This is inspired by a number of false positives in real code, including
PR14968. I've added test cases reduced from these false positives to
test/Sema/unused-expr.c, as well as corresponding test cases that pass the
offending expressions as arguments to a no-op macro to ensure that we do warn
there.
This also removes my previous tweak from r166522/r166534, so that we warn on
unused cast expressions in macro arguments.
There were several test cases that were using -Wunused-value to test general
diagnostic emission features; I changed those to use other warnings or warn on
a macro argument expression. I stared at the test case for PR14399 for a while
with Richard Smith and we believe the new test case exercises the same
codepaths as before.
llvm-svn: 172696
it apart from [[gnu::noreturn]] / __attribute__((noreturn)), since their
semantics are not equivalent (for instance, we treat [[gnu::noreturn]] as
affecting the function type, whereas [[noreturn]] does not).
llvm-svn: 172691
ActOnFinishFullExpr that some of its checks only apply to discarded-value
expressions. This adds missing checks for unexpanded variadic template
parameter packs to a handful of constructs.
llvm-svn: 172485
Previously, -Wunused-comparison ignored comparisons in both macro bodies and
macro arguments, but we would still emit a -Wunused-value warning for either.
Now we correctly emit -Wunused-comparison for expressions in macro arguments.
Also, add isMacroBodyExpansion to SourceManager, to go along with
isMacroArgExpansion.
llvm-svn: 172279
in case condition type. // rdar://11577384.
Test is conditionalized on x86_64-apple triple as
I am not sure if the INT_MAX/LONG_MAX values in the test
will pass this test for other hosts.
llvm-svn: 172016
uncovered.
This required manually correcting all of the incorrect main-module
headers I could find, and running the new llvm/utils/sort_includes.py
script over the files.
I also manually added quite a few missing headers that were uncovered by
shuffling the order or moving headers up to be main-module-headers.
llvm-svn: 169237
but can be dereferenced to form an expression which does have viable begin/end
functions, then typo-correct the range, even if something else goes wrong with
the statement (such as inaccessible begin/end or the wrong type of loop
variable).
In order to ensure we recover correctly and produce any followup diagnostics in
this case, redo semantic analysis on the for-range statement outside of the
diagnostic trap, after issuing the typo-correction.
llvm-svn: 164323
The old error message stating that 'begin' was an undeclared identifier
is replaced with a new message explaining that the error is in the range
expression, along with which of the begin() and end() functions was
problematic if relevant.
Additionally, if the range was a pointer type or defines operator*,
attempt to dereference the range, and offer a FixIt if the modified range
works.
llvm-svn: 162248
These require special handling, which we don't currently handle. This is being
put in place to ensure we don't do invalid symbol table lookups or try to parse
invalid assembly. The test cases just makes sure the latter isn't happening.
llvm-svn: 162050
variables, function or label references. The former is a potential clobber.
The latter is either an input or an output. Unfortunately, it's difficult to
test this patch at the moment, but the added test case will eventually do so.
llvm-svn: 162026
statement. For example,
if (x)
__asm out dx, ax __asm out dx, ax
results in a single inline asm statement (i.e., both "out dx, ax" statements are
predicated on if(x)).
llvm-svn: 161986
The AsmParser expects a single asm instruction, but valid ms-style inline asm
statements may contain multiple instructions.
This happens with asm blocks
__asm {
mov ebx, eax
mov ecx, ebx
}
or when multiple asm statements are adjacent to one another
__asm mov ebx, eax
__asm mov ecx, ebx
and
__asm mov ebx, eax __asm mov ecx, ebx
Currently, asm blocks are not properly handled.
llvm-svn: 161780
Fariborz Jahanian