Fatal errors disable all further diagnostics. Continuing to permit
template instantiation does nothing but make it take longer for clang to
finish with the TU.
Instead, halt all further instantiation.
Fixed in PR22396.
llvm-svn: 227556
we're instantiating, if there's a ParmVarDecl within a FunctionDecl context
that is not a parameter of that function. Add some asserts to catch this kind
of issue more generally, and fix another bug exposed by those asserts where we
were missing a local instantiation scope around substitution of
explicitly-specified template arguments.
llvm-svn: 225490
Specifically, when we have this situation:
struct A {
template <typename T> struct B {
int m1 = sizeof(A);
};
B<int> m2;
};
We can't parse m1's initializer eagerly because we need A to be
complete. Therefore we wait until the end of A's class scope to parse
it. However, we can trigger instantiation of B before the end of A,
which will attempt to instantiate the field decls eagerly, and it would
build a bad field decl instantiation that said it had an initializer but
actually lacked one.
Fixed by deferring instantiation of default member initializers until
they are needed during constructor analysis. This addresses a long
standing FIXME in the code.
Fixes PR19195.
Reviewed By: rsmith
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D5690
llvm-svn: 222192
than the type of a function declaration). We previously didn't instantiate
these at all! This also covers the pathological case where the only mention of
a parameter pack is within the exception specification; this gives us a second
way (other than alias templates) to reach the horrible state where a type
contains an unexpanded pack, but its canonical type does not.
This is a re-commit of r219977:
r219977 was reverted in r220038 because it hit a wrong-code bug in GCC 4.7.2.
(That's gcc.gnu.org/PR56135, and affects any implicit lambda-capture of
'this' within a template.)
r219977 was a re-commit of r217995, r218011, and r218053:
r217995 was reverted in r218058 because it hit a rejects-valid bug in MSVC.
(Incorrect overload resolution in the presence of using-declarations.)
It was re-committed in r219977 with a workaround for the MSVC rejects-valid.
r218011 was a workaround for an MSVC parser bug. (Incorrect desugaring of
unbraced range-based for loop).
llvm-svn: 221750
It broke some builders. I guess it'd be reproducible with --vg.
Failing Tests (3):
Clang :: CXX/except/except.spec/p1.cpp
Clang :: SemaTemplate/instantiate-exception-spec-cxx11.cpp
Clang :: SemaTemplate/instantiate-exception-spec.cpp
llvm-svn: 220038
reverted in r218058 because they triggered a rejects-valid bug in MSVC.
Original commit message from r217995:
Instantiate exception specifications when instantiating function types (other
than the type of a function declaration). We previously didn't instantiate
these at all! This also covers the pathological case where the only mention of
a parameter pack is within the exception specification; this gives us a second
way (other than alias templates) to reach the horrible state where a type
contains an unexpanded pack, but its canonical type does not.
llvm-svn: 219977
Previously loop hints such as #pragma loop vectorize_width(#) required a constant. This patch allows a constant expression to be used as well. Such as a non-type template parameter or an expression (2 * c + 1).
Reviewed by Richard Smith
llvm-svn: 219589
r218053: Use exceptions() instead of getNumExceptions()/getExceptionType() to avoid
r218011: Work around MSVC parser bug by putting redundant braces around the body of
r217997: Skip parens when detecting whether we're instantiating a function declaration.
r217995: Instantiate exception specifications when instantiating function types (other
The Windows build was broken for 16 hours and no one had any good ideas of how to
fix it. Reverting for now to make the builders green. See the cfe-commits thread [1] for
more info.
This was the build error (from [2]):
C:\bb-win7\ninja-clang-i686-msc17-R\llvm-project\clang\lib\Sema\SemaTemplateInstantiate.cpp(1590) : error C2668: '`anonymous-namespace'::TemplateInstantiator::TransformFunctionProtoType' : ambiguous call to overloaded function
C:\bb-win7\ninja-clang-i686-msc17-R\llvm-project\clang\lib\Sema\SemaTemplateInstantiate.cpp(1313): could be 'clang::QualType `anonymous-namespace'::TemplateInstantiator::TransformFunctionProtoType<clang::Sema::SubstFunctionDeclType::<lambda_756edcbe7bd5c7584849a6e3a1491735>>(clang::TypeLocBuilder &,clang::FunctionProtoTypeLoc,clang::CXXRecordDecl *,unsigned int,Fn)'
with
[
Fn=clang::Sema::SubstFunctionDeclType::<lambda_756edcbe7bd5c7584849a6e3a1491735>
]
c:\bb-win7\ninja-clang-i686-msc17-r\llvm-project\clang\lib\sema\TreeTransform.h(4532): or 'clang::QualType clang::TreeTransform<Derived>::TransformFunctionProtoType<clang::Sema::SubstFunctionDeclType::<lambda_756edcbe7bd5c7584849a6e3a1491735>>(clang::TypeLocBuilder &,clang::FunctionProtoTypeLoc,clang::CXXRecordDecl *,unsigned int,Fn)'
with
[
Derived=`anonymous-namespace'::TemplateInstantiator,
Fn=clang::Sema::SubstFunctionDeclType::<lambda_756edcbe7bd5c7584849a6e3a1491735>
]
while trying to match the argument list '(clang::TypeLocBuilder, clang::FunctionProtoTypeLoc, clang::CXXRecordDecl *, unsigned int, clang::Sema::SubstFunctionDeclType::<lambda_756edcbe7bd5c7584849a6e3a1491735>)'
1. http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/cfe-commits/Week-of-Mon-20140915/115011.html
2. http://bb.pgr.jp/builders/ninja-clang-i686-msc17-R/builds/10515/steps/build_clang_tools_1/logs/stdio
llvm-svn: 218058
than the type of a function declaration). We previously didn't instantiate
these at all! This also covers the pathological case where the only mention of
a parameter pack is within the exception specification; this gives us a second
way (other than alias templates) to reach the horrible state where a type
contains an unexpanded pack, but its canonical type does not.
llvm-svn: 217995
These note diags have the same message and can be unified further but for now
let's just bring them together.
Incidental change: Display a source range in the final attr diagnostic.
llvm-svn: 209728
after we've already instantiated a definition for the function, pass it to the
ASTConsumer again so that it knows the specialization kind has changed and can
update the function's linkage.
This only matters if we instantiate the definition of the function before we
reach the end of the TU; this can happen in at least three different ways:
C++11 constexpr functions, C++14 deduced return types, and functions
instantiated within modules.
llvm-svn: 207152
No functionality change.
When determining the pattern for instantiating a generic lambda call operator specialization - we must not go drilling down for the 'prototype' (i.e. as written) pattern - rather we must use our partially transformed pattern (whose DeclRefExprs are wired correctly to any enclosing lambda's decls that should be mapped correctly in a local instantiation scope) that is the templated pattern of the specialization's primary template (even though the primary template might be instantiated from a 'prototype' member-template). Previously, the drilling down was haltted by marking the instantiated-from primary template as a member-specialization (incorrectly).
This prompted Richard to remark (http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D1784?id=4687#inline-10272)
"It's a bit nasty to (essentially) set this bit incorrectly. Can you put the check into getTemplateInstantiationPattern instead?"
In my reckless youth, I chose to ignore that comment. With the passage of time, I have come to learn the value of bowing to the will of the angry Gods ;)
llvm-svn: 205543
This patch factors the bodies of 9 constructors out into a single initialization
method.
Reviewed By: rsmith
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D3059
llvm-svn: 203846
if the type's declaration was previously instantiated in an unimported module.
(For an imported type definition, this already worked, because the source
location is set to the location of the definition, but for locally-instantiated
type definitions, it did not.)
llvm-svn: 203425
handling C++11 default initializers. Without this, other parts of Sema (such as
lambda capture) would think the default initializer is part of the surrounding
function scope.
llvm-svn: 199453
For an init capture, process the initialization expression
right away. For lambda init-captures such as the following:
const int x = 10;
auto L = [i = x+1](int a) {
return [j = x+2,
&k = x](char b) { };
};
keep in mind that each lambda init-capture has to have:
- its initialization expression executed in the context
of the enclosing/parent decl-context.
- but the variable itself has to be 'injected' into the
decl-context of its lambda's call-operator (which has
not yet been created).
Each init-expression is a full-expression that has to get
Sema-analyzed (for capturing etc.) before its lambda's
call-operator's decl-context, scope & scopeinfo are pushed on their
respective stacks. Thus if any variable is odr-used in the init-capture
it will correctly get captured in the enclosing lambda, if one exists.
The init-variables above are created later once the lambdascope and
call-operators decl-context is pushed onto its respective stack.
Since the lambda init-capture's initializer expression occurs in the
context of the enclosing function or lambda, therefore we can not wait
till a lambda scope has been pushed on before deciding whether the
variable needs to be captured. We also need to process all
lvalue-to-rvalue conversions and discarded-value conversions,
so that we can avoid capturing certain constant variables.
For e.g.,
void test() {
const int x = 10;
auto L = [&z = x](char a) { <-- don't capture by the current lambda
return [y = x](int i) { <-- don't capture by enclosing lambda
return y;
}
};
If x was not const, the second use would require 'L' to capture, and
that would be an error.
Make sure TranformLambdaExpr is also aware of this.
Patch approved by Richard (Thanks!!)
http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2092
llvm-svn: 196454
We would fail to instantiate them when the surrounding function was
instantiated. Instantiate the class and add it's members to the list of
pending instantiations, they should be resolved when we are finished
with the function's body.
This fixes PR9685.
llvm-svn: 195827
A previous attempt http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/cfe-commits/Week-of-Mon-20130930/090049.html resulted in PR 17476, and was reverted,
The original TransformLambdaExpr (pre generic-lambdas) transformed the TypeSourceInfo of the Call operator in its own instantiation scope via TransformType. This resulted in the parameters of the call operator being mapped to their transformed counterparts in an instantiation scope that would get popped off.
Then a call to TransformFunctionParameters would add the parameters and their transformed mappings (but newly created ones!) to the current instantiation scope. This would result in a disconnect between the new call operator's TSI parameters and those used to construct the call operator declaration. This was ok in the non-generic lambda world - but would cause issues with nested transformations (when non-generic and generics were interleaved) in the generic lambda world - that I somewhat kludged around initially - but this resulted in PR17476.
The new approach seems cleaner. We only do the transformation of the TypeSourceInfo - but we make sure to do it in the current instantiation scope so we don't lose the untransformed to transformed mappings of the ParmVarDecls when they get created.
Another attempt caused a test to fail (http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/cfe-commits/Week-of-Mon-20131021/091533.html) and also had to be reverted - my apologies - in my haste, i did not run all the tests - argh!
Now all the tests seem to pass - but a Fixme has been added - since I suspect Richard will find the fix a little inelegant ;) I shall try and work on a more elegant fix once I have had a chance to discuss with Richard or Doug at a later date.
Hopefully the third time;s a charm *fingers crossed*
This does not yet include capturing.
Please see test file for examples.
This patch was LGTM'd by Doug:
http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D1784
llvm-svn: 193230
They were causing CodeGenCXX/mangle-exprs.cpp to fail.
Revert "Remove the circular reference to LambdaExpr in CXXRecordDecl."
Revert "Again: Teach TreeTransform and family how to transform generic lambdas nested within templates and themselves."
llvm-svn: 193226
lambdas nested within templates and themselves.
A previous attempt http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/cfe-commits/Week-of-Mon-20130930/090049.html resulted in PR 17476, and was reverted,
The original TransformLambdaExpr (pre generic-lambdas) transformed the TypeSourceInfo of the Call operator in its own instantiation scope via TransformType. This resulted in the parameters of the call operator being mapped to their transformed counterparts in an instantiation scope that would get popped off.
Then a call to TransformFunctionParameters would add the parameters and their transformed mappings (but newly created ones!) to the current instantiation scope. This would result in a disconnect between the new call operator's TSI parameters and those used to construct the call operator declaration. This was ok in the non-generic lambda world - but would cause issues with nested transformations (when non-generic and generics were interleaved) in the generic lambda world - that I somewhat kludged around initially - but this resulted in PR17476.
The new approach seems cleaner. We only do the transformation of the TypeSourceInfo - but we make sure to do it in the current instantiation scope so we don't lose the untransformed to transformed mappings of the ParmVarDecls when they get created.
This does not yet include capturing.
Please see test file for examples.
This patch was LGTM'd by Doug:
http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D1784
llvm-svn: 193216
The bool conversion operator on InstantiatingTemplate never added value and
only served to obfuscate the template instantiation routines.
This replaces the conversion and its callers with an explicit isInvalid()
function to make it clear what's going on at a glance.
llvm-svn: 192177
This does not yet include capturing (that is next).
Please see test file for examples.
This patch was LGTM'd by Doug:
http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D1784http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/cfe-commits/Week-of-Mon-20130930/090048.html
When I first committed this patch - a bunch of buildbots were unable to compile the code that VS2010 seemed to compile. Seems like there was a dependency on Sema/Template.h which VS did not seem to need, but I have now added for the other compilers. It still compiles on Visual Studio 2010 - lets hope the buildbots remain quiet (please!)
llvm-svn: 191879
This does not yet include capturing (that is next).
Please see test file for examples.
This patch was LGTM'd by Doug:
http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D1784
llvm-svn: 191875
template and defined outside it, don't instantiate it twice when instantiating
the surrounding class template specialization. That would cause us to reject
the code because we think two partial specializations instantiated to produce
the same signature.
llvm-svn: 191418
Summary:
- lambdas, blocks or captured statements in templates were not
handled which causes codegen crashes.
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D1628
llvm-svn: 190784
This change unifies the logic for template instantiation of methods and
functions declared with typedefs.
It ensures that SubstFunctionType() always fills the Params out param
with non-null ParmVarDecls or returns null.
Reviewers: rsmith
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D1135
llvm-svn: 187528
sufficient to only consider names visible at the point of instantiation,
because that may not include names that were visible when the template was
defined. More generally, if the instantiation backtrace goes through a module
M, then every declaration visible within M should be available to the
instantiation. Any of those declarations might be part of the interface that M
intended to export to a template that it instantiates.
The fix here has two parts:
1) If we find a non-visible declaration during name lookup during template
instantiation, check whether the declaration was visible from the defining
module of all entities on the active template instantiation stack. The defining
module is not the owning module in all cases: we look at the module in which a
template was defined, not the module in which it was first instantiated.
2) Perform pending instantiations at the end of a module, not at the end of the
translation unit. This is general goodness, since it significantly cuts down
the amount of redundant work that is performed in every TU importing a module,
and also implicitly adds the module containing the point of instantiation to
the set of modules checked for declarations in a lookup within a template
instantiation.
There's a known issue here with template instantiations performed while
building a module, if additional imports are added later on. I'll fix that
in a subsequent commit.
llvm-svn: 187167
Reid Kleckner