This reverts commit cc56c66f27.
Fixed a bad assertion, the target of a UsingShadowDecl must not have
*local* qualifiers, but it can be a typedef whose underlying type is qualified.
Currently there's no way to find the UsingDecl that a typeloc found its
underlying type through. Compare to DeclRefExpr::getFoundDecl().
Design decisions:
- a sugar type, as there are many contexts this type of use may appear in
- UsingType is a leaf like TypedefType, the underlying type has no TypeLoc
- not unified with UnresolvedUsingType: a single name is appealing,
but being sometimes-sugar is often fiddly.
- not unified with TypedefType: the UsingShadowDecl is not a TypedefNameDecl or
even a TypeDecl, and users think of these differently.
- does not cover other rarer aliases like objc @compatibility_alias,
in order to be have a concrete API that's easy to understand.
- implicitly desugared by the hasDeclaration ASTMatcher, to avoid
breaking existing patterns and following the precedent of ElaboratedType.
Scope:
- This does not cover types associated with template names introduced by
using declarations. A future patch should introduce a sugar TemplateName
variant for this. (CTAD deduced types fall under this)
- There are enough AST matchers to fix the in-tree clang-tidy tests and
probably any other matchers, though more may be useful later.
Caveats:
- This changes a fairly common pattern in the AST people may depend on matching.
Previously, typeLoc(loc(recordType())) matched whether a struct was
referred to by its original scope or introduced via using-decl.
Now, the using-decl case is not matched, and needs a separate matcher.
This is similar to the case of typedefs but nevertheless both adds
complexity and breaks existing code.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D114251
This avoids an unnecessary copy required by 'return OS.str()', allowing
instead for NRVO or implicit move. The .str() call (which flushes the
stream) is no longer required since 65b13610a5,
which made raw_string_ostream unbuffered by default.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D115374
Most of `MemoryBuffer` interfaces expose a `RequiresNullTerminator` parameter that's being used to:
* determine how to open a file (`mmap` vs `open`),
* assert newly initialized buffer indeed has an implicit null terminator.
This patch adds the paramater to the `SmallVectorMemoryBuffer` constructors, meaning:
* null terminator can now be added to `SmallVector`s that didn't have one before,
* `SmallVectors` that had a null terminator before keep it even after the move.
In line with existing code, the new parameter is defaulted to `true`. This patch makes sure all calls to the `SmallVectorMemoryBuffer` constructor set it to `false` to preserve the current semantics.
Reviewed By: dexonsmith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D115331
Declaration context of template parameters of a FunctionTemplateDecl
may be different for each one parameter if the template is a
deduction guide. This case is handled correctly after this change.
Reviewed By: martong
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D114418
The AST structural equivalence check did not differentiate between
a struct and a struct with same name in different namespace. When
type of a member is checked it is possible to encounter such a case
and wrongly decide that the types are similar. This problem is fixed
by check for the namespaces of a record declaration.
Reviewed By: martong
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D113118
The AST structural equivalence check did not differentiate between
a struct and a struct with same name in different namespace. When
type of a member is checked it is possible to encounter such a case
and wrongly decide that the types are similar. This problem is fixed
by check for the namespaces of a record declaration.
Reviewed By: martong
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D113118
These should be all the commands from [1] except those that are marked
obsolete, and "link" / "endlink", as that conflicts with the existing
HeaderDoc pair "link / "/link". For some commands we don't have the
ideal category, but it should work good enough for most cases.
There seems to be no existing test for most commands (except the ones
interpreted by -Wdocumentation), and to some extent such a test wouldn't
look very interesting. But I added a test for the correct parsing of
formulas, as they're a bit special. And I had to adapt
comment-lots-of-unknown-commands.c because typo correction was kicking
in and recognizing some of the commands.
This should fix a couple of reported bugs: PR17437, PR19581, PR24062
(partially, no diagnostic for matching cond/endcond), PR32909, PR37813,
PR44243 (partially, email@domain.com must be addressed separately).
[1] https://www.doxygen.nl/manual/commands.html
Reviewed By: gribozavr2
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111190
1. Moves the check to ASTStructuralEquivalence.cpp like all the other checks.
2. Adds the missing checks for identifier and init expression. Also add the
respective tests for that stuff.
Reviewed By: martong
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D112804
This used to span just the `[[enum foo]] : bar;` in the absence of a
body. This patch expands the range to cover the base specifier, so that the
various consumers can detect the full range of the decl.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111259
Fix for importing functions where the TypeSourceInfo is set and the
exception specification information contains reference to the function
declaration itself.
Reviewed By: martong, steakhal
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D112013
Based on post-commit review discussion on
2bd8493847 with Richard Smith.
Other uses of forcing HasEmptyPlaceHolder to false seem OK to me -
they're all around pointer/reference types where the pointer/reference
token will appear at the rightmost side of the left side of the type
name, so they make nested types (eg: the "int" in "int *") behave as
though there is a non-empty placeholder (because the "*" is essentially
the placeholder as far as the "int" is concerned).
This was originally committed in 277623f4d5
Reverted in f9ad1d1c77 due to breakages
outside of clang - lldb seems to have some strange/strong dependence on
"char [N]" versus "char[N]" when printing strings (not due to that name
appearing in DWARF, but probably due to using clang to stringify type
names) that'll need to be addressed, plus a few other odds and ends in
other subprojects (clang-tools-extra, compiler-rt, etc).
Looks like lldb has some issues with this - somehow it causes lldb to
treat a "char[N]" type as an array of chars (prints them out
individually) but a "char [N]" is printed as a string. (even though the
DWARF doesn't have this string in it - it's something to do with the
string lldb generates for itself using clang)
This reverts commit 277623f4d5.
Based on post-commit review discussion on
2bd8493847 with Richard Smith.
Other uses of forcing HasEmptyPlaceHolder to false seem OK to me -
they're all around pointer/reference types where the pointer/reference
token will appear at the rightmost side of the left side of the type
name, so they make nested types (eg: the "int" in "int *") behave as
though there is a non-empty placeholder (because the "*" is essentially
the placeholder as far as the "int" is concerned).
Attributes of "C/C++ Thread safety attributes" section in Attr.td
are added to ASTImporter. The not added attributes from this section
do not need special import handling.
Reviewed By: martong
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110528
This provides better support for `TypeLoc`s to allow `TypeLoc`-related
matchers to feature stricter typing and to avoid relying on the dynamic
casting of `TypeLoc`s in matchers.
Reviewed By: ymandel, tdl-g, sbenza
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110586
Import of Attr objects was incomplete in ASTImporter.
This change introduces support for a generic way of importing an attribute.
For an usage example import of the attribute AssertCapability is
added to ASTImporter.
Updating the old attribute import code and adding new attributes or extending
the generic functions (if needed) is future work.
Reviewed By: steakhal, martong
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D109608
BindingDecl was added recently but the related DecompositionDecl is needed
to make C++17 structured bindings importable.
Import of BindingDecl was changed to avoid infinite import loop.
Reviewed By: martong
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105354
This reverts commit 20176bc7dd as some
versions of GCC do not seem to handle the new code very well. They
complain about:
/tmp/ccqUQZyw.s: Assembler messages:
/tmp/ccqUQZyw.s:1151: Error: symbol `_ZNSt14_Function_base13_Base_managerIN5clangUlPKNS1_4StmtEE2_EE10_M_managerERSt9_Any_dataRKS7_St18_Manager_operation' is already defined
/tmp/ccqUQZyw.s:11963: Error: symbol `_ZNSt17_Function_handlerIFbPKN5clang4StmtEENS0_UlS3_E2_EE9_M_invokeERKSt9_Any_dataOS3_' is already defined
This seems like it is some GCC issue, but multiple buildbots (and my
local machine) are all failing because of it.
Original commit message:
[clang-repl] Implement partial translation units and error recovery.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D96033 contained a discussion regarding efficient
modeling of error recovery. @rjmccall has outlined the key ideas:
Conceptually, we can split the translation unit into a sequence of partial
translation units (PTUs). Every declaration will be associated with a unique PTU
that owns it.
The first key insight here is that the owning PTU isn't always the "active"
(most recent) PTU, and it isn't always the PTU that the declaration
"comes from". A new declaration (that isn't a redeclaration or specialization of
anything) does belong to the active PTU. A template specialization, however,
belongs to the most recent PTU of all the declarations in its signature - mostly
that means that it can be pulled into a more recent PTU by its template
arguments.
The second key insight is that processing a PTU might extend an earlier PTU.
Rolling back the later PTU shouldn't throw that extension away. For example, if
the second PTU defines a template, and the third PTU requires that template to
be instantiated at float, that template specialization is still part of the
second PTU. Similarly, if the fifth PTU uses an inline function belonging to the
fourth, that definition still belongs to the fourth. When we go to emit code in
a new PTU, we map each declaration we have to emit back to its owning PTU and
emit it in a new module for just the extensions to that PTU. We keep track of
all the modules we've emitted for a PTU so that we can unload them all if we
decide to roll it back.
Most declarations/definitions will only refer to entities from the same or
earlier PTUs. However, it is possible (primarily by defining a
previously-declared entity, but also through templates or ADL) for an entity
that belongs to one PTU to refer to something from a later PTU. We will have to
keep track of this and prevent unwinding to later PTU when we recognize it.
Fortunately, this should be very rare; and crucially, we don't have to do the
bookkeeping for this if we've only got one PTU, e.g. in normal compilation.
Otherwise, PTUs after the first just need to record enough metadata to be able
to revert any changes they've made to declarations belonging to earlier PTUs,
e.g. to redeclaration chains or template specialization lists.
It should even eventually be possible for PTUs to provide their own slab
allocators which can be thrown away as part of rolling back the PTU. We can
maintain a notion of the active allocator and allocate things like Stmt/Expr
nodes in it, temporarily changing it to the appropriate PTU whenever we go to do
something like instantiate a function template. More care will be required when
allocating declarations and types, though.
We would want the PTU to be efficiently recoverable from a Decl; I'm not sure
how best to do that. An easy option that would cover most declarations would be
to make multiple TranslationUnitDecls and parent the declarations appropriately,
but I don't think that's good enough for things like member function templates,
since an instantiation of that would still be parented by its original class.
Maybe we can work this into the DC chain somehow, like how lexical DCs are.
We add a different kind of translation unit `TU_Incremental` which is a
complete translation unit that we might nonetheless incrementally extend later.
Because it is complete (and we might want to generate code for it), we do
perform template instantiation, but because it might be extended later, we don't
warn if it declares or uses undefined internal-linkage symbols.
This patch teaches clang-repl how to recover from errors by disconnecting the
most recent PTU and update the primary PTU lookup tables. For instance:
```./clang-repl
clang-repl> int i = 12; error;
In file included from <<< inputs >>>:1:
input_line_0:1:13: error: C++ requires a type specifier for all declarations
int i = 12; error;
^
error: Parsing failed.
clang-repl> int i = 13; extern "C" int printf(const char*,...);
clang-repl> auto r1 = printf("i=%d\n", i);
i=13
clang-repl> quit
```
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104918
This reverts commit 6775fc6ffa.
It also reverts "[lldb] Fix compilation by adjusting to the new ASTContext signature."
This reverts commit 03a3f86071.
We see some failures on the lldb infrastructure, these changes might play a role
in it. Let's revert it now and see if the bots will become green.
Ref: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104918
https://reviews.llvm.org/D96033 contained a discussion regarding efficient
modeling of error recovery. @rjmccall has outlined the key ideas:
Conceptually, we can split the translation unit into a sequence of partial
translation units (PTUs). Every declaration will be associated with a unique PTU
that owns it.
The first key insight here is that the owning PTU isn't always the "active"
(most recent) PTU, and it isn't always the PTU that the declaration
"comes from". A new declaration (that isn't a redeclaration or specialization of
anything) does belong to the active PTU. A template specialization, however,
belongs to the most recent PTU of all the declarations in its signature - mostly
that means that it can be pulled into a more recent PTU by its template
arguments.
The second key insight is that processing a PTU might extend an earlier PTU.
Rolling back the later PTU shouldn't throw that extension away. For example, if
the second PTU defines a template, and the third PTU requires that template to
be instantiated at float, that template specialization is still part of the
second PTU. Similarly, if the fifth PTU uses an inline function belonging to the
fourth, that definition still belongs to the fourth. When we go to emit code in
a new PTU, we map each declaration we have to emit back to its owning PTU and
emit it in a new module for just the extensions to that PTU. We keep track of
all the modules we've emitted for a PTU so that we can unload them all if we
decide to roll it back.
Most declarations/definitions will only refer to entities from the same or
earlier PTUs. However, it is possible (primarily by defining a
previously-declared entity, but also through templates or ADL) for an entity
that belongs to one PTU to refer to something from a later PTU. We will have to
keep track of this and prevent unwinding to later PTU when we recognize it.
Fortunately, this should be very rare; and crucially, we don't have to do the
bookkeeping for this if we've only got one PTU, e.g. in normal compilation.
Otherwise, PTUs after the first just need to record enough metadata to be able
to revert any changes they've made to declarations belonging to earlier PTUs,
e.g. to redeclaration chains or template specialization lists.
It should even eventually be possible for PTUs to provide their own slab
allocators which can be thrown away as part of rolling back the PTU. We can
maintain a notion of the active allocator and allocate things like Stmt/Expr
nodes in it, temporarily changing it to the appropriate PTU whenever we go to do
something like instantiate a function template. More care will be required when
allocating declarations and types, though.
We would want the PTU to be efficiently recoverable from a Decl; I'm not sure
how best to do that. An easy option that would cover most declarations would be
to make multiple TranslationUnitDecls and parent the declarations appropriately,
but I don't think that's good enough for things like member function templates,
since an instantiation of that would still be parented by its original class.
Maybe we can work this into the DC chain somehow, like how lexical DCs are.
We add a different kind of translation unit `TU_Incremental` which is a
complete translation unit that we might nonetheless incrementally extend later.
Because it is complete (and we might want to generate code for it), we do
perform template instantiation, but because it might be extended later, we don't
warn if it declares or uses undefined internal-linkage symbols.
This patch teaches clang-repl how to recover from errors by disconnecting the
most recent PTU and update the primary PTU lookup tables. For instance:
```./clang-repl
clang-repl> int i = 12; error;
In file included from <<< inputs >>>:1:
input_line_0:1:13: error: C++ requires a type specifier for all declarations
int i = 12; error;
^
error: Parsing failed.
clang-repl> int i = 13; extern "C" int printf(const char*,...);
clang-repl> auto r1 = printf("i=%d\n", i);
i=13
clang-repl> quit
```
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104918
Template parameters are created in ASTImporter with the translation unit as DeclContext.
The DeclContext is later updated (by the create function of template classes).
ASTImporterLookupTable was not updated after these changes of the DC. The patch
adds update of the DeclContext in ASTImporterLookupTable.
Reviewed By: martong
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103792
Given `int foo, bar;`, TraverseAST reveals this tree:
TranslationUnitDecl
- foo
- bar
Before this patch, with the TraversalScope set to {foo}, TraverseAST yields:
foo
After this patch it yields:
TranslationUnitDecl
- foo
Also, TraverseDecl(TranslationUnitDecl) now respects the traversal scope.
---
The main effect of this today is that clang-tidy checks that match the
translationUnitDecl(), either in order to traverse it or check
parentage, should work.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104071
This implements the 'using enum maybe-qualified-enum-tag ;' part of
1099. It introduces a new 'UsingEnumDecl', subclassed from
'BaseUsingDecl'. Much of the diff is the boilerplate needed to get the
new class set up.
There is one case where we accept ill-formed, but I believe this is
merely an extended case of an existing bug, so consider it
orthogonal. AFAICT in class-scope the c++20 rule is that no 2 using
decls can bring in the same target decl ([namespace.udecl]/8). But we
already accept:
struct A { enum { a }; };
struct B : A { using A::a; };
struct C : B { using A::a;
using B::a; }; // same enumerator
this patch permits mixtures of 'using enum Bob;' and 'using Bob::member;' in the same way.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D102241
This diff adds testcase for the issue fixed in https://reviews.llvm.org/D77468
but regression test was not added in the diff. On Clang 9 it caused
crash in cland during code completion.
Test Plan: check-clang-unit
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103722
ParmVarDecl is created with translation unit as the parent DeclContext
and later moved to the correct DeclContext. ASTImporterLookupTable
should be updated at this move.
Reviewed By: martong
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103231
In the case of TypedefDecls we set the DeclContext after we imported it.
It turns out, it could lead to null pointer dereferences during the
cleanup part of a failed import.
This patch demonstrates this issue and fixes it by checking if the
DeclContext is available or not.
Reviewed By: shafik
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D102640
Reverts parts of https://reviews.llvm.org/D17183, but keeps the
resetDataLayout() API and adds an assert that checks that datalayout string and
user label prefix are in sync.
Approach 1 in https://reviews.llvm.org/D17183#2653279
Reduces number of TUs build for 'clang-format' from 689 to 575.
I also implemented approach 2 in D100764. If someone feels motivated
to make us use DataLayout more, it's easy to revert this change here
and go with D100764 instead. I don't plan on doing more work in this
area though, so I prefer going with the smaller, more self-consistent change.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D100776
(PR49478)
As ArrayType::ArrayType mentioned in clang/lib/AST/Type.cpp, a
DependentSizedArrayType might not have size expression because it it
used as the type of a dependent array of unknown bound with a dependent
braced initializer.
Thus, I add a check when mangling array of that type.
This should fix https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=49478
Reviewed By: Richard Smith - zygoloid
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D99407
Sam McCall