If we're going to assume references are dereferenceable, we should also
assume they're aligned: otherwise, we can't actually dereference them.
See also D80072.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D80166
expression is a discarded-value expression.
Summary:
We used to get this wrong in three ways:
1) During parsing, an expression-statement followed by the }) ending a
statement expression was always treated as producing the value of the
statement expression. That's wrong for ({ if (1) expr; })
2) During template instantiation, various kinds of statement (most
statements not appearing directly in a compound-statement) were not
treated as discarded-value expressions, resulting in missing volatile
loads (etc).
3) In all contexts, an expression-statement with attributes was not
treated as producing the value of the statement expression, eg
({ [[attr]] expr; }).
Also fix incorrect enforcement of OpenMP rule that directives can "only
be placed in the program at a position where ignoring or deleting the
directive would result in a program with correct syntax". In particular,
a label (be it goto, case, or default) should not affect whether
directives are permitted.
Reviewers: aaron.ballman, rjmccall
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57984
llvm-svn: 354090
Because references must be initialized using some evaluated expression, they
must point to something, and a callee can assume the reference parameter is
dereferenceable. Taking advantage of a new attribute just added to LLVM, mark
them as such.
Because dereferenceability in addrspace(0) implies nonnull in the backend, we
don't need both attributes. However, we need to know the size of the object to
use the dereferenceable attribute, so for incomplete types we still emit only
nonnull.
llvm-svn: 213386
Fix a bug in the emission of complex compound assignment l-values.
Introduce a method to emit an expression whose value isn't relevant.
Make that method evaluate its operand as an l-value if it is one.
Fixes our volatile compliance in C++.
llvm-svn: 120931
but not in C++, so don't emit aggregate loads of volatile references
in null context in C++. Happens to have been caught by an assertion.
We do not get the scalar case right. Volatiles are really broken.
llvm-svn: 112019
Eli Friedman