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
tuple-like interpretation of decomposition declaration even if there is no
::value member. We already did this, anticipating this resolution, just update
comments and tweak a testcase.
llvm-svn: 289021
We continue to support dynamic exception specifications in C++1z as an
extension, but produce an error-by-default warning when we encounter one. This
allows users to opt back into the feature with a warning flag, and implicitly
opts system headers back into the feature should they happen to use it.
There is one semantic change implied by P0003R5 but not implemented here:
violating a throw() exception specification should now call std::terminate
directly instead of calling std::unexpected(), but since P0003R5 also removes
std::unexpected() and std::set_unexpected, and the default unexpected handler
calls std::terminate(), a conforming C++1z program cannot tell that we are
still calling it. The upside of this strategy is perfect backwards
compatibility; the downside is that we don't get the more efficient 'noexcept'
codegen for 'throw()'.
llvm-svn: 289019
When an object of class type is initialized from a prvalue of the same type
(ignoring cv qualifications), use the prvalue to initialize the object directly
instead of inserting a redundant elidable call to a copy constructor.
llvm-svn: 288866
latter case, a temporary array object is materialized, and can be
lifetime-extended by binding a reference to the member access. Likewise, in an
array-to-pointer decay, an rvalue array is materialized before being converted
into a pointer.
This caused IR generation to stop treating file-scope array compound literals
as having static storage duration in some cases in C++; that has been rectified
by modeling such a compound literal as an lvalue. This also improves clang's
compatibility with GCC for those cases.
llvm-svn: 288654
Summary:
The C++17 rules for aggregate initialization changed to disallow types with explicit constructors [dcl.init.aggr]p1. This patch implements that new rule.
Reviewers: rsmith
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D25654
llvm-svn: 288565
Summary:
[expr.cast.static] states:
> 3. A glvalue of type “cv1 T1” can be cast to type “rvalue reference to cv2 T2” if “cv2 T2” is reference-compatible
> with “cv1 T1”. The result refers to the object or the specified base class subobject thereof. If T2 is
> an inaccessible or ambiguous base class of T1, a program that necessitates such a cast is
> ill-formed.
>
> 4. Otherwise, an expression e can be explicitly converted to a type T using a static_cast of the form static_-
> cast<T>(e) if the declaration T t(e); is well-formed, for some invented temporary variable t. [...]
Currently when checking p3 Clang will diagnose `static_cast<T&&>(e)` as invalid if the argument is not reference compatible with `T`. However I believe the correct behavior is to also check p4 in those cases. For example:
```
double y = 42;
static_cast<int&&>(y); // this should be OK. 'int&& t(y)' is well formed
```
Note that we still don't check p4 for non-reference-compatible types which are reference-related since `T&& t(e);` should never be well formed in those cases.
Reviewers: rsmith
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26231
llvm-svn: 285872
This commit improves the "must have C++ linkage" error diagnostics that are
emitted for C++ declarations like templates and literal operators by adding an
additional note that points to the appropriate extern "C" linkage specifier.
rdar://19021120
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26189
llvm-svn: 285823
This has the following ABI impact:
1) Functions whose parameter or return types are non-throwing function pointer
types have different manglings in c++1z mode from prior modes. This is
necessary because c++1z permits overloading on the noexceptness of function
pointer parameter types. A warning is issued for cases that will change
manglings in c++1z mode.
2) Functions whose parameter or return types contain instantiation-dependent
exception specifications change manglings in all modes. This is necessary
to support overloading on / SFINAE in these exception specifications, which
a careful reading of the standard indicates has essentially always been
permitted.
Note that, in order to be affected by these changes, the code in question must
specify an exception specification on a function pointer/reference type that is
written syntactically within the declaration of another function. Such
declarations are very rare, and I have so far been unable to find any code
that would be affected by this. (Note that such things will probably become
more common in C++17, since it's a lot easier to get a noexcept function type
as a function parameter / return type there.)
This change does not affect the set of symbols produced by a build of clang,
libc++, or libc++abi.
llvm-svn: 285150
mismatched dynamic exception specifications in expressions from an error to a
warning, since this is no longer ill-formed in C++1z.
Allow reference binding of a reference-to-non-noexcept function to a noexcept
function lvalue. As defect resolutions, also allow a conditional between
noexcept and non-noexcept function lvalues to produce a non-noexcept function
lvalue (rather than decaying to a function pointer), and allow function
template argument deduction to deduce a reference to non-noexcept function when
binding to a noexcept function type.
llvm-svn: 284905
This has two significant effects:
1) Direct relational comparisons between null pointer constants (0 and nullopt)
and pointers are now ill-formed. This was always the case for C, and it
appears that C++ only ever permitted by accident. For instance, cases like
nullptr < &a
are now rejected.
2) Comparisons and conditional operators between differently-cv-qualified
pointer types now work, and produce a composite type that both source
pointer types can convert to (when possible). For instance, comparison
between 'int **' and 'const int **' is now valid, and uses an intermediate
type of 'const int *const *'.
Clang previously supported #2 as an extension.
We do not accept the cases in #1 as an extension. I've tested a fair amount of
code to check that this doesn't break it, but if it turns out that someone is
relying on this, we can easily add it back as an extension.
This is a re-commit of r284800.
llvm-svn: 284890
This has two significant effects:
1) Direct relational comparisons between null pointer constants (0 and nullopt)
and pointers are now ill-formed. This was always the case for C, and it
appears that C++ only ever permitted by accident. For instance, cases like
nullptr < &a
are now rejected.
2) Comparisons and conditional operators between differently-cv-qualified
pointer types now work, and produce a composite type that both source
pointer types can convert to (when possible). For instance, comparison
between 'int **' and 'const int **' is now valid, and uses an intermediate
type of 'const int *const *'.
Clang previously supported #2 as an extension.
We do not accept the cases in #1 as an extension. I've tested a fair amount of
code to check that this doesn't break it, but if it turns out that someone is
relying on this, we can easily add it back as an extension.
llvm-svn: 284800
Original commit message:
[c++1z] Teach composite pointer type computation how to compute the composite
pointer type of two function pointers with different noexcept specifications.
While I'm here, also teach it how to merge dynamic exception specifications.
llvm-svn: 284785
pointer type of two function pointers with different noexcept specifications.
While I'm here, also teach it how to merge dynamic exception specifications.
llvm-svn: 284753
not instantiate exception specifications of functions if they were only used in
unevaluated contexts (other than 'noexcept' expressions).
In C++17 onwards, this becomes essential since the exception specification is
now part of the function's type.
Note that this means that constructs like the following no longer work:
struct A {
static T f() noexcept(...);
decltype(f()) *p;
};
... because the decltype expression now needs the exception specification of
'f', which has not yet been parsed.
llvm-svn: 284549
error: 'error' diagnostics seen but not expected:
File clang\test\CXX\conv\conv.fctptr\p1.cpp Line 16: assigning to 'void (S::*)() __attribute__((thiscall)) noexcept' from incompatible type 'void (S::*)() __attribute__((thiscall))': different exception specifications
llvm-svn: 284352
CheckSingleAssignmentConstraints. These no longer produce ExprError() when they
have not emitted an error, and reliably inform the caller when they *have*
emitted an error.
This fixes some serious issues where we would fail to emit any diagnostic for
invalid code and then attempt to emit code for an invalid AST, and conversely
some issues where we would emit two diagnostics for the same problem.
llvm-svn: 283508
assume that ::operator new provides no more alignment than is necessary for any
primitive type, except when we're on a GNU OS, where glibc's malloc guarantees
to provide 64-bit alignment on 32-bit systems and 128-bit alignment on 64-bit
systems. This can be controlled by the command-line -fnew-alignment flag.
llvm-svn: 282974
Summary:
C++1z 6.4.1/p2:
If the if statement is of the form if constexpr, the value of the
condition shall be a contextually converted constant expression of type
bool [...]
C++1z 5.20/p4:
[...] A contextually converted constant expression of type bool is an
expression, contextually converted to bool (Clause4), where the
converted expression is a constant expression and the conversion
sequence contains only the conversions above. [...]
Contextually converting result of an expression `e` to a Boolean value
requires `bool t(e)` to be well-formed.
An explicit conversion function is only considered as a user-defined
conversion for direct-initialization, which is essentially what
//contextually converted to bool// requires.
Also, fixes PR28470.
Reviewers: rsmith
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24158
llvm-svn: 280838
copy-initialization. We previously got this wrong in a couple of ways:
- we only looked for copy / move constructors and constructor templates for
this copy, and thus would fail to copy in cases where doing so should use
some other constructor (but see core issue 670),
- we mishandled the special case for disabling user-defined conversions that
blocks infinite recursion through repeated application of a copy constructor
(applying it in slightly too many cases) -- though as far as I can tell,
this does not ever actually affect the result of overload resolution, and
- we misapplied the special-case rules for constructors taking a parameter
whose type is a (reference to) the same class type by incorrectly assuming
that only happens for copy/move constructors (it also happens for
constructors instantiated from templates and those inherited from base
classes).
These changes should only affect strange corner cases (for instance, where the
copy constructor exists but has a non-const-qualified parameter type), so for
the most part it only causes us to produce more 'candidate' notes, but see the
test changes for other cases whose behavior is affected.
llvm-svn: 280776
explicit specialization to a warning for C++98 mode (this is a defect report
resolution, so per our informal policy it should apply in C++98), and turn
the warning on by default for C++11 and later. In all cases where it fires, the
right thing to do is to remove the pointless explicit instantiation.
llvm-svn: 280308
indirect virtual bases. We don't need to be able to invoke such an assignment
operator from the derived class, and we shouldn't delete the derived assignment
op if we can't do so.
llvm-svn: 280288
anonymous union member of a class, we need overload resolution for the move
constructor of the class itself too; we can't rely on Sema to do the right
thing for us for anonymous union types.
llvm-svn: 278763
they're redeclarations. This is necessary in order for name lookup to correctly
find the most recent declaration of the name (which affects default template
argument lookup and cross-module merging, among other things).
llvm-svn: 275612
The problem is that the parameter pack in a function type type alias is not
reexpanded after being transformed. Also remove an incorrect comment in a
similar function. Fixes PR26017.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D21030
llvm-svn: 274566
constructor would be; this is effectively required by P0136R1. This has the
effect of exposing the validity of the base class initialization steps to
SFINAE checks.
llvm-svn: 274088
Richard Smith