template arguments.
This fixes some cases where we'd incorrectly accept "A::template B" when B is a
kind of template that requires template arguments (in particular, a variable
template or a concept).
llvm-svn: 331013
Found via codespell -q 3 -I ../clang-whitelist.txt
Where whitelist consists of:
archtype
cas
classs
checkk
compres
definit
frome
iff
inteval
ith
lod
methode
nd
optin
ot
pres
statics
te
thru
Patch by luzpaz! (This is a subset of D44188 that applies cleanly with a few
files that have dubious fixes reverted.)
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D44188
llvm-svn: 329399
layout" rules.
The new rules say that a standard-layout struct has its first non-static
data member and all base classes at offset 0, and consider a class to
not be standard-layout if that would result in multiple subobjects of a
single type having the same address.
We track "is C++11 standard-layout class" separately from "is
standard-layout class" so that the ABIs that need this information can
still use it.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45176
llvm-svn: 329332
Summary:
As the title says, this makes following code compile:
```
template<typename> struct Foo {};
Foo() -> Foo<void>;
Foo f; // ok
```
Thanks Nicolas Lesser for coining the fix.
Reviewers: rsmith, lichray
Reviewed By: rsmith, lichray
Subscribers: lichray, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38216
llvm-svn: 328409
Summary:
This fixes [PR35381](https://llvm.org/pr35381) and an additional bug where clang didn't warn about the C++17 extension when having an expression in the init statement.
Thanks Nicolas Lesser for contributing the patch.
Reviewers: rsmith
Reviewed By: rsmith
Subscribers: erik.pilkington, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40445
llvm-svn: 327782
More generally, this permits a template to be specialized in any scope in which
it could be defined, so this also supersedes DR44 and DR374 (the latter of
which we previously only implemented in C++11 mode onwards due to unclarity as
to whether it was a DR).
llvm-svn: 327705
template parameter that is an expanded parameter pack, only substitute into the
current slice, not the entire pack.
This reduces the checking of N template template arguments for an expanded
parameter pack containing N parameters from quadratic time to linear time in
the length of the pack. This is important because one (and possibly the only?)
general technique for splitting a template parameter pack in linear time
depends on doing this.
llvm-svn: 326973
Specifically, we would not properly parse these types within template arguments
(for non-type template parameters), and in tentative parses. Fixing both of
these essentially requires that we parse deduced template specialization types
as types in all contexts, even in template argument lists -- in particular,
tentative parsing may look ahead and annotate a deduced template specialization
type before we figure out that we're actually supposed to treat the tokens as a
template-name. We deal with this by simply permitting deduced template
specialization types when parsing template arguments, and converting them to
template template arguments.
llvm-svn: 326299
The tests that failed on a windows host have been fixed.
Original message:
Start setting dso_local for COFF.
With this there are still some GVs where we don't set dso_local
because setGVProperties is never called. I intend to fix that in
followup commits. This is just the bare minimum to teach
shouldAssumeDSOLocal what it should do for COFF.
llvm-svn: 325940
Summary:
According to [dcl.init.list]p7:
A narrowing conversion is an implicit conversion
- ...
- from an integer type or unscoped enumeration type to a
floating-point type, except where the source is a constant
expression and the actual value after conversion will fit into
the target type and will produce the original value when
converted back to the original type, or
- ...
Currently clang does not handle the 'unscoped enumeration' case. This
patch fixes the corresponding check.
Reviewers: faisalv, rsmith, rogfer01
Reviewed By: rogfer01
Subscribers: rogfer01, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D42545
llvm-svn: 325668
Summary:
According to the C++11 standard [dcl.type.simple]p4:
The type denoted by decltype(e) is defined as follows:
- if e is an unparenthesized id-expression or an unparenthesized
class member access (5.2.5), decltype(e) is the type of the entity
named by e.
Currently Clang handles the 'member access' case incorrectly for
static data members (decltype returns T& instead of T). This patch
fixes the issue.
Reviewers: faisalv, rsmith, rogfer01
Reviewed By: rogfer01
Subscribers: rogfer01, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D42969
llvm-svn: 325117
While here, fix up the myriad other ways in which Sema's two "can this handler
catch that exception?" implementations get things wrong and unify them.
llvm-svn: 322431
an inline namespace, update its semantic DeclContext to match.
We would previously get the semantic DeclContext wrong (pointing to the named
scope rather than the inline namespace within it), resulting in wrong lookup
results and linkage-related problems if the inline namespace was an anonymous
namespace.
llvm-svn: 321770
(Re-submission of D39937 with fixed tests.)
Adjust wording for const-qualification mismatch to be a little more clear.
Also add another diagnostic for a ref qualifier mismatch, which previously produced a useless error (this error path is simply very old; see rL119336):
Before:
error: cannot initialize object parameter of type 'X0' with an expression of type 'X0'
After:
error: 'this' argument to member function 'rvalue' is an lvalue, but function has rvalue ref-qualifier
Reviewers: aaron.ballman
Reviewed By: aaron.ballman
Subscribers: lebedev.ri, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D41646
llvm-svn: 321609
Summary:
Adjust wording for const-qualification mismatch to be a little more clear.
Also add another diagnostic for a ref qualifier mismatch, which previously produced a useless error (this error path is simply very old; see rL119336):
Before:
error: cannot initialize object parameter of type 'X0' with an expression of type 'X0'
After:
error: 'this' argument to member function 'rvalue' is an lvalue, but function has rvalue ref-qualifier
Reviewers: rsmith, aaron.ballman
Reviewed By: aaron.ballman
Subscribers: lebedev.ri, aaron.ballman, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D39937
llvm-svn: 321592
The standard correctly forbids various decl-specifiers that dont make sense on non-type template parameters - such as the extern in:
template<extern int> struct X;
This patch implements those restrictions (in a fashion similar to the corresponding checks on function parameters within ActOnParamDeclarator).
Credit goes to miyuki (Mikhail Maltsev) for drawing attention to this issue, authoring the initial versions of this patch, and supporting the effort to re-engineer it slightly. Thank you!
For details of how this patch evolved please see: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40705
llvm-svn: 321339
This allows you to dump C++ code that spells bool instead of _Bool, leaves off the elaborated type specifiers when printing struct or class names, and other C-isms.
Fixes the -Wreorder issue and fixes the ast-dump-color.cpp test.
llvm-svn: 321310
This allows you to dump C++ code that spells bool instead of _Bool, leaves off the elaborated type specifiers when printing struct or class names, and other C-isms.
llvm-svn: 321223
Summary:
This is a side-effect brought in by p0620r0, which allows other placeholder types (derived from `auto` and `decltype(auto)`) to be usable in a `new` expression with a single-clause //braced-init-list// as its initializer (8.3.4 [expr.new]/2). N3922 defined its semantics.
References:
http://wg21.link/p0620r0http://wg21.link/n3922
Reviewers: rsmith, aaron.ballman
Reviewed By: rsmith
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D39451
llvm-svn: 320401
Summary:
This is so we can implement concepts per P0734R0. Relevant failing test
cases are disabled.
Reviewers: hubert.reinterpretcast, rsmith, saar.raz, nwilson
Reviewed By: saar.raz
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40380
Patch by Changyu Li!
llvm-svn: 319992
Sometimes we check the validity of some construct between producing a
diagnostic and producing its notes. Ideally, we wouldn't do that, but in
practice running code that "cannot possibly produce a diagnostic" in such a
situation should be safe, and reasonable factoring of some code requires it
with our current diagnostics infrastruture. If this does happen, a diagnostic
that's suppressed due to SFINAE should not cause notes connected to the prior
diagnostic to be suppressed.
llvm-svn: 319408
This also clarifies some terminology used by the diagnostic (methods -> Objective-C methods, fields -> non-static data members, etc).
Many of the tests needed to be updated in multiple places for the diagnostic wording tweaks. The first instance of the diagnostic for that attribute is fully specified and subsequent instances cut off the complete list (to make it easier if additional subjects are added in the future for the attribute).
llvm-svn: 319002
This implements [dcl.modules.export] from the C++ Modules TS, which lets a module re-export another module with the "export import" syntax.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40270
llvm-svn: 318744
In order to identify the copy deduction candidate, I considered two approaches:
- attempt to determine whether an implicit guide is a copy deduction candidate by checking certain properties of its subsituted parameter during overload-resolution.
- using one of the many bits (WillHaveBody) from FunctionDecl (that CXXDeductionGuideDecl inherits from) that are otherwise irrelevant for deduction guides
After some brittle gymnastics w the first strategy, I settled on the second, although to avoid confusion and to give that bit a better name, i turned it into a member of an anonymous union.
Given this identification 'bit', the tweak to overload resolution was a simple reordering of the deduction guide checks (in SemaOverload.cpp::isBetterOverloadCandidate), in-line with Jason Merrill's p0620r0 drafting which made it into the working paper. Concordant with that, I made sure the copy deduction candidate is always added.
References:
See https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34970
See http://wg21.link/p0620r0
llvm-svn: 316292
It seems that all of the other templated cases are handled correctly,
however the function template case was not correctly handled. This
patch recovers from this condition by setting the function to noexcept
after diagnosing. Previously it simply set NoexceptExpr to null,
which caused an Assert when this was evaluated during substitution.
Differential Revision:https://reviews.llvm.org/D38700
llvm-svn: 315638
When declaring an entity in the "purview" of a module, it's never a
redeclaration of an entity in the purview of a default module or in no module
("in the global module"). Don't consider those other declarations as possible
redeclaration targets if they're not visible, and reject any cases where we
pick a prior visible declaration that violates this rule.
This reinstates r315251 and r315256, reverted in r315309 and r315308
respectively, tweaked to avoid triggering a linkage calculation when declaring
implicit special members (this exposed our pre-existing issue with typedef
names for linkage changing the linkage of types whose linkage has already been
computed and cached in more cases). A testcase for that regression has been
added in r315366.
llvm-svn: 315379
When declaring an entity in the "purview" of a module, it's never a
redeclaration of an entity in the purview of a default module or in no module
("in the global module"). Don't consider those other declarations as possible
redeclaration targets if they're not visible, and reject any cases where we
pick a prior visible declaration that violates this rule.
llvm-svn: 315251
Move the logic for determining the `wchar_t` type information into the
driver. Rather than passing the single bit of information of
`-fshort-wchar` indicate to the frontend the desired type of `wchar_t`
through a new `-cc1` option of `-fwchar-type` and indicate the
signedness through `-f{,no-}signed-wchar`. This replicates the current
logic which was spread throughout Basic into the
`RenderCharacterOptions`.
Most of the changes to the tests are to ensure that the frontend uses
the correct type. Add a new test set under `test/Driver/wchar_t.c` to
ensure that we calculate the proper types for the various cases.
llvm-svn: 315126
function-style cast.
This fires for cases such as
T(x);
... where 'x' was previously declared and T is a type. This construct declares
a variable named 'x' rather than the (probably expected) interpretation of a
function-style cast of 'x' to T.
llvm-svn: 314570
This doesn't affect our code generation in any material way -- we already give
such declarations internal linkage from a codegen perspective -- but it has
some subtle effects on code validity.
We suppress the 'L' (internal linkage) marker for mangled names in anonymous
namespaces, because it is redundant (the information is already carried by the
namespace); this deviates from GCC's behavior if a variable or function in an
anonymous namespace is redundantly declared 'static' (where GCC does include
the 'L'), but GCC's behavior is incoherent because such a declaration can be
validly declared with or without the 'static'.
We still deviate from the standard in one regard here: extern "C" declarations
in anonymous namespaces are still granted external linkage. Changing those does
not appear to have been an intentional consequence of the standard change in
DR1113.
llvm-svn: 314037
I've been unable to find any cases whose behavior is actually changed by this,
but only because an implicitly deleted destructor also results in it being
impossible to have a trivial (non-deleted) copy constructor, which the place
where this really matters (choosing whether to pass a class in registers)
happens to also check.
llvm-svn: 313948
If a function or variable has a type with no linkage (and is not extern "C"),
any use of it requires a definition within the same translation unit; the idea
is that it is not possible to define the entity elsewhere, so any such use is
necessarily an error.
There is an exception, though: some types formally have no linkage but
nonetheless can be referenced from other translation units (for example, this
happens to anonymous structures defined within inline functions). For entities
with those types, we suppress the diagnostic except under -pedantic.
llvm-svn: 313729
This follows the scheme agreed with Nathan Sidwell, which can be found here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/cxx-modules?action=AttachFile
This will be proposed to the itanium-cxx-abi list once we have some experience
with how well it works; the ABI for this TS should be considered unstable until
it is part of the Itanium C++ ABI.
llvm-svn: 312467
Extend the -fmodule-file option to support the [<name>=]<file> value format.
If the name is omitted, then the old semantics is preserved (the module file
is loaded whether needed or not). If the name is specified, then the mapping
is treated as just another prebuilt module search mechanism, similar to
-fprebuilt-module-path, and the module file is only loaded if actually used
(e.g., via import). With one exception: this mapping also overrides module
file references embedded in other modules (which can be useful if module files
are moved/renamed as often happens during remote compilation).
This override semantics requires some extra work: we now store the module name
in addition to the file name in the serialized AST representation.
Reviewed By: rsmith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35020
llvm-svn: 312220
Extend the -fmodule-file option to support the [<name>=]<file> value format.
If the name is omitted, then the old semantics is preserved (the module file
is loaded whether needed or not). If the name is specified, then the mapping
is treated as just another prebuilt module search mechanism, similar to
-fprebuilt-module-path, and the module file is only loaded if actually used
(e.g., via import). With one exception: this mapping also overrides module
file references embedded in other modules (which can be useful if module files
are moved/renamed as often happens during remote compilation).
This override semantics requires some extra work: we now store the module name
in addition to the file name in the serialized AST representation.
Reviewed By: rsmith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35020
llvm-svn: 312105
If a TS module name has more than one component (e.g., foo.bar) then we
erroneously activated the submodule semantics when encountering a module
declaration in the module implementation unit (e.g., 'module foo.bar;').
Reviewed By: rsmith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35678
llvm-svn: 312007
Prior to this patch clang would not error here:
template <class T> struct B;
template <class T> struct A {
void foo();
void foo2();
void test1() {
B<T>::foo(); // OK, foo is declared in A<int> - matches type of 'this'.
B<T>::foo2(); // This should be an error!
// foo2 is found in B<int>, 'base unrelated' to 'this'.
}
};
template <class T> struct B : A<T> {
using A<T>::foo2;
};
llvm-svn: 311851
This patch, by hamzasood, implements P0409R2, and allows [=, this] pre-C++2a as an extension (with appropriate warnings) for consistency.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D36572
Thanks Hamza!
llvm-svn: 311224
In addition to the formal linkage rules, the Modules TS includes cases where
internal-linkage symbols within a module interface unit can be referenced from
outside the module via exported inline functions / templates. We give such
declarations "module-internal linkage", which is formally internal linkage, but
results in an externally-visible symbol.
llvm-svn: 307434
These cases occur frequently for declarations in the global module (above the
module-declaration) in a Modules TS module interface. When we merge a
definition from another module into such a module-private definition, ensure
that we transitively make everything lexically within that definition visible
to that translation unit.
llvm-svn: 307129
(possible implicit) noexcept specifier
Throwing in the destructor is not good (C++11 change try to not allow see below).
But in reality, those codes are exist.
C++11 [class.dtor]p3:
A declaration of a destructor that does not have an exception-specification is
implicitly considered to have the same exception specification as an implicit
declaration.
With this change, the application worked before may now run into runtime
termination. My goal here is to emit a warning to provide only possible info to
where the code may need to be changed.
First there is no way, in compile time to identify the “throw” really throw out
of the function. Things like the call which throw out… To keep this simple,
when “throw” is seen, checking its enclosing function(only destructor and
dealloc functions) with noexcept(true) specifier emit warning.
Here is implementation detail:
A new member function CheckCXXThrowInNonThrowingFunc is added for class Sema
in Sema.h. It is used in the call to both BuildCXXThrow and
TransformCXXThrowExpr.
The function basic check if the enclosing function with non-throwing noexcept
specifer, if so emit warning for it.
The example of warning message like:
k1.cpp:18:3: warning: ''~dependent_warn'' has a (possible implicit) non-throwing
noexcept specifier. Throwing exception may cause termination.
[-Wthrow-in-dtor]
throw 1;
^
k1.cpp:43:30: note: in instantiation of member function
'dependent_warn<noexcept_fun>::~dependent_warn' requested here
dependent_warn<noexcept_fun> f; // cause warning
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33333
llvm-svn: 306149
A function declared in a friend declaration may have declarations prior
to the containing class definition. If such declaration defines default
argument, the friend function declaration inherits them. This behavior
causes problems if the class where the friend is declared is a template:
during the class instantiation the friend function looks like if it had
default arguments, so error is triggered.
With this change friend functions declared in class templates do not
inherit default arguments. Actual set of them will be defined at the
point where the containing class is instantiated.
This change fixes PR12724.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30393
llvm-svn: 304965
Clang makes check for function redefinition after it merged the new
declaration with the existing one. As a result, it produces poor
diagnostics in the case of a friend function defined inline, as in
the code:
```
void func() {}
class C { friend void func() {} };
```
Error message in this case states that `inline declaration of 'func'
follows non-inline definition`, which is misleading, as `func` does
not have explicit `inline` specifier.
With this changes compiler reports function redefinition if the new
function is a friend defined inline and it does not have explicit
`inline` specifier.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26065
llvm-svn: 304964
This is not required by the standard (yet), but there seems to be reasonable
support for this being a defect according to CWG discussion, and libstdc++ 7.1
relies on it working.
llvm-svn: 304946
member function" context notes to registering an entry on the context stack.
Also reorder the steps within defining special members to be consistent.
This has a few benefits: if multiple diagnostics are produced while checking
such a member, the note is now attached to the first such diagnostic rather
than the last, this prepares us for persisting these diagnostics between the
point at which we require the implicit instantiation of a template and the
point at which that instantiation is actually performed, and this fixes some
cases where we would fail to produce a full note stack leading back to user
code in the case of such a diagnostic.
The reordering exposed a case where we could recursively attempt to define a
defaulted destructor while we're already defining one (and other such cases
also appear to be possible, with or without this change), so this change also
reuses the "willHaveBody" flag on function declarations to track that we're in
the middle of synthesizing a body for the function and bails out if we try to
define a function that we're already defining.
llvm-svn: 303930
Correct class-template deprecation behavior
Based on the comment in the test, and my reading of the standard, a deprecated warning should be issued in the following case:
template<typename T> [[deprecated]] class Foo{}; Foo<int> f;
This was not the case, because the ClassTemplateSpecializationDecl creation did not also copy the deprecated attribute.
Note: I did NOT audit the complete set of attributes to see WHICH ones should be copied, so instead I simply copy ONLY the deprecated attribute.
Previous DiffRev: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27486, was reverted.
This patch fixes the issues brought up here by the reverter: https://reviews.llvm.org/rL298410
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31245
llvm-svn: 298634
Based on the comment in the test, and my reading of the standard, a deprecated warning should be issued in the following case:
template<typename T> [[deprecated]] class Foo{}; Foo<int> f;
This was not the case, because the ClassTemplateSpecializationDecl creation did not also copy the deprecated attribute.
Note: I did NOT audit the complete set of attributes to see WHICH ones should be copied, so instead I simply copy ONLY the deprecated attribute.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27486
llvm-svn: 298410
Summary:
3.4.6 [basic.lookup.udir] paragraph 1:
In a using-directive or namespace-alias-definition, during the lookup for a namespace-name or for a name in a nested-name-specifier, only namespace names are considered.
Reviewers: rsmith, aaron.ballman
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30848
llvm-svn: 298126
Printing typedefs or type aliases using clang_getTypeSpelling() is missing the
namespace they are defined in. This is in contrast to other types that always
yield the full typename including namespaces.
Patch by Michael Reiher!
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29944
llvm-svn: 297465
Essentially, as a base class constructor does not construct virtual bases, such
a constructor for an abstract class does not need the corresponding base class
construction to be valid, and likewise for destructors.
This creates an awkward situation: clang will sometimes generate references to
the complete object and deleting destructors for an abstract class (it puts
them in the construction vtable for a derived class). But we can't generate a
"correct" version of these because we can't generate references to base class
constructors any more (if they're template specializations, say, we might not
have instantiated them and can't assume any other TU will emit a copy).
Fortunately, we don't need to, since no correct program can ever invoke them,
so instead emit symbols that just trap.
We should stop emitting references to these symbols, but still need to emit
definitions for compatibility.
llvm-svn: 296275
Rather than attempting to compare whether the previous and current top of
context stack are "equal" (which fails for a number of reasons, such as the
context stack entries containing pointers to objects on the stack, or reaching
the same "top of stack" entry through two different paths), track the depth of
context stack at which we last emitted a note and invalidate it when we pop the
context stack to less than that depth.
This causes us to emit some missing "in instantiation of" notes and to stop
emitting redundant "in instantiation of" stacks matching the previous stack in
rare cases.
llvm-svn: 295921
This appears to be the only template argument deduction context where we were
missing this check. Surprisingly, other implementations also appear to miss
the check in this case; it may turn out that important code is relying on
the widespread non-conformance here, in which case we'll need to reconsider.
llvm-svn: 295277
After r264564, we allowed direct-list-initialization of an enum from an
integral value in C++1z mode, so long as that value can convert to the
enum's underlying type.
In this kind of initialization, we need a lvalue-to-rvalue conversion
for the initializer value if it is not a rvalue. This lets us accept the
following code:
enum class A : unsigned {};
A foo(unsigned x) { return A{x}; }
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29723
llvm-svn: 295266
such guides below explicit ones, and ensure that references to the class's
template parameters are not treated as forwarding references.
We make a few tweaks to the wording in the current standard:
1) The constructor parameter list is copied faithfully to the deduction guide,
without losing default arguments or a varargs ellipsis (which the standard
wording loses by omission).
2) If the class template declares no constructors, we add a T() -> T<...> guide
(which will only ever work if T has default arguments for all non-pack
template parameters).
3) If the class template declares nothing that looks like a copy or move
constructor, we add a T(T<...>) -> T<...> guide.
#2 and #3 follow from the "pretend we had a class type with these constructors"
philosophy for deduction guides.
llvm-svn: 295007
It's actually meaningful and useful to allow such variables to have no
initializer, but we are strictly following the standard here until the C++
committee reaches consensus on allowing this.
llvm-svn: 294785
Summary:
This adds associated constraints as a property of class templates.
An error is produced if redeclarations are not similarly constrained.
Reviewers: rsmith, faisalv, aaron.ballman
Reviewed By: rsmith
Subscribers: cfe-commits, nwilson
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D25674
llvm-svn: 294697
Add a warning for shadowed variables across records. Referencing a
shadow'ed variable may not give the desired variable. Add an optional
warning for the shadowing.
Patch by James Sun!
llvm-svn: 294401
We model deduction-guides as functions with a new kind of name that identifies
the template whose deduction they guide; the bulk of this patch is adding the
new name kind. This gives us a clean way to attach an extensible list of guides
to a class template in a way that doesn't require any special handling in AST
files etc (and we're going to need these functions we come to performing
deduction).
llvm-svn: 294266
name. If the dependent name happened to end in a template-id (X<T>::Y<U>), we
would fail to notice that the 'typename' keyword is missing when resolving it
to a type.
It turns out that GCC has a similar bug. If this shows up in much real code, we
can easily downgrade this to an ExtWarn.
llvm-svn: 293815
This change adds a new type node, DeducedTemplateSpecializationType, to
represent a type template name that has been used as a type. This is modeled
around AutoType, and shares a common base class for representing a deduced
placeholder type.
We allow deduced class template types in a few more places than the standard
does: in conditions and for-range-declarators, and in new-type-ids. This is
consistent with GCC and with discussion on the core reflector. This patch
does not yet support deduced class template types being named in typename
specifiers.
llvm-svn: 293207
This commit improves the mismatched destructor type error by detecting when the
destructor call has used a '.' instead of a '->' on a pointer to the destructed
type. The diagnostic now suggests to use '->' instead of '.', and adds a fixit
where appropriate.
rdar://28766702
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D25817
llvm-svn: 292615
Under this defect resolution, the injected-class-name of a class or class
template cannot be used except in very limited circumstances (when declaring a
constructor, in a nested-name-specifier, in a base-specifier, or in an
elaborated-type-specifier). This is apparently done to make parsing easier, but
it's a pain for us since we don't know whether a template-id using the
injected-class-name is valid at the point when we annotate it (we don't yet
know whether the template-id will become part of an elaborated-type-specifier).
As a tentative resolution to a perceived language defect, mem-initializer-ids
are added to the list of exceptions here (they generally follow the same rules
as base-specifiers).
When the reference to the injected-class-name uses the 'typename' or 'template'
keywords, we permit it to be used to name a type or template as an extension;
other compilers also accept some cases in this area. There are also a couple of
corner cases with dependent template names that we do not yet diagnose, but
which will also get this treatment.
llvm-svn: 292518
This rule permits the injected-class-name of a class template to be used as
both a template type argument and a template template argument, with no extra
syntax required to disambiguate.
llvm-svn: 292426
Summary:
Warn when a lambda explicitly captures something that is not used in its body.
The warning is part of -Wunused and can be enabled with -Wunused-lambda-capture.
Reviewers: rsmith, arphaman, jbcoe, aaron.ballman
Subscribers: Quuxplusone, arphaman, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28467
llvm-svn: 291905
Diasllow a declaration using the 'auto' type specifier from using two different
meanings of it at once, or from declaring multiple functions with deduced
return types or introducing multiple trailing return types.
The standard does not technically disallow the multiple trailing return types
case if all the declarators declare variables (such as function pointers with
trailing return types), but we disallow that too, following the clear intent.
llvm-svn: 291880
* Update version number in DR tests from 4.0 to 4
* Teach make_cxx_dr_status script about version numbers that don't contain a
period.
* Update cxx_status.html and cxx_dr_status.html to list Clang 4 features as
"Clang 4" rather than "SVN"
Clang 4 features are still listed in yellow rather than green until release.
llvm-svn: 291871
Summary:
Per https://wg21.link/CWG1677, the C++11 standard did not clarify that constant
initialization of an object allowed constexpr brace-or-equal initialization of
subobjects:
struct foo_t { union { int i; volatile int j; } u; };
__attribute__((__require_constant_initialization__))
static const foo_t x = {{0}};
Because foo_t::u has a volatile member, the initializer for x fails. However,
there is really no good reason, because this:
union foo_u { int i; volatile int j; };
__attribute__((__require_constant_initialization__))
static const foo_u x = {0};
does have a constant initializer.
(This was triggered by musl's pthread_mutex_t type when building under C++11.)
Reviewers: rsmith
Subscribers: EricWF, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28427
llvm-svn: 291480
Check for implicit conversion sequences for non-dependent function
template parameters between deduction and substitution. The idea is to accept
as many cases as possible, on the basis that substitution failure outside the
immediate context is much more common during substitution than during implicit
conversion sequence formation.
This re-commits r290808, reverted in r290811 and r291412, with a couple of
fixes for handling of explicitly-specified non-trailing template argument
packs.
llvm-svn: 291427
This issue clarifies how deduction proceeds past a non-trailing function
parameter pack. Essentially, the pack itself is skipped and consumes no
arguments (except for those implied by an explicitly-specified template
arguments), and nothing is deduced from it. As a small fix to the standard's
rule, we do not allow subsequent deduction to change the length of the function
parameter pack (by preventing extension of the explicitly-specified pack if
present, and otherwise deducing all contained packs to empty packs).
llvm-svn: 291425
Check for implicit conversion sequences for non-dependent function
template parameters between deduction and substitution. The idea is to accept
as many cases as possible, on the basis that substitution failure outside the
immediate context is much more common during substitution than during implicit
conversion sequence formation.
This re-commits r290808, reverted in r290811, with a fix for handling of
explicitly-specified template argument packs.
llvm-svn: 291410
The rule we use is that a construction of a class type T from an argument of
type U cannot use an inherited constructor if U is the same as T or is derived
from T (or if the initialization would first convert it to such a type). This
(approximately) matches the rule in use by GCC, and matches the current proposed
DR resolution.
llvm-svn: 291403
This implements something like the current direction of DR1581: we use a narrow
syntactic check to determine the set of places where a constant expression
could be evaluated, and only instantiate a constexpr function or variable if
it's referenced in one of those contexts, or is odr-used.
It's not yet clear whether this is the right set of syntactic locations; we
currently consider all contexts within templates that would result in odr-uses
after instantiation, and contexts within list-initialization (narrowing
conversions take another victim...), as requiring instantiation. We could in
principle restrict the former cases more (only const integral / reference
variable initializers, and contexts in which a constant expression is required,
perhaps). However, this is sufficient to allow us to accept libstdc++ code,
which relies on GCC's behavior (which appears to be somewhat similar to this
approach).
llvm-svn: 291318
This reverts commit r290808, as it broken all ARM and AArch64 test-suite
test: MultiSource/UnitTests/C++11/frame_layout
Also, please, next time, try to write a commit message in according to
our guidelines:
http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#commit-messages
llvm-svn: 290811
template parameters between deduction and substitution. The idea is to accept
as many cases as possible, on the basis that substitution failure outside
the immediate context is much more common during substitution than during
implicit conversion sequence formation.
This does not implement the partial ordering portion of DR1391, which so
far appears to be misguided.
llvm-svn: 290808
to make reference to template parameters. This is only a partial
implementation; we retain the restriction that the argument must not be
type-dependent, since it's unclear how that would work given the existence of
other language rules requiring an exact type match in this context, even for
type-dependent cases (a question has been raised on the core reflector).
llvm-svn: 290647
specialized than the primary template. (Put another way, if we imagine there
were a partial specialization matching the primary template, we should never
select it if some other partial specialization also matches.)
llvm-svn: 290593
template arguments as written rather than the canonical template arguments,
so we print more user-friendly names for template parameters.
llvm-svn: 290483
fail the merge if the arguments have different types (except if one of them was
deduced from an array bound, in which case take the type from the other).
This is correct because (except in the array bound case) the type of the
template argument in each deduction must match the type of the parameter, so at
least one of the two deduced arguments must have a mismatched type.
This is necessary because we would otherwise lose the type information for the
discarded template argument in the merge, and fail to diagnose the mismatch.
In order to power this, we now properly retain the type of a deduced non-type
template argument deduced from a declaration, rather than giving it the type of
the template parameter; we'll convert it to the template parameter type when
checking the deduced arguments.
llvm-svn: 290399
-fno-inline-functions, -O0, and optnone.
These were really, really tangled together:
- We used the noinline LLVM attribute for -fno-inline
- But not for -fno-inline-functions (breaking LTO)
- But we did use it for -finline-hint-functions (yay, LTO is happy!)
- But we didn't for -O0 (LTO is sad yet again...)
- We had weird structuring of CodeGenOpts with both an inlining
enumeration and a boolean. They interacted in weird ways and
needlessly.
- A *lot* of set smashing went on with setting these, and then got worse
when we considered optnone and other inlining-effecting attributes.
- A bunch of inline affecting attributes were managed in a completely
different place from -fno-inline.
- Even with -fno-inline we failed to put the LLVM noinline attribute
onto many generated function definitions because they didn't show up
as AST-level functions.
- If you passed -O0 but -finline-functions we would run the normal
inliner pass in LLVM despite it being in the O0 pipeline, which really
doesn't make much sense.
- Lastly, we used things like '-fno-inline' to manipulate the pass
pipeline which forced the pass pipeline to be much more
parameterizable than it really needs to be. Instead we can *just* use
the optimization level to select a pipeline and control the rest via
attributes.
Sadly, this causes a bunch of churn in tests because we don't run the
optimizer in the tests and check the contents of attribute sets. It
would be awesome if attribute sets were a bit more FileCheck friendly,
but oh well.
I think this is a significant improvement and should remove the semantic
need to change what inliner pass we run in order to comply with the
requested inlining semantics by relying completely on attributes. It
also cleans up tho optnone and related handling a bit.
One unfortunate aspect of this is that for generating alwaysinline
routines like those in OpenMP we end up removing noinline and then
adding alwaysinline. I tried a bunch of other approaches, but because we
recompute function attributes from scratch and don't have a declaration
here I couldn't find anything substantially cleaner than this.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28053
llvm-svn: 290398
Much to my surprise, '-disable-llvm-optzns' which I thought was the
magical flag I wanted to get at the raw LLVM IR coming out of Clang
deosn't do that. It still runs some passes over the IR. I don't want
that, I really want the *raw* IR coming out of Clang and I strongly
suspect everyone else using it is in the same camp.
There is actually a flag that does what I want that I didn't know about
called '-disable-llvm-passes'. I suspect many others don't know about it
either. It both does what I want and is much simpler.
This removes the confusing version and makes that spelling of the flag
an alias for '-disable-llvm-passes'. I've also moved everything in Clang
to use the 'passes' spelling as it seems both more accurate (*all* LLVM
passes are disabled, not just optimizations) and much easier to remember
and spell correctly.
This is part of simplifying how Clang drives LLVM to make it cleaner to
wire up to the new pass manager.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28047
llvm-svn: 290392
* a dependent non-type using-declaration within a function template can be
valid, as it can refer to an enumerator, so don't reject it in the template
definition
* we can partially substitute into a dependent using-declaration if it appears
within a (local class in a) generic lambda within a function template, which
means an UnresolvedUsing*Decl doesn't necessarily instantiate to a UsingDecl.
llvm-svn: 290071
constructs that can do so into the initialization code. This fixes a number
of different cases in which we used to fail to check for abstract types.
Thanks to Tim Shen for inspiring the weird code that uncovered this!
llvm-svn: 289753
copy constructors of classes with array members, instead using
ArrayInitLoopExpr to represent the initialization loop.
This exposed a bug in the static analyzer where it was unable to differentiate
between zero-initialized and unknown array values, which has also been fixed
here.
llvm-svn: 289618
Other compilers accept invalid code here that we reject, and we need a
better error message to try to convince users that the code is really
incorrect. Consider:
class Foo {
typedef MyIterHelper<Foo> iterator;
friend class iterator;
};
Previously our wording was "elaborated type refers to a typedef".
"elaborated type" isn't widely known terminology, so the new diagnostic
says "typedef 'iterator' cannot be referenced with class specifier".
Reviewers: rsmith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D25216
llvm-svn: 289259
mirror the description in the standard. Per DR1295, this means that binding a
const / rvalue reference to a bit-field no longer "binds directly", and per
P0135R1, this means that we materialize a temporary in reference binding
after adjusting cv-qualifiers and before performing a derived-to-base cast.
In C++11 onwards, this should have fixed the last case where we would
materialize a temporary of the wrong type (with a subobject adjustment inside
the MaterializeTemporaryExpr instead of outside), but we still have to deal
with that possibility in C++98, unless we want to start using xvalues to
represent materialized temporaries there too.
llvm-svn: 289250
Lei Liu