new expression, distinguish between the case of a constant and non-constant
initializer. In the former case, if the bound is erroneous (too many
initializer elements, bound is negative, or allocated size overflows), reject,
and take the bound into account when determining whether we need to
default-construct any elements. In the remanining cases, move the logic to
check for default-constructibility of trailing elements into the initialization
code rather than inventing a bogus array bound, to cope with cases where the
number of initialized elements is not the same as the number of initializer
list elements (this can happen due to string literal initialization or brace
elision).
This also fixes rejects-valid and crash-on-valid errors when initializing a
new'd array of character type from a braced string literal.
llvm-svn: 283406
just the extremely specific case of a trailing array element that couldn't be
initialized because the default constructor for the element type is deleted.
Also reword the diagnostic to better match our other context diagnostics and to
prepare for the implementation of core issue 1070.
llvm-svn: 210083
new, is well-formed with defined semantics of throwing (a type which can be
caught by a handler for) std::bad_array_new_length, unlike in C++98 where it is
somewhere nebulous between undefined behavior and ill-formed.
If the array size is an integral constant expression and satisfies one of these
criteria, we would previous the array new expression, but now in C++11 mode, we
merely issue a warning (the code is still rejected in C++98 mode, naturally).
We don't yet implement new C++11 semantics correctly (see PR11644), but we do
implement the overflow checking, and (for the default operator new) convert such
expressions to an exception, so accepting such code now does not seem especially
unsafe.
llvm-svn: 149767
Richard Smith