Commit Graph

16 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Richard Smith 263a0a33cc Don't warn about runtime behavior problems in variable initializers that we
know are going to be constant-evaluated.

Any relevant diagnostics should be produced by constant expression evaluation.

llvm-svn: 314067
2017-09-23 18:27:11 +00:00
Richard Smith 62f19e700d Implement C++17 P0386R2, inline variables. (The 'inline' specifier gives a
variable weak discardable linkage and partially-ordered initialization, and is
implied for constexpr static data members.)

llvm-svn: 273754
2016-06-25 00:15:56 +00:00
Hans Wennborg 84fe12d1e9 Provide better diagnostic wording for initializers on static
data member definitions when the variable has an initializer
in its declaration.

For the following code:

  struct S {
    static const int x = 42;
  };
  const int S::x = 42;

This patch changes the diagnostic from:

  a.cc:4:14: error: redefinition of 'x'
  const int S::x = 42;
               ^
  a.cc:2:20: note: previous definition is here
    static const int x = 42;
                     ^
to:

  a.cc:4:18: error: static data member 'x' already has an initializer
  const int S::x = 42;
                   ^
  a.cc:2:24: note: previous initialization is here
    static const int x = 42;
                         ^

Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2235

llvm-svn: 195306
2013-11-21 03:17:44 +00:00
David Blaikie 8505c29593 Move -Wstatic-float-init fixit into a note & don't recover as if constexpr
llvm-svn: 173841
2013-01-29 22:26:08 +00:00
Richard Smith cf656385ea Sync 'in class initialization of static const double' extension up with GCC,
and split it out of -Wgnu into its own warning flag.

 * In C++11, this is now a hard error (GCC has no extension here in C++11 mode).
   The error can be disabled with -Wno-static-float-init, and has a fixit to
   add 'constexpr'.

 * In C++98, this is still an ExtWarn, but is now controlled by
   -Wstatic-float-init as well as -Wgnu.

llvm-svn: 173414
2013-01-25 04:22:16 +00:00
Richard Smith 6331c408b5 Deal with a horrible C++11 special case. If a non-literal type has a constexpr
constructor, and that constructor is used to initialize an object of static
storage duration such that all members and bases are initialized by constant
expressions, constant initialization is performed. In this case, the object
can still have a non-trivial destructor, and if it does, we must emit a dynamic
initializer which performs no initialization and instead simply registers that
destructor.

llvm-svn: 150419
2012-02-13 22:16:19 +00:00
Richard Smith 3607ffee5c Update constexpr implementation to match CWG's chosen approach for core issues
1358, 1360, 1452 and 1453.
 - Instantiations of constexpr functions are always constexpr. This removes the
   need for separate declaration/definition checking, which is now gone.
 - This makes it possible for a constexpr function to be virtual, if they are
   only dependently virtual. Virtual calls to such functions are not constant
   expressions.
 - Likewise, it's now possible for a literal type to have virtual base classes.
   A constexpr constructor for such a type cannot actually produce a constant
   expression, though, so add a special-case diagnostic for a constructor call
   to such a type rather than trying to evaluate it.
 - Classes with trivial default constructors (for which value initialization can
   produce a fully-initialized value) are considered literal types.
 - Classes with volatile members are not literal types.
 - constexpr constructors can be members of non-literal types. We do not yet use
   static initialization for global objects constructed in this way.

llvm-svn: 150359
2012-02-13 03:54:03 +00:00
Richard Smith ab3fe0f9ba Further testing for instantiation of out-of-line constexpr static data member
template definitions.

llvm-svn: 148506
2012-01-19 22:50:02 +00:00
Richard Smith 45bb45523f An instantiation of a constexpr static data member in a class template is
constexpr.

llvm-svn: 148505
2012-01-19 22:46:17 +00:00
Richard Smith eda3c84698 constexpr: static data members declared constexpr are required to have an
initializer; all other constexpr variables are merely required to be
initialized. In particular, a user-provided constexpr default constructor can be
used for such initialization.

llvm-svn: 144028
2011-11-07 22:16:17 +00:00
Richard Smith 9ca5c42582 Update all tests other than Driver/std.cpp to use -std=c++11 rather than
-std=c++0x. Patch by Ahmed Charles!

llvm-svn: 141900
2011-10-13 22:29:44 +00:00
Richard Smith 43a87fe86a PR11067: A definition of a constexpr static variable doesn't need an initializer if the in-class declaration had one. Such a declaration must be initialized by a constant expression.
llvm-svn: 141279
2011-10-06 09:21:12 +00:00
Richard Smith 7b729cdbff Suggest adding 'constexpr' if the GNU extension for in-class initializers for static const float members is used in C++11 mode.
llvm-svn: 140828
2011-09-30 00:33:19 +00:00
Richard Smith 256336d9ab Mark the ExtWarn for in-class initialization of static const float members as a GNU extension. Don't extend the scope of this extension to all literal types in C++0x mode.
llvm-svn: 140820
2011-09-29 23:18:34 +00:00
Richard Smith 2316cd8b79 constexpr: semantic checking for constexpr variables.
We had an extension which allowed const static class members of floating-point type to have in-class initializers, 'as a C++0x extension'. However, C++0x does not allow this. The extension has been kept, and extended to all literal types in C++0x mode (with a fixit to add the 'constexpr' specifier).

llvm-svn: 140801
2011-09-29 19:11:37 +00:00
Douglas Gregor f0f8369912 Diagnose the presence of multiple initializations of static data
members, from Faisal Vali! Fixes PR6904.

llvm-svn: 111900
2010-08-24 05:27:49 +00:00