error: 'error' diagnostics seen but not expected:
File clang\test\CXX\conv\conv.fctptr\p1.cpp Line 16: assigning to 'void (S::*)() __attribute__((thiscall)) noexcept' from incompatible type 'void (S::*)() __attribute__((thiscall))': different exception specifications
llvm-svn: 284352
CheckSingleAssignmentConstraints. These no longer produce ExprError() when they
have not emitted an error, and reliably inform the caller when they *have*
emitted an error.
This fixes some serious issues where we would fail to emit any diagnostic for
invalid code and then attempt to emit code for an invalid AST, and conversely
some issues where we would emit two diagnostics for the same problem.
llvm-svn: 283508
assume that ::operator new provides no more alignment than is necessary for any
primitive type, except when we're on a GNU OS, where glibc's malloc guarantees
to provide 64-bit alignment on 32-bit systems and 128-bit alignment on 64-bit
systems. This can be controlled by the command-line -fnew-alignment flag.
llvm-svn: 282974
Summary:
C++1z 6.4.1/p2:
If the if statement is of the form if constexpr, the value of the
condition shall be a contextually converted constant expression of type
bool [...]
C++1z 5.20/p4:
[...] A contextually converted constant expression of type bool is an
expression, contextually converted to bool (Clause4), where the
converted expression is a constant expression and the conversion
sequence contains only the conversions above. [...]
Contextually converting result of an expression `e` to a Boolean value
requires `bool t(e)` to be well-formed.
An explicit conversion function is only considered as a user-defined
conversion for direct-initialization, which is essentially what
//contextually converted to bool// requires.
Also, fixes PR28470.
Reviewers: rsmith
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24158
llvm-svn: 280838
copy-initialization. We previously got this wrong in a couple of ways:
- we only looked for copy / move constructors and constructor templates for
this copy, and thus would fail to copy in cases where doing so should use
some other constructor (but see core issue 670),
- we mishandled the special case for disabling user-defined conversions that
blocks infinite recursion through repeated application of a copy constructor
(applying it in slightly too many cases) -- though as far as I can tell,
this does not ever actually affect the result of overload resolution, and
- we misapplied the special-case rules for constructors taking a parameter
whose type is a (reference to) the same class type by incorrectly assuming
that only happens for copy/move constructors (it also happens for
constructors instantiated from templates and those inherited from base
classes).
These changes should only affect strange corner cases (for instance, where the
copy constructor exists but has a non-const-qualified parameter type), so for
the most part it only causes us to produce more 'candidate' notes, but see the
test changes for other cases whose behavior is affected.
llvm-svn: 280776
explicit specialization to a warning for C++98 mode (this is a defect report
resolution, so per our informal policy it should apply in C++98), and turn
the warning on by default for C++11 and later. In all cases where it fires, the
right thing to do is to remove the pointless explicit instantiation.
llvm-svn: 280308
indirect virtual bases. We don't need to be able to invoke such an assignment
operator from the derived class, and we shouldn't delete the derived assignment
op if we can't do so.
llvm-svn: 280288
anonymous union member of a class, we need overload resolution for the move
constructor of the class itself too; we can't rely on Sema to do the right
thing for us for anonymous union types.
llvm-svn: 278763
they're redeclarations. This is necessary in order for name lookup to correctly
find the most recent declaration of the name (which affects default template
argument lookup and cross-module merging, among other things).
llvm-svn: 275612
The problem is that the parameter pack in a function type type alias is not
reexpanded after being transformed. Also remove an incorrect comment in a
similar function. Fixes PR26017.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D21030
llvm-svn: 274566
constructor would be; this is effectively required by P0136R1. This has the
effect of exposing the validity of the base class initialization steps to
SFINAE checks.
llvm-svn: 274088
Replace inheriting constructors implementation with new approach, voted into
C++ last year as a DR against C++11.
Instead of synthesizing a set of derived class constructors for each inherited
base class constructor, we make the constructors of the base class visible to
constructor lookup in the derived class, using the normal rules for
using-declarations.
For constructors, UsingShadowDecl now has a ConstructorUsingShadowDecl derived
class that tracks the requisite additional information. We create shadow
constructors (not found by name lookup) in the derived class to model the
actual initialization, and have a new expression node,
CXXInheritedCtorInitExpr, to model the initialization of a base class from such
a constructor. (This initialization is special because it performs real perfect
forwarding of arguments.)
In cases where argument forwarding is not possible (for inalloca calls,
variadic calls, and calls with callee parameter cleanup), the shadow inheriting
constructor is not emitted and instead we directly emit the initialization code
into the caller of the inherited constructor.
Note that this new model is not perfectly compatible with the old model in some
corner cases. In particular:
* if B inherits a private constructor from A, and C uses that constructor to
construct a B, then we previously required that A befriends B and B
befriends C, but the new rules require A to befriend C directly, and
* if a derived class has its own constructors (and so its implicit default
constructor is suppressed), it may still inherit a default constructor from
a base class
llvm-svn: 274049
Crash reported in PR28023 is caused by the fact that non-type template
parameters are found by tag name lookup. In the code provided in that PR:
template<int V> struct A {
struct B {
template <int> friend struct V;
};
};
the template parameter V is found when lookup for redeclarations of 'struct V'
is made. Latter on the error about shadowing of 'V' is emitted but the semantic
context of 'struct V' is already determined wrong: 'struct A' instead of
translation unit.
The fix moves the check for shadowing toward the beginning of the method and
thus prevents from wrong context calculations.
This change fixes PR28023.
llvm-svn: 272366
a base class via a using-declaration. If a class has a using-declaration
declaring either a constructor or an assignment operator, eagerly declare its
special members in case they need to displace a shadow declaration from a
using-declaration.
llvm-svn: 269398
* an unscoped enumerator whose enumeration is a class member is itself a class
member, so can only be the subject of a class-scope using-declaration.
* a scoped enumerator cannot be the subject of a class-scope using-declaration.
llvm-svn: 268594
if we are parsing a template specialization.
This commit makes changes to clear the TemplateParamScope bit and set
the TemplateParamParent field of the current scope to null if a template
specialization is being parsed.
Before this commit, Sema::ActOnStartOfLambdaDefinition would check
whether the parent template scope had any decls to determine whether
or not a template specialization was being parsed. This wasn't correct
since it couldn't distinguish between a real template specialization and
a template defintion with an unnamed template parameter (only template
parameters with names are added to the scope's decl list). To fix the
bug, this commit changes the code to check the pointer to the parent
template scope rather than the decl list.
rdar://problem/23440346
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D19175
llvm-svn: 267975
Remove the floating point to bool conversion warnings. Some of these
conversions will be caught by -Wliteral-conversion and -Wfloat-conversion
llvm-svn: 267234
Restructure the implict floating point to integer conversions so that
interesting sub-groups are under different flags. Breakdown of warnings:
No warning:
Exact conversions from floating point to integer:
int x = 10.0;
int x = 1e10;
-Wliteral-conversion - Floating point literal to integer with rounding:
int x = 5.5;
int x = -3.4;
-Wfloat-conversion - All conversions not covered by the above two:
int x = GetFloat();
int x = 5.5 + 3.5;
-Wfloat-zero-conversion - The expression converted has a non-zero floating
point value that gets converted to a zero integer value, excluded the cases
falling under -Wliteral-conversion. Subset of -Wfloat-conversion.
int x = 1.0 / 2.0;
-Wfloat-overflow-conversion - The floating point value is outside the range
of the integer type, exluding cases from -Wliteral conversion. Subset of
-Wfloat-conversion.
char x = 500;
char x = -1000;
-Wfloat-bool-conversion - Any conversion of a floating point type to bool.
Subset of -Wfloat-conversion.
if (GetFloat()) {}
bool x = 5.0;
-Wfloat-bool-constant-conversion - Conversion of a compile time evaluatable
floating point value to bool. Subset of -Wfloat-bool-conversion.
bool x = 1.0;
bool x = 4.0 / 20.0;
Also add EvaluateAsFloat to Sema, which is similar to EvaluateAsInt, but for
floating point values.
llvm-svn: 267054
With this patch compiler emits warning if it tries to make implicit instantiation
of a template but cannot find the template definition. The warning can be suppressed
by explicit instantiation declaration or by command line options
-Wundefined-var-template and -Wundefined-func-template. The implementation follows
the discussion of http://reviews.llvm.org/D12326.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D16396
llvm-svn: 266719
Summary: A program shall not declare an explicit instantiation (14.8.2), an explicit specialization (14.8.3), or a partial specialization of a concept definition.
Reviewers: rsmith, hubert.reinterpretcast, faisalv, aaron.ballman
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D18221
llvm-svn: 265868
Implement lambda capture of *this by copy.
For e.g.:
struct A {
int d = 10;
auto foo() { return [*this] (auto a) mutable { d+=a; return d; }; }
};
auto L = A{}.foo(); // A{}'s lifetime is gone.
// Below is still ok, because *this was captured by value.
assert(L(10) == 20);
assert(L(100) == 120);
If the capture was implicit, or [this] (i.e. *this was captured by reference), this code would be otherwise undefined.
Implementation Strategy:
- amend the parser to accept *this in the lambda introducer
- add a new king of capture LCK_StarThis
- teach Sema::CheckCXXThisCapture to handle by copy captures of the
enclosing object (i.e. *this)
- when CheckCXXThisCapture does capture by copy, the corresponding
initializer expression for the closure's data member
direct-initializes it thus making a copy of '*this'.
- in codegen, when assigning to CXXThisValue, if *this was captured by
copy, make sure it points to the corresponding field member, and
not, unlike when captured by reference, what the field member points
to.
- mark feature as implemented in svn
Much gratitude to Richard Smith for his carefully illuminating reviews!
llvm-svn: 263921
NAKAMURA Takumi