constructor. This isn't quite perfect (as usual, we don't handle default
arguments correctly yet, and we don't deal with copy/move constructors for
arguments correctly either, but this will be fixed when we implement core issue
1351.
This completes our support for inheriting constructors.
llvm-svn: 179154
The GNU line marker directive was sharing code with the #line directive, but some of the warnings/errors were reporting as #line directive diagnostics in both cases.
Previously:
#line 11foo1 ==> "#line directive requires a simple digit sequence"
# 11foo1 ==> "#line directive requires a simple digit sequence"
Now, we get:
#line 11foo1 ==> "#line directive requires a simple digit sequence"
# 11foo1 ==> "GNU line marker directive requires a simple digit sequence"
llvm-svn: 179139
fact be defined and used in another TU.
Reshuffle some test cases because we suppress -Wunused-variable after we've
emitted an error.
This fixes PR15558.
llvm-svn: 179138
when result type of protocol property and getter method
differ by fixing a more serious problem. When a forward
protocol declaration comes between its definition and
its use in class protocol list, the forward protocol
ast was being used in building the protocol list.
// rdar://12522752
llvm-svn: 179108
Summary:
Some codebases use these kinds of macros in functions, e.g. Chromium's
IPC_BEGIN_MESSAGE_MAP, IPC_BEGIN_MESSAGE_HANDLER, etc.
Reviewers: djasper, klimek
Reviewed By: klimek
CC: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D645
llvm-svn: 179099
Previously, the analyzer used isIntegerType() everywhere, which uses the C
definition of "integer". The C++ predicate with the same behavior is
isIntegerOrUnscopedEnumerationType().
However, the analyzer is /really/ using this to ask if it's some sort of
"integrally representable" type, i.e. it should include C++11 scoped
enumerations as well. hasIntegerRepresentation() sounds like the right
predicate, but that includes vectors, which the analyzer represents by its
elements.
This commit audits all uses of isIntegerType() and replaces them with the
general isIntegerOrEnumerationType(), except in some specific cases where
it makes sense to exclude scoped enumerations, or any enumerations. These
cases now use isIntegerOrUnscopedEnumerationType() and getAs<BuiltinType>()
plus BuiltinType::isInteger().
isIntegerType() is hereby banned in the analyzer - lib/StaticAnalysis and
include/clang/StaticAnalysis. :-)
Fixes real assertion failures. PR15703 / <rdar://problem/12350701>
llvm-svn: 179081
Test that the path notes do not change. I don’t think we should print a note on escape.
Also, I’ve removed a check that assumed that the family stored in the RefStete could be
AF_None and added an assert in the constructor.
llvm-svn: 179075
We were assuming that any expression used as a converted constant
expression would either not have a folded constant value or would be
an integer, which is not the case for some ill-formed constant
expressions. Because converted constant expressions are only used
where integral values are expected, we can simply treat this as an
error path. If that ever changes, we'll need to widen the interface of
Sema::CheckConvertedConstantExpression() anyway.
llvm-svn: 179068
This fixes a regression I introduced in r178136, where we would not
consider the using directives from the semantic declaration contexts
that aren't represented by the lexical scopes (Scope) when performing
unqualified name lookup. This lead to horribly funny diagnostics like
"no identifier named 'foo'; did you mean 'foo'?".
llvm-svn: 179067
When two template decls with the same name are used in this diagnostic,
force them to print their qualified names. This changes the bad message of:
candidate template ignored: could not match 'array' against 'array'
to the better message of:
candidate template ignored: could not match 'NS2::array' against 'NS1::array'
llvm-svn: 179056
The idea is to indent according to operator precedence and pretty much
identical to how stuff would be indented with parenthesis.
Before:
bool value = aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa +
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa +
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa ==
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa *
bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb +
bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb &&
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa *
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa >
ccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc;
After:
bool value = aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa +
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa +
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa ==
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa *
bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb +
bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb &&
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa *
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa >
ccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc;
llvm-svn: 179049
This slightly propagates an existing hack that delays when we provide
access specifiers for the visible conversion functions of a class by
copying the available access specifier early. The only client this
affects is LLDB, which tends to discover and add conversion functions
after the class is technically "complete". As such, the only
observable difference is in LLDB, so the testing will go there.
llvm-svn: 179029
linkage specification, and is marked as __attribute__((used)), try to also give
it the unmangled name (by emitting an internal linkage alias) if nothing else
within the translation unit would use that name. This allows inline asm in that
translation unit to use the entity via its unmangled name, which people
apparently rely on.
llvm-svn: 178950
This is important because sometimes two nodes are identical, except the
second one is a sink.
This bug has probably been around for a while, but it wouldn't have been an
issue in the old report graph algorithm. I'm ashamed to say I actually looked
at this the first time around and thought it would never be a problem...and
then didn't include an assertion to back that up.
PR15684
llvm-svn: 178944
New rule:
- Method decls in @implementation are considered "redeclarations"
and inherit deprecated/availability from the @interface.
- All other cases are consider overrides, which do not inherit
deprecated/availability. For example:
(a) @interface redeclares a method in an adopted protocol.
(b) A subclass redeclares a method in a superclass.
(c) A protocol redeclares a method from another protocol it adopts.
The idea is that API authors should have the ability to easily
move availability/deprecated up and down a class/protocol hierarchy.
A redeclaration means that the availability/deprecation is a blank
slate.
Fixes <rdar://problem/13574571>
llvm-svn: 178937
Richard Smith