This implements the following changes:
* AutoType retains sugared deduced-as-type.
* Template argument deduction machinery analyses the sugared type all the way
down. It would previously lose the sugar on first recursion.
* Undeduced AutoType will be properly canonicalized, including the constraint
template arguments.
* Remove the decltype node created from the decltype(auto) deduction.
As a result, we start seeing sugared types in a lot more test cases,
including some which showed very unfriendly `type-parameter-*-*` types.
Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com>
Reviewed By: rsmith, #libc, ldionne
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110216
This implements the following changes:
* AutoType retains sugared deduced-as-type.
* Template argument deduction machinery analyses the sugared type all the way
down. It would previously lose the sugar on first recursion.
* Undeduced AutoType will be properly canonicalized, including the constraint
template arguments.
* Remove the decltype node created from the decltype(auto) deduction.
As a result, we start seeing sugared types in a lot more test cases,
including some which showed very unfriendly `type-parameter-*-*` types.
Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com>
Reviewed By: rsmith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110216
This implements the following changes:
* AutoType retains sugared deduced-as-type.
* Template argument deduction machinery analyses the sugared type all the way
down. It would previously lose the sugar on first recursion.
* Undeduced AutoType will be properly canonicalized, including the constraint
template arguments.
* Remove the decltype node created from the decltype(auto) deduction.
As a result, we start seeing sugared types in a lot more test cases,
including some which showed very unfriendly `type-parameter-*-*` types.
Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com>
Reviewed By: rsmith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110216
The dump of all diagnostics of all tests under `clang/test/{CXX,SemaCXX,SemaTemplate}` was analyzed , and all the cases where there were obviously bad canonical types being printed, like `type-parameter-*-*` and `<overloaded function type>` were identified. Also a small amount of cases of missing sugar were analyzed.
This patch then spells those explicitly in the test expectations, as preparatory work for future fixes for these problems.
Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com>
Reviewed By: rsmith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110210
Based on post-commit review discussion on
2bd8493847 with Richard Smith.
Other uses of forcing HasEmptyPlaceHolder to false seem OK to me -
they're all around pointer/reference types where the pointer/reference
token will appear at the rightmost side of the left side of the type
name, so they make nested types (eg: the "int" in "int *") behave as
though there is a non-empty placeholder (because the "*" is essentially
the placeholder as far as the "int" is concerned).
This was originally committed in 277623f4d5
Reverted in f9ad1d1c77 due to breakages
outside of clang - lldb seems to have some strange/strong dependence on
"char [N]" versus "char[N]" when printing strings (not due to that name
appearing in DWARF, but probably due to using clang to stringify type
names) that'll need to be addressed, plus a few other odds and ends in
other subprojects (clang-tools-extra, compiler-rt, etc).
Looks like lldb has some issues with this - somehow it causes lldb to
treat a "char[N]" type as an array of chars (prints them out
individually) but a "char [N]" is printed as a string. (even though the
DWARF doesn't have this string in it - it's something to do with the
string lldb generates for itself using clang)
This reverts commit 277623f4d5.
Based on post-commit review discussion on
2bd8493847 with Richard Smith.
Other uses of forcing HasEmptyPlaceHolder to false seem OK to me -
they're all around pointer/reference types where the pointer/reference
token will appear at the rightmost side of the left side of the type
name, so they make nested types (eg: the "int" in "int *") behave as
though there is a non-empty placeholder (because the "*" is essentially
the placeholder as far as the "int" is concerned).
lambda-expression's captures.
The built-in structured binding rules for classes require that all
fields can be accessed by name, and the fields introduced for lambda
captures are unnamed, so decomposing a capturing lambda is ill-formed.
user interface and documentation, and update __cplusplus for C++20.
WG21 considers the C++20 standard to be finished (even though it still
has some more steps to pass through in the ISO process).
The old flag names are accepted for compatibility, as usual, and we
still have lots of references to C++2a in comments and identifiers;
those can be cleaned up separately.
Summary:
Trying to use structure binding with a structure that doesn't implement
std::tuple_size, should unpack the data members. When the struct is a
template though, clang might hit an assertion (if the type has not been
completed before), because CXXRecordDecl::DefinitionData is nullptr.
This commit fixes the problem by completing the type while trying to
decompose the structured binding.
The ICE happens in real world code, for example, when trying to iterate
a protobuf generated map with a range-based for loop and structure
bindings (because google::protobuf::MapPair is a template and doesn't
support std::tuple_size).
Reported-by: nicholas.sun@nlsun.com
Patch by Daniele Di Proietto
Reviewers: #clang, rsmith
Reviewed By: #clang, rsmith
Subscribers: cpplearner, Rakete1111, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D56974
llvm-svn: 352323
In order to match our mangling scheme, use a different set of numbers for
decomposition declarations, and consider all binding names when forming the
numbering. This does not yet affect any mangled names we produce, because
local decomposition declarations can't yet have linkage, but a C++ standard
proposal to change that is currently being processed.
llvm-svn: 331692
Most code paths would already bail out in this case, but certain paths,
particularly overload resolution and typo correction, would not. Carrying on
with an invalid declaration could in some cases result in crashes due to
downstream code relying on declaration invariants that are not necessarily
met for invalid declarations, and in other cases just resulted in undesirable
follow-on diagnostics.
llvm-svn: 291030
decomposition declarations.
There are a couple of things in the wording that seem strange here:
decomposition declarations are permitted at namespace scope (which we partially
support here) and they are permitted as the declaration in a template (which we
reject).
llvm-svn: 276492
Matheus Izvekov