pointer. Its purpose in life is to be a glorified void*, but which does not
implicitly convert to void* or other OpaquePtr's with a different UID.
Introduce Action::DeclPtrTy which is a typedef for OpaquePtr<0>. Change the
entire parser/sema interface to use DeclPtrTy instead of DeclTy*. This
makes the C++ compiler enforce that these aren't convertible to other opaque
types.
We should also convert ExprTy, StmtTy, TypeTy, AttrTy, BaseTy, etc,
but I don't plan to do that in the short term.
The one outstanding known problem with this patch is that we lose the
bitmangling optimization where ActionResult<DeclPtrTy> doesn't know how to
bitmangle the success bit into the low bit of DeclPtrTy. I will rectify
this with a subsequent patch.
llvm-svn: 67952
know how to recover from an error, we can attach a hint to the
diagnostic that states how to modify the code, which can be one of:
- Insert some new code (a text string) at a particular source
location
- Remove the code within a given range
- Replace the code within a given range with some new code (a text
string)
Right now, we use these hints to annotate diagnostic information. For
example, if one uses the '>>' in a template argument in C++98, as in
this code:
template<int I> class B { };
B<1000 >> 2> *b1;
we'll warn that the behavior will change in C++0x. The fix is to
insert parenthese, so we use code insertion annotations to illustrate
where the parentheses go:
test.cpp:10:10: warning: use of right-shift operator ('>>') in template
argument will require parentheses in C++0x
B<1000 >> 2> *b1;
^
( )
Use of these annotations is partially implemented for HTML
diagnostics, but it's not (yet) producing valid HTML, which may be
related to PR2386, so it has been #if 0'd out.
In this future, we could consider hooking this mechanism up to the
rewriter to actually try to fix these problems during compilation (or,
after a compilation whose only errors have fixes). For now, however, I
suggest that we use these code modification hints whenever we can, so
that we get better diagnostics now and will have better coverage when
we find better ways to use this information.
This also fixes PR3410 by placing the complaint about missing tokens
just after the previous token (rather than at the location of the next
token).
llvm-svn: 65570
vector<vector<double>> Matrix;
In C++98/03, this token always means "right shift". However, if we're in
a context where we know that it can't mean "right shift", provide a
friendly reminder to put a space between the two >'s and then treat it
as two >'s as part of recovery.
In C++0x, this token is always broken into two '>' tokens.
llvm-svn: 65484
std::vector<int>::allocator_type
When we parse a template-id that names a type, it will become either a
template-id annotation (which is a parsed representation of a
template-id that has not yet been through semantic analysis) or a
typename annotation (where semantic analysis has resolved the
template-id to an actual type), depending on the context. We only
produce a type in contexts where we know that we only need type
information, e.g., in a type specifier. Otherwise, we create a
template-id annotation that can later be "upgraded" by transforming it
into a typename annotation when the parser needs a type. This occurs,
for example, when we've parsed "std::vector<int>" above and then see
the '::' after it. However, it means that when writing something like
this:
template<> class Outer::Inner<int> { ... };
We have two tokens to represent Outer::Inner<int>: one token for the
nested name specifier Outer::, and one template-id annotation token
for Inner<int>, which will be passed to semantic analysis to define
the class template specialization.
Most of the churn in the template tests in this patch come from an
improvement in our error recovery from ill-formed template-ids.
llvm-svn: 65467
us whether there was an error in trying to parse a type-name (type-id
in C++). This allows propagation of errors further in the compiler,
suppressing more bogus error messages.
llvm-svn: 64922
specialization of class templates, e.g.,
template<typename T> class X;
template<> class X<int> { /* blah */ };
Each specialization is a different *Decl node (naturally), and can
have different members. We keep track of forward declarations and
definitions as for other class/struct/union types.
This is only the basic framework: we still have to deal with checking
the template headers properly, improving recovery when there are
failures, handling nested name specifiers, etc.
llvm-svn: 64848
arguments. This commit covers checking and merging default template
arguments from previous declarations, but it does not cover the actual
use of default template arguments when naming class template
specializations.
llvm-svn: 64229
disambiguation contexts, so that we properly parse template arguments
such as
A<int()>
as type-ids rather than as expressions. Since this can be confusing
(especially when the template parameter is a non-type template
parameter), we try to give a friendly error message.
Almost, eliminate a redundant error message (that should have been a
note) and add some ultra-basic checks for non-type template
arguments.
llvm-svn: 64189
representation for template arguments. Also simplifies the interface
for ActOnClassTemplateSpecialization and eliminates some annoying
allocations of TemplateArgs.
My attempt at smart pointers for template arguments lists is
relatively lame. We can improve it once we're sure that we have the
right representation for template arguments.
llvm-svn: 64154
to a class template. For example, the template-id 'vector<int>' now
has a nice, sugary type in the type system. What we can do now:
- Parse template-ids like 'vector<int>' (where 'vector' names a
class template) and form proper types for them in the type system.
- Parse icky template-ids like 'A<5>' and 'A<(5 > 0)>' properly,
using (sadly) a bool in the parser to tell it whether '>' should
be treated as an operator or not.
This is a baby-step, with major problems and limitations:
- There are currently two ways that we handle template arguments
(whether they are types or expressions). These will be merged, and,
most likely, TemplateArg will disappear.
- We don't have any notion of the declaration of class template
specializations or of template instantiations, so all template-ids
are fancy names for 'int' :)
llvm-svn: 64153
redeclarations. For example, checks that a class template
redeclaration has the same template parameters as previous
declarations.
Detangled class-template checking from ActOnTag, whose logic was
getting rather convoluted because it tried to handle C, C++, and C++
template semantics in one shot.
Made some inroads toward eliminating extraneous "declaration does not
declare anything" errors by adding an "error" type specifier.
llvm-svn: 63973
.def file for each library. This means that adding a diagnostic
to sema doesn't require all the other libraries to be rebuilt.
Patch by Anders Johnsen!
llvm-svn: 63111
become useful or correct until we (1) parse template arguments
correctly, (2) have some way to turn template-ids into types,
declarators, etc., and (3) have a real representation of templates.
llvm-svn: 61208
parameters, with some semantic analysis:
- Template parameters are introduced into template parameter scope
- Complain about template parameter shadowing (except in Microsoft mode)
Note that we leak template parameter declarations like crazy, a
problem we'll remedy once we actually create proper declarations for
templates.
Next up: dependent types and value-dependent/type-dependent
expressions.
llvm-svn: 60597
- Template parameter scope to hold the template parameters
- Template parameter context for parsing declarators
- Actions for template type parameters and non-type template
parameters
llvm-svn: 60387
Chris Lattner