This patch adds ObjectFilePCHContainerOperations uses the LLVM backend
to put the contents of a PCH into a __clangast section inside a COFF, ELF,
or Mach-O object file container.
This is done to facilitate module debugging by makeing it possible to
store the debug info for the types defined by a module alongside the AST.
rdar://problem/20091852
llvm-svn: 241620
The error has the form ... 'int' ... 'const int' ... dropped qualifiers. At
first glance, it appears that the const qualifier is added. Reverse the types
so that the second type is less qualified than the first.
llvm-svn: 237482
Previously we'd try to perform checks on the captures from the middle of
parsing the lambda's body, at the point where we detected that a variable
needed to be captured. This was wrong in a number of subtle ways. In
PR23334, we couldn't correctly handle the list of potential odr-uses
resulting from the capture, and our attempt to recover from that resulted
in a use-after-free.
We now defer building the initialization expression until we leave the lambda
body and return to the enclosing context, where the initialization does the
right thing. This patch only covers lambda-expressions, but we should apply
the same change to blocks and captured statements too.
llvm-svn: 235921
This is a necessary prerequisite for debugging with modules.
The .pcm files become containers that hold the serialized AST which allows
us to store debug information in the module file that can be shared by all
object files that were built importing the module.
This reapplies r230044 with a fixed configure+make build and updated
dependencies and testcase requirements. Over the last iteration this
version adds
- missing target requirements for testcases that specify an x86 triple,
- a missing clangCodeGen.a dependency to libClang.a in the make build.
rdar://problem/19104245
llvm-svn: 230423
(or of a lambda init-capture, which is sort-of such a variable). The semantics
of such constructs will change when we implement N3922, so we intend to warn on
this in Clang 3.6 then change the semantics in Clang 3.7.
llvm-svn: 228792
Previously if an enumeration was used in a nested name specifier in pre-C++11
language dialect, error message was 'XXX is not a class, namespace, or scoped
enumeration'. This patch removes the word 'scoped' as in C++11 any enumeration
may be used in this context.
llvm-svn: 226410
We don't yet support pointer-to-member template arguments that have undergone
pointer-to-member conversions, mostly because we don't have a mangling for them yet.
llvm-svn: 222807
Specifically, when we have this situation:
struct A {
template <typename T> struct B {
int m1 = sizeof(A);
};
B<int> m2;
};
We can't parse m1's initializer eagerly because we need A to be
complete. Therefore we wait until the end of A's class scope to parse
it. However, we can trigger instantiation of B before the end of A,
which will attempt to instantiate the field decls eagerly, and it would
build a bad field decl instantiation that said it had an initializer but
actually lacked one.
Fixed by deferring instantiation of default member initializers until
they are needed during constructor analysis. This addresses a long
standing FIXME in the code.
Fixes PR19195.
Reviewed By: rsmith
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D5690
llvm-svn: 222192
For namespaces, this is consistent with mangling and GCC's debug info
behavior. For structs, GCC uses <anonymous struct> but we prefer
consistency between all anonymous entities but don't want to confuse
them with template arguments, etc, so we'll just go with parens in all
cases.
llvm-svn: 205398
Since "half" is an OpenCL keyword and clang accepts __fp16 as an extension for
other languages, error messages and metadata (and hence debug info) should refer
to the half-precision floating point as "__fp16" instead of "half" when
compiling for non-OpenCL languages. This patch creates a new printing policy for
half in a similar manner to what is done for bool and wchar_t.
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2952
llvm-svn: 204164
null comparison when the pointer is known to be non-null.
This catches the array to pointer decay, function to pointer decay and
address of variables. This does not catch address of function since this
has been previously used to silence a warning.
Pointer to bool conversion is under -Wbool-conversion.
Pointer to null comparison is under -Wtautological-pointer-compare, a sub-group
of -Wtautological-compare.
void foo() {
int arr[5];
int x;
// warn on these conditionals
if (foo);
if (arr);
if (&x);
if (foo == null);
if (arr == null);
if (&x == null);
if (&foo); // no warning
}
llvm-svn: 202216
The problem here is more serious than the fix implies. Adding a field
to a class updates the triviality bits for the class (among other
things). Failing to require a complete type before adding the field
meant that these updates don't happen in the well-formed case where
the capture is an uninstantiated class template specialization,
leading the lambda itself to be treated as having a trivial copy
constructor when it shouldn't. Fixes <rdar://problem/15560464>.
llvm-svn: 197623
This patch was submitted to the list for review and didn't receive a LGTM.
(In fact one explicit objection and one query were raised.)
This reverts commit r197295.
llvm-svn: 197299
The tests were perhaps made too relaxed in r197164 when we switched to the new
MinGW ABI. This makes sure we check explicitly for an optional thiscall
attribute and nothing else.
We should still look into whether we should print these attributes at all in
these cases.
llvm-svn: 197252
Both Richard and I felt that the current wording in the working paper needed some tweaking - Please see http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2035 for additional context and references to core-reflector messages that discuss wording tweaks.
What is implemented is what we had intended to specify in Bristol; but, recently felt that the specification might benefit from some tweaking and fleshing.
As a rough attempt to explain the semantics: If a nested lambda with a default-capture names a variable within its body, and if the enclosing full expression that contains the name of that variable is instantiation-dependent - then an enclosing lambda that is capture-ready (i.e. within a non-dependent context) must capture that variable, if all intervening nested lambdas can potentially capture that variable if they need to, and all intervening parent lambdas of the capture-ready lambda can and do capture the variable.
Of note, 'this' capturing is also currently underspecified in the working paper for generic lambdas. What is implemented here is if the set of candidate functions in a nested generic lambda includes both static and non-static member functions (regardless of viability checking - i.e. num and type of parameters/arguments) - and if all intervening nested-inner lambdas between the capture-ready lambda and the function-call containing nested lambda can capture 'this' and if all enclosing lambdas of the capture-ready lambda can capture 'this', then 'this' is speculatively captured by that capture-ready lambda.
Hopefully a paper for the C++ committee (that Richard and I had started some preliminary work on) is forthcoming.
This essentially makes generic lambdas feature complete, except for known bugs. The more prominent ones (and the ones I am currently aware of) being:
- generic lambdas and init-captures are broken - but a patch that fixes this is already in the works ...
- nested variadic expansions such as:
auto K = [](auto ... OuterArgs) {
vp([=](auto ... Is) {
decltype(OuterArgs) OA = OuterArgs;
return 0;
}(5)...);
return 0;
};
auto M = K('a', ' ', 1, " -- ", 3.14);
currently cause crashes. I think I know how to fix this (since I had done so in my initial implementation) - but it will probably take some work and back & forth with Doug and Richard.
A warm thanks to all who provided feedback - and especially to Doug Gregor and Richard Smith for their pivotal guidance: their insight and prestidigitation in such matters is boundless!
Now let's hope this commit doesn't upset the buildbot gods ;)
Thanks!
llvm-svn: 194188
A previous attempt http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/cfe-commits/Week-of-Mon-20130930/090049.html resulted in PR 17476, and was reverted,
The original TransformLambdaExpr (pre generic-lambdas) transformed the TypeSourceInfo of the Call operator in its own instantiation scope via TransformType. This resulted in the parameters of the call operator being mapped to their transformed counterparts in an instantiation scope that would get popped off.
Then a call to TransformFunctionParameters would add the parameters and their transformed mappings (but newly created ones!) to the current instantiation scope. This would result in a disconnect between the new call operator's TSI parameters and those used to construct the call operator declaration. This was ok in the non-generic lambda world - but would cause issues with nested transformations (when non-generic and generics were interleaved) in the generic lambda world - that I somewhat kludged around initially - but this resulted in PR17476.
The new approach seems cleaner. We only do the transformation of the TypeSourceInfo - but we make sure to do it in the current instantiation scope so we don't lose the untransformed to transformed mappings of the ParmVarDecls when they get created.
Another attempt caused a test to fail (http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/cfe-commits/Week-of-Mon-20131021/091533.html) and also had to be reverted - my apologies - in my haste, i did not run all the tests - argh!
Now all the tests seem to pass - but a Fixme has been added - since I suspect Richard will find the fix a little inelegant ;) I shall try and work on a more elegant fix once I have had a chance to discuss with Richard or Doug at a later date.
Hopefully the third time;s a charm *fingers crossed*
This does not yet include capturing.
Please see test file for examples.
This patch was LGTM'd by Doug:
http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D1784
llvm-svn: 193230
They were causing CodeGenCXX/mangle-exprs.cpp to fail.
Revert "Remove the circular reference to LambdaExpr in CXXRecordDecl."
Revert "Again: Teach TreeTransform and family how to transform generic lambdas nested within templates and themselves."
llvm-svn: 193226
lambdas nested within templates and themselves.
A previous attempt http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/cfe-commits/Week-of-Mon-20130930/090049.html resulted in PR 17476, and was reverted,
The original TransformLambdaExpr (pre generic-lambdas) transformed the TypeSourceInfo of the Call operator in its own instantiation scope via TransformType. This resulted in the parameters of the call operator being mapped to their transformed counterparts in an instantiation scope that would get popped off.
Then a call to TransformFunctionParameters would add the parameters and their transformed mappings (but newly created ones!) to the current instantiation scope. This would result in a disconnect between the new call operator's TSI parameters and those used to construct the call operator declaration. This was ok in the non-generic lambda world - but would cause issues with nested transformations (when non-generic and generics were interleaved) in the generic lambda world - that I somewhat kludged around initially - but this resulted in PR17476.
The new approach seems cleaner. We only do the transformation of the TypeSourceInfo - but we make sure to do it in the current instantiation scope so we don't lose the untransformed to transformed mappings of the ParmVarDecls when they get created.
This does not yet include capturing.
Please see test file for examples.
This patch was LGTM'd by Doug:
http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D1784
llvm-svn: 193216
An invalid decltype expression like 'decltype int' gives:
error: expected '(' after 'decltype'
This makes it so 'sizeof int' gives a similar one:
error: expected parentheses around type name in sizeof expression
llvm-svn: 192258
This does not yet include capturing (that is next).
Please see test file for examples.
This patch was LGTM'd by Doug:
http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D1784http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/cfe-commits/Week-of-Mon-20130930/090048.html
When I first committed this patch - a bunch of buildbots were unable to compile the code that VS2010 seemed to compile. Seems like there was a dependency on Sema/Template.h which VS did not seem to need, but I have now added for the other compilers. It still compiles on Visual Studio 2010 - lets hope the buildbots remain quiet (please!)
llvm-svn: 191879
This does not yet include capturing (that is next).
Please see test file for examples.
This patch was LGTM'd by Doug:
http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D1784
llvm-svn: 191875
The general strategy is to create template versions of the conversion function and static invoker and then during template argument deduction of the conversion function, create the corresponding call-operator and static invoker specializations, and when the conversion function is marked referenced generate the body of the conversion function using the corresponding static-invoker specialization. Similarly, Codegen does something similar - when asked to emit the IR for a specialized static invoker of a generic lambda, it forwards emission to the corresponding call operator.
This patch has been reviewed in person both by Doug and Richard. Richard gave me the LGTM.
A few minor changes:
- per Richard's request i added a simple check to gracefully inform that captures (init, explicit or default) have not been added to generic lambdas just yet (instead of the assertion violation).
- I removed a few lines of code that added the call operators instantiated parameters to the currentinstantiationscope. Not only did it not handle parameter packs, but it is more relevant in the patch for nested lambdas which will follow this one, and fix that problem more comprehensively.
- Doug had commented that the original implementation strategy of using the TypeSourceInfo of the call operator to create the static-invoker was flawed and allowed const as a member qualifier to creep into the type of the static-invoker. I currently kludge around it - but after my initial discussion with Doug, with a follow up session with Richard, I have added a FIXME so that a more elegant solution that involves the use of TrivialTypeSourceInfo call followed by the correct wiring of the template parameters to the functionprototypeloc is forthcoming.
Thanks!
llvm-svn: 191634
Adrian Prantl