diagnostic message are compared. If either is a substring of the other, then
no error is given. This gives rise to an unexpected case:
// expect-error{{candidate function has different number of parameters}}
will match the following error messages from Clang:
candidate function has different number of parameters (expected 1 but has 2)
candidate function has different number of parameters
It will also match these other error messages:
candidate function
function has different number of parameters
number of parameters
This patch will change so that the verification string must be a substring of
the diagnostic message before accepting. Also, all the failing tests from this
change have been corrected. Some stats from this cleanup:
87 - removed extra spaces around verification strings
70 - wording updates to diagnostics
40 - extra leading or trailing characters (typos, unmatched parens or quotes)
35 - diagnostic level was included (error:, warning:, or note:)
18 - flag name put in the warning (-Wprotocol)
llvm-svn: 146619
Fixes an assertion arising C overload analysis, but really I can't imagine
that this wouldn't cause a thousand other uncaught failures.
Fixes PR6600.
llvm-svn: 98400
not just the viable ones. This is reasonable because the most common use of
deleted functions is to exclude some implicit conversion during calls; users
therefore will want to figure out why some other options were excluded.
Started sorting overload results. Right now it just sorts by location in the
translation unit (after putting viable functions first), but we can do better than
that.
Changed bool OnlyViable parameter to PrintOverloadCandidates to an enum for better
self-documentation.
llvm-svn: 92990
- This is designed to make it obvious that %clang_cc1 is a "test variable"
which is substituted. It is '%clang_cc1' instead of '%clang -cc1' because it
can be useful to redefine what gets run as 'clang -cc1' (for example, to set
a default target).
llvm-svn: 91446
(as GCC does), except when we've performed overload resolution and
found an unavailable function: in this case, we actually error.
Merge the checking of unavailable functions with the checking for
deprecated functions. This unifies a bit of code, and makes sure that
we're checking for unavailable functions in the right places. Also,
this check can cause an error. We may, eventually, want an option to
make "unavailable" warnings into errors.
Implement much of the logic needed for C++0x deleted functions, which
are effectively the same as "unavailable" functions (but always cause
an error when referenced). However, we don't have the syntax to
specify deleted functions yet :)
llvm-svn: 64955
any named parameters, e.g., this is accepted in C:
void f(...) __attribute__((overloadable));
although this would be rejected:
void f(...);
To do this, moved the checking of the "ellipsis without any named
arguments" condition from the parser into Sema (where it belongs anyway).
llvm-svn: 64902
to do in this area, since there are other places that reference
FunctionDecls.
Don't allow "overloadable" functions (in C) to be declared without a
prototype.
llvm-svn: 64897
given name in a given scope is marked as "overloadable", every
function declaration and definition with that same name and in that
same scope needs to have the "overloadable" attribute. Essentially,
the "overloadable" attribute is not part of attribute merging, so it
must be specified even for redeclarations. This keeps users from
trying to be too sneaky for their own good:
double sin(double) __attribute__((overloadable)); // too sneaky
#include <math.h>
Previously, this would have made "sin" overloadable, and therefore
given it a mangled name. Now, we get an error inside math.h when we
see a (re)declaration of "sin" that doesn't have the "overloadable"
attribute.
llvm-svn: 64414
Richard Trieu