we can only exit it via a
catchret, at which point the exception is destroyed and we can't
rethrow. We could potentially emit the finally body inside the catchpad
and have the normal cleanup path somehow branch into it, but that would
require some new IR construct that could branch into a catchpad.
Instead, after discussing it with Reid Kleckner, we decided that
frontend outlining was the best approach, similar to how SEH `__finally`
works today. We decided to use CapturedStmt (which was also suggested by
Reid) rather than CaptureFinder (which is what `__finally` uses) since
the latter doesn't handle a lot of cases we care about, e.g. self
accesses, property accesses, block captures, etc. Extending
CaptureFinder to handle those additional cases proved unwieldy, whereas
CapturedStmt already took care of all of those. In theory `__finally`
could also be moved over to CapturedStmt, which would remove some
existing limitations (e.g. the inability to capture this), although
CaptureFinder would still be needed for SEH filters.
The one case supported by `@finally` but not CapturedStmt (or
CaptureFinder for that matter) is arbitrary control flow out of the
`@finally`, e.g. having a return statement inside a `@finally`. We can
add that support as a follow-up, but in practice we've found it to be
used very rarely anyway.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D47564
llvm-svn: 334251
Second attempt. Fix line endings and warning.
As an addition to CXTranslationUnit_SkipFunctionBodies, provide the
new option CXTranslationUnit_LimitSkipFunctionBodiesToPreamble,
which constraints the skipping of functions bodies to the preamble
only. Function bodies in the main file are not affected if this
option is set.
Skipping function bodies only in the preamble is what clangd already
does and the introduced flag implements it for libclang clients.
Patch by Nikolai Kosjar.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45815
llvm-svn: 332587
As an addition to CXTranslationUnit_SkipFunctionBodies, provide the
new option CXTranslationUnit_LimitSkipFunctionBodiesToPreamble,
which constraints the skipping of functions bodies to the preamble
only. Function bodies in the main file are not affected if this
option is set.
Skipping function bodies only in the preamble is what clangd already
does and the introduced flag implements it for libclang clients.
Patch by Nikolai Kosjar.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45815
llvm-svn: 332578
Restrict the following keywords in the OpenCL C++ language mode,
according to Sections 2.2 & 2.9 of the OpenCL C++ 1.0 Specification.
- dynamic_cast
- typeid
- register (already restricted in OpenCL C, update the diagnostic)
- thread_local
- exceptions (try/catch/throw)
- access qualifiers read_only, write_only, read_write
Support the `__global`, `__local`, `__constant`, `__private`, and
`__generic` keywords in OpenCL C++. Leave the unprefixed address
space qualifiers such as global available, i.e., do not mark them as
reserved keywords in OpenCL C++. libclcxx provides explicit address
space pointer classes such as `global_ptr` and `global<T>` that are
implemented using the `__`-prefixed qualifiers.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D46022
llvm-svn: 331874
When a '>>' token is split into two '>' tokens (in C++11 onwards), or (as an
extension) when we do the same for other tokens starting with a '>', we can't
just use a location pointing to the first '>' as the location of the split
token, because that would result in our miscomputing the length and spelling
for the token. As a consequence, for example, a refactoring replacing 'A<X>'
with something else would sometimes replace one character too many, and
similarly diagnostics highlighting a template-id source range would highlight
one character too many.
Fix this by creating an expansion range covering the first character of the
'>>' token, whose spelling is '>'. For this to work, we generalize the
expansion range of a macro FileID to be either a token range (the common case)
or a character range (used in this new case).
llvm-svn: 331155
template arguments.
This fixes some cases where we'd incorrectly accept "A::template B" when B is a
kind of template that requires template arguments (in particular, a variable
template or a concept).
llvm-svn: 331013
This patch is a tweak of changyu's patch: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40381. It differs in that the recognition of the 'concept' token is moved into the machinery that recognizes declaration-specifiers - this allows us to leverage the attribute handling machinery more seamlessly.
See the test file to get a sense of the basic parsing that this patch supports.
There is much more work to be done before concepts are usable...
Thanks Changyu!
llvm-svn: 330794
In `ParseDeclarationSpecifiers` for the code
class A typename A;
we were able to annotate token `kw_typename` because it refers to
existing type. But later during processing token `annot_typename` we
failed to `SetTypeSpecType` and exited switch statement leaving
annotation token unconsumed. The code after the switch statement failed
because it didn't expect a special token.
The fix is not to assume that switch statement consumes all special
tokens and consume any token, not just non-special.
rdar://problem/37099386
Reviewers: rsmith, arphaman
Reviewed By: rsmith
Subscribers: jkorous-apple, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D44449
llvm-svn: 329735
Found via codespell -q 3 -I ../clang-whitelist.txt
Where whitelist consists of:
archtype
cas
classs
checkk
compres
definit
frome
iff
inteval
ith
lod
methode
nd
optin
ot
pres
statics
te
thru
Patch by luzpaz! (This is a subset of D44188 that applies cleanly with a few
files that have dubious fixes reverted.)
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D44188
llvm-svn: 329399
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
Summary:
The codegen for conditions assumes that a normal variable declaration is used in a condition, but this is not the case when a structured binding is used.
This fixes [PR36747](http://llvm.org/pr36747).
Thanks Nicolas Lesser for contributing the patch.
Reviewers: lichray, rsmith
Reviewed By: lichray
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D44534
llvm-svn: 327780
Summary:
Let's suppose the `-Weverything` is passed.
Given code like
```
void F() {}
;
```
If the code is compiled with `-std=c++03`, it would diagnose that extra sema:
```
<source>:2:1: warning: extra ';' outside of a function is a C++11 extension [-Wc++11-extra-semi]
;
^~
```
If the code is compiled with `-std=c++11`, it also would diagnose that extra sema:
```
<source>:2:1: warning: extra ';' outside of a function is incompatible with C++98 [-Wc++98-compat-pedantic]
;
^~
```
But, let's suppose the C++11 or higher is used, and the used does not care
about `-Wc++98-compat-pedantic`, so he disables that diagnostic.
And that silences the complaint about extra `;` too.
And there is no way to re-enable that particular diagnostic, passing `-Wextra-semi` does nothing...
Now, there is also a related `no newline at end of file` diagnostic, which is also emitted by `-Wc++98-compat-pedantic`
```
<source>:2:2: warning: C++98 requires newline at end of file [-Wc++98-compat-pedantic]
;
^
```
But unlike the previous case, if `-Wno-c++98-compat-pedantic` is passed, that diagnostic stays displayed:
```
<source>:2:2: warning: no newline at end of file [-Wnewline-eof]
;
^
```
This diff refactors the code so `-Wc++98-compat-extra-semi` can be re-enabled, after the `-Wc++98-compat-pedantic` was disabled.
This seems ugly, but there does not seem to be any saner way.
Testing: `$ ninja check-clang`
Reviewers: rsmith, rtrieu, aaron.ballman
Reviewed By: aaron.ballman
Subscribers: jordan_rose, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D43162
llvm-svn: 327558
We need to treat __unaligned like the other 'cvr' qualifiers when it
appears at the end of a function prototype. We weren't doing that in
some tentative parsing.
Fixes PR36638.
llvm-svn: 326962
Specifically, we would not properly parse these types within template arguments
(for non-type template parameters), and in tentative parses. Fixing both of
these essentially requires that we parse deduced template specialization types
as types in all contexts, even in template argument lists -- in particular,
tentative parsing may look ahead and annotate a deduced template specialization
type before we figure out that we're actually supposed to treat the tokens as a
template-name. We deal with this by simply permitting deduced template
specialization types when parsing template arguments, and converting them to
template template arguments.
llvm-svn: 326299
This is not quite NFC: we don't perform the usual arithmetic conversions unless
we have an operand of arithmetic or enumeration type any more. This matches the
standard rule, but actually has no effect other than to marginally improve our
diagnostics for the non-arithmetic, non-enumeration cases (by not performing
integral promotions on one operand if the other is a pointer).
llvm-svn: 322024
Suggest moving the following erroneous attrib list (based on location)
[[]] struct X;
to
struct [[]] X;
Additionally, added a fixme for the current implementation that diagnoses misplaced attributes to consider using the newly introduced diagnostic (that I think is more user-friendly).
llvm-svn: 321449
This is a slightly odd construct (it's more common to see "A (::B)()") but can
happen in friend declarations, and the parens are not redundant as they prevent
the :: binding to the left.
llvm-svn: 321318
This allows you to dump C++ code that spells bool instead of _Bool, leaves off the elaborated type specifiers when printing struct or class names, and other C-isms.
Fixes the -Wreorder issue and fixes the ast-dump-color.cpp test.
llvm-svn: 321310
This allows you to dump C++ code that spells bool instead of _Bool, leaves off the elaborated type specifiers when printing struct or class names, and other C-isms.
llvm-svn: 321223
Adding the new enumerator forced a bunch more changes into this patch than I
would have liked. The -Wtautological-compare warning was extended to properly
check the new comparison operator, clang-format needed updating because it uses
precedence levels as weights for determining where to break lines (and several
operators increased their precedence levels with this change), thread-safety
analysis needed changes to build its own IL properly for the new operator.
All "real" semantic checking for this operator has been deferred to a future
patch. For now, we use the relational comparison rules and arbitrarily give
the builtin form of the operator a return type of 'void'.
llvm-svn: 320707
Summary:
This feature was discussed but not yet proposed. It allows a structured binding to appear as a //condition//
if (auto [ok, val] = f(...))
So the user can save an extra //condition// if the statement can test the value to-be-decomposed instead. Formally, it makes the value of the underlying object of the structured binding declaration also the value of a //condition// that is an initialized declaration.
Considering its logicality which is entirely evident from its trivial implementation, I think it might be acceptable to land it as an extension for now before I write the paper.
Reviewers: rsmith, faisalv, aaron.ballman
Reviewed By: rsmith
Subscribers: aaron.ballman, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D39284
llvm-svn: 320011
Summary:
This is so we can implement concepts per P0734R0. Relevant failing test
cases are disabled.
Reviewers: hubert.reinterpretcast, rsmith, saar.raz, nwilson
Reviewed By: saar.raz
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40380
Patch by Changyu Li!
llvm-svn: 319992
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
The right shift operator was not seen as a valid operator in a fold expression, which is PR32563.
Patch by Nicolas Lesser ("Blitz Rakete")!
llvm-svn: 317032
GCC ignore qualifiers on array types. Since we seem to have this
function primarily for GCC compatibility, we should try to match that
behavior.
This also adds a few more test-cases __builtin_types_compatible_p,
which were inspired by GCC's documentation on the builtin.
llvm-svn: 315951
function-style cast.
This fires for cases such as
T(x);
... where 'x' was previously declared and T is a type. This construct declares
a variable named 'x' rather than the (probably expected) interpretation of a
function-style cast of 'x' to T.
llvm-svn: 314570
This is similar to what's done on arm and x86_64, where
these calling conventions are silently ignored, as in
SVN r245076.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36105
llvm-svn: 310303
'#pragma pack (pop)' and suspicious uses of '#pragma pack' in included files
The second recommit (r309106) was reverted because the "non-default #pragma
pack value chages the alignment of struct or union members in the included file"
warning proved to be too aggressive for external projects like Chromium
(https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=749197). This recommit
makes the problematic warning a non-default one, and gives it the
-Wpragma-pack-suspicious-include warning option.
The first recommit (r308441) caused a "non-default #pragma pack value might
change the alignment of struct or union members in the included file" warning
in LLVM itself. This recommit tweaks the added warning to avoid warnings for
#includes that don't have any records that are affected by the non-default
alignment. This tweak avoids the previously emitted warning in LLVM.
Original message:
This commit adds a new -Wpragma-pack warning. It warns in the following cases:
- When a translation unit is missing terminating #pragma pack (pop) directives.
- When entering an included file if the current alignment value as determined
by '#pragma pack' directives is different from the default alignment value.
- When leaving an included file that changed the state of the current alignment
value.
rdar://10184173
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35484
llvm-svn: 309386
The warning fires on non-suspicious code in Chromium. Reverting until a
solution is figured out.
> Recommit r308327 2nd time: Add a warning for missing
> '#pragma pack (pop)' and suspicious uses of '#pragma pack' in included files
>
> The first recommit (r308441) caused a "non-default #pragma pack value might
> change the alignment of struct or union members in the included file" warning
> in LLVM itself. This recommit tweaks the added warning to avoid warnings for
> #includes that don't have any records that are affected by the non-default
> alignment. This tweak avoids the previously emitted warning in LLVM.
>
> Original message:
>
> This commit adds a new -Wpragma-pack warning. It warns in the following cases:
>
> - When a translation unit is missing terminating #pragma pack (pop) directives.
> - When entering an included file if the current alignment value as determined
> by '#pragma pack' directives is different from the default alignment value.
> - When leaving an included file that changed the state of the current alignment
> value.
>
> rdar://10184173
>
> Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35484
llvm-svn: 309186
'#pragma pack (pop)' and suspicious uses of '#pragma pack' in included files
The first recommit (r308441) caused a "non-default #pragma pack value might
change the alignment of struct or union members in the included file" warning
in LLVM itself. This recommit tweaks the added warning to avoid warnings for
#includes that don't have any records that are affected by the non-default
alignment. This tweak avoids the previously emitted warning in LLVM.
Original message:
This commit adds a new -Wpragma-pack warning. It warns in the following cases:
- When a translation unit is missing terminating #pragma pack (pop) directives.
- When entering an included file if the current alignment value as determined
by '#pragma pack' directives is different from the default alignment value.
- When leaving an included file that changed the state of the current alignment
value.
rdar://10184173
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35484
llvm-svn: 309106
This seems to have broken the sanitizer-x86_64-linux buildbot. Reverting until
it's fixed, especially since this landed just before the 5.0 branch.
> This commit adds a new -Wpragma-pack warning. It warns in the following cases:
>
> - When a translation unit is missing terminating #pragma pack (pop) directives.
> - When entering an included file if the current alignment value as determined
> by '#pragma pack' directives is different from the default alignment value.
> - When leaving an included file that changed the state of the current alignment
> value.
>
> rdar://10184173
>
> Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35484
llvm-svn: 308455
and suspicious uses of '#pragma pack' in included files
This commit adds a new -Wpragma-pack warning. It warns in the following cases:
- When a translation unit is missing terminating #pragma pack (pop) directives.
- When entering an included file if the current alignment value as determined
by '#pragma pack' directives is different from the default alignment value.
- When leaving an included file that changed the state of the current alignment
value.
rdar://10184173
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35484
llvm-svn: 308441
of '#pragma pack' in included files
This commit adds a new -Wpragma-pack warning. It warns in the following cases:
- When a translation unit is missing terminating #pragma pack (pop) directives.
- When entering an included file if the current alignment value as determined
by '#pragma pack' directives is different from the default alignment value.
- When leaving an included file that changed the state of the current alignment
value.
rdar://10184173
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35484
llvm-svn: 308327
Shoaib Meenai