For example, given:
enum __attribute__((deprecated)) T *p;
-ast-print produced:
enum T *p;
The attribute was lost because the enum forward decl was lost.
Another example is the loss of enum forward decls from C++ namespaces
(in MS compatibility mode).
The trouble was that the EnumDecl node was suppressed, as revealed by
-ast-dump. The suppression of the EnumDecl was intentional in
r116122, but I don't understand why. The suppression isn't needed for
the test suite to behave.
Reviewed by: rsmith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D46846
llvm-svn: 333574
For example, given:
struct T1 {
struct T2 *p0;
};
-ast-print produced:
struct T1 {
struct T2;
struct T2 *p0;
};
Compiling that produces a warning that the first struct T2 declaration
does not declare anything.
Details:
A tag decl group is one or more decls that share a type specifier that
is a tag decl (that is, a struct/union/class/enum decl). Within
functions, the parser builds such a tag decl group as part of a
DeclStmt. However, in decl contexts, such as file scope or a member
list, the parser does not group together the members of a tag decl
group. Previously, detection of tag decl groups during printing was
implemented but only if the tag decl was unnamed. Otherwise, as in
the above example, the members of the group did not print together and
so sometimes introduced warnings.
This patch extends detection of tag decl groups in decl contexts to
any tag decl that is recorded in the AST as not free-standing.
Reviewed by: rsmith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45465
llvm-svn: 332314
For example, given:
void fn() {
enum __attribute__((deprecated)) T *p;
}
-ast-print produced:
void fn() {
enum T __attribute__((deprecated(""))) *p;
}
-ast-print on that produced:
void fn() {
enum T *p __attribute__((deprecated("")));
}
The attribute is on enum T in the first case, but it's on p in the
other cases.
Details:
Within enum declarations, enum attributes were always printed after
the tag and any member list. When no member list was present but the
enum was a type specifier in a variable declaration, the attribute
then applied to the variable not the enum, changing the semantics.
This patch fixes that by always printing attributes between the enum's
keyword and tag, as clang already does for structs, unions, and
classes.
Reviewed By: rsmith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45456
llvm-svn: 330722
Both are related to handling anonymous structures.
* clang didn't handle () around an anonymous struct variable.
* clang also crashed on syntax errors that could lead to other
syntactic constructs following the declaration of an
anonymous struct. While the code is invalid, that's not
a good reason to panic compiler.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D41788
llvm-svn: 322742
clang -cc1 -ast-print put the struct
definition in the wrong place, like this:
struct {} typedef S;
The reason that this happens is that the printing code
first prints the struct definition, and then tells the next
declaration to leave out the type. This behavior
is correct for simple variable declarations, but fails for
typedefs (or extern, mutable, etc).
The patch address this problem by skipping the struct
declaration when we first see it, and then telling the first
subsequent declaration that it needs to print out the full
struct definition.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D17285
llvm-svn: 263836
Tag and specifier printing can be suppressed in Decl::printGroup, but these suppressions leak into the initializers. Thus
int *x = ((void *)0), *y = ((void *)0);
gets printed as
int *x = ((void *)0), *y = ((*)0);
And
struct { struct Z z; } z = {(struct Z){}};
gets printed as
struct { struct Z z; } z = {(){}};
The stops the suppressions from leaking into the initializers.
Patch by Nick Sumner!
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D16438
llvm-svn: 258679
Allows StmtPrinter to print old style field designators in
initializers, fixing an issue where we would print the following
invalid code:
struct A a = {b: = 3, .c = 4};
Patch by Nick Sumner. Thanks!
llvm-svn: 238517
C99 array parameters can have index-type CVR qualifiers, and the TypePrinter
should print them when present (and we were not for constant-sized arrays).
Otherwise, we'd drop the restrict in:
int foo(int a[restrict static 3]) { ... }
llvm-svn: 213445
In C99, an array parameter declarator might have the form: direct-declarator
'[' 'static' type-qual-list[opt] assign-expr ']'
and when the size of the array is a constant, don't omit the static keyword
when printing the type. Also, in the VLA case, put a space after the static
keyword (some assignment expression must follow it).
llvm-svn: 213424
- This is designed to make it obvious that %clang_cc1 is a "test variable"
which is substituted. It is '%clang_cc1' instead of '%clang -cc1' because it
can be useful to redefine what gets run as 'clang -cc1' (for example, to set
a default target).
llvm-svn: 91446
Joel E. Denny