This fixes bug 47716.
According to [module.interface]p2, it is meaningless to export an entity
which is not in namespace scope.
The reason why the compiler crashes is that the compiler missed
ExportDecl when the compiler traverse the subclass of DeclContext. So
here is the crash.
Also, the patch implements [module.interface]p6 in
Sema::CheckRedeclaration* functions.
Reviewed By: aaron.ballman, urnathan
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D112903
Commit 5fbe21a774 missed committing the correct checking of
out-of-class comparision operator argument types. These are they,
from the originally posted diff.
Reviewed By: mizvekov
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D115894
This implements p2085, allowing out-of-class defaulting of comparison
operators, primarily so they need not be inline, IIUC intent. this was
mostly straigh forward, but required reimplementing
Sema::CheckExplicitlyDefaultedComparison, as now there's a case where
we have no a priori clue as to what class a defaulted comparison may
be for. We have to inspect the parameter types to find out. Eg:
class X { ... };
bool operator==(X, X) = default;
Thus reimplemented the parameter type checking, and added 'is this a
friend' functionality for the above case.
Reviewed By: mizvekov
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104478
Previously we would create global module fragment for extern linkage
declaration which is alreday in global module fragment. However, it is
clearly redundant to do so. This patch would check if the extern linkage
declaration are already in GMF before we create a GMF for it.
According to [module.unit]p7.2.3, a declaration within a linkage-specification
should be attached to the global module.
This let user to forward declare types across modules.
Reviewed by: rsmith, aaron.ballman
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110215
This implements the following changes:
* AutoType retains sugared deduced-as-type.
* Template argument deduction machinery analyses the sugared type all the way
down. It would previously lose the sugar on first recursion.
* Undeduced AutoType will be properly canonicalized, including the constraint
template arguments.
* Remove the decltype node created from the decltype(auto) deduction.
As a result, we start seeing sugared types in a lot more test cases,
including some which showed very unfriendly `type-parameter-*-*` types.
Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com>
Reviewed By: rsmith, #libc, ldionne
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110216
This implements the following changes:
* AutoType retains sugared deduced-as-type.
* Template argument deduction machinery analyses the sugared type all the way
down. It would previously lose the sugar on first recursion.
* Undeduced AutoType will be properly canonicalized, including the constraint
template arguments.
* Remove the decltype node created from the decltype(auto) deduction.
As a result, we start seeing sugared types in a lot more test cases,
including some which showed very unfriendly `type-parameter-*-*` types.
Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com>
Reviewed By: rsmith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110216
This implements the following changes:
* AutoType retains sugared deduced-as-type.
* Template argument deduction machinery analyses the sugared type all the way
down. It would previously lose the sugar on first recursion.
* Undeduced AutoType will be properly canonicalized, including the constraint
template arguments.
* Remove the decltype node created from the decltype(auto) deduction.
As a result, we start seeing sugared types in a lot more test cases,
including some which showed very unfriendly `type-parameter-*-*` types.
Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com>
Reviewed By: rsmith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110216
There's a nuanced check about when to use suffixes on these integer
non-type-template-parameters, but when rebuilding names for
-gsimple-template-names there isn't enough data in the DWARF to
determine when to use suffixes or not. So turn on suffixes always to
make it easy to match up names in llvm-dwarfdump --verify.
I /think/ if we correctly modelled auto non-type-template parameters
maybe we could put suffixes only on those. But there's also some logic
in Clang that puts the suffixes on overloaded functions - at least
that's what the parameter says (see D77598 and printTemplateArguments
"TemplOverloaded" parameter) - but I think maybe it's for anything that
/can/ be overloaded, not necessarily only the things that are overloaded
(the argument value is hardcoded at the various callsites, doesn't seem
to depend on overload resolution/searching for overloaded functions). So
maybe with "auto" modeled more accurately, and differentiating between
function templates (always using type suffixes there) and class/variable
templates (only using the suffix for "auto" types) we could correctly
use integer type suffixes only in the minimal set of cases.
But that seems all too much fuss, so let's just put integer type
suffixes everywhere always in the debug info of integer non-type
template parameters in template names.
(more context:
* https://reviews.llvm.org/D77598#inline-1057607
* https://groups.google.com/g/llvm-dev/c/ekLMllbLIZg/m/-dhJ0hO1AAAJ )
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111477
It isn't really pulling its weight and I think splitting it out from
-Wweak-vtables was the wrong call: I think it was just a bug in the
original warning, which was trying to not diagnose template
instantiations, implicit or explicit.
usage of an abstract class type within itself.
We were missing handling for deduction guides (which would assert),
friend declarations, and variable templates. We were mishandling inline
variables and other variables defined inside the class definition.
These diagnostics should be downgraded to warnings, or perhaps removed
entirely, once we implement P0929R2.
Modify the IfStmt node to suppoort constant evaluated expressions.
Add a new ExpressionEvaluationContext::ImmediateFunctionContext to
keep track of immediate function contexts.
This proved easier/better/probably more efficient than walking the AST
backward as it allows diagnosing nested if consteval statements.
See PR51862.
The consumers of the Elidable flag in CXXConstructExpr assume that
an elidable construction just goes through a single copy/move construction,
so that the source object is immediately passed as an argument and is the same
type as the parameter itself.
With the implementation of P2266 and after some adjustments to the
implementation of P1825, we started (correctly, as per standard)
allowing more cases where the copy initialization goes through
user defined conversions.
With this patch we stop using this flag in NRVO contexts, to preserve code
that relies on that assumption.
This causes no known functional changes, we just stop firing some asserts
in a cople of included test cases.
Reviewed By: rsmith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D109800
Don't say we couldn't find an 'operator<=>' when we were actually
looking for an 'operator=='. Also fix a crash when attempting to
diagnose if we select a built-in 'operator!=' in this lookup.
Before this patch, CXXCtorInitializers that don't typecheck get discarded in
most cases. In particular:
- typos that can't be corrected don't turn into RecoveryExpr. The full expr
disappears instead, and without an init expr we discard the node.
- initializers that fail initialization (e.g. constructor overload resolution)
are discarded too.
This patch addresses both these issues (a bit clunkily and repetitively, for
member/base/delegating initializers)
It does not preserve any AST nodes when the member/base can't be resolved or
other problems of that nature. That breaks invariants of CXXCtorInitializer
itself, and we don't have a "weak" RecoveryCtorInitializer like we do for Expr.
I believe the changes to diagnostics in existing tests are improvements.
(We're able to do some analysis on the non-broken parts of the initializer)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D101641
See PR47174.
When canonicalizing nested name specifiers of the type kind,
the prefix for 'DependentTemplateSpecialization' types was being
dropped, leading to malformed types which would cause failures
when rebuilding template names.
Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com>
Reviewed By: rsmith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D107311
@kpn pointed out that the global variable initialization functions didn't
have the "strictfp" metadata set correctly, and @rjmccall said that there
was buggy code in SetFPModel and StartFunction, this patch is to solve
those problems. When Sema creates a FunctionDecl, it sets the
FunctionDeclBits.UsesFPIntrin to "true" if the lexical FP settings
(i.e. a combination of command line options and #pragma float_control
settings) correspond to ConstrainedFP mode. That bit is used when CodeGen
starts codegen for a llvm function, and it translates into the
"strictfp" function attribute. See bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44571
Reviewed By: Aaron Ballman
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D102343
Word on the grapevine was that the committee had some discussion that
ended with unanimous agreement on eliminating relational function pointer comparisons.
We wanted to be bold and just ban all of them cold turkey.
But then we chickened out at the last second and are going for
eliminating just the spaceship overload candidate instead, for now.
See D104680 for reference.
This should be fine and "safe", because the only possible semantic change this
would cause is that overload resolution could possibly be ambiguous if
there was another viable candidate equally as good.
But to save face a little we are going to:
* Issue an "error" for three-way comparisons on function pointers.
But all this is doing really is changing one vague error message,
from an "invalid operands to binary expression" into an
"ordered comparison of function pointers", which sounds more like we mean business.
* Otherwise "warn" that comparing function pointers like that is totally
not cool (unless we are told to keep quiet about this).
Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com>
Reviewed By: rsmith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104892
During template instantiation involving templated lambdas, clang
could hit an assertion in `TemplateDeclInstantiator::SubstFunctionType`
since the functions are not associated with any `TypeSourceInfo`:
`assert(OldTInfo && "substituting function without type source info");`
This path is triggered when using templated lambdas like the one added as
a test to this patch. To fix this:
- Create `TypeSourceInfo`s for special members and make sure the template
instantiator can get through all patterns.
- Introduce a `SpecialMemberTypeInfoRebuilder` tree transform to rewrite
such member function arguments. Without this, we get errors like:
`error: only special member functions and comparison operators may be defaulted`
since `getDefaultedFunctionKind` can't properly recognize these functions
as special members as part of `SetDeclDefaulted`.
Fixes PR45828 and PR44848
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D88327
Fixes bug 50263
When "unused-private-field" flag is on if you have a struct with private
members and only defaulted comparison operators clang will warn about
unused private fields.
If you where to write the comparison operators by hand no warning is
produced.
This is a bug since defaulting a comparison operator uses all private
members .
The fix is simple, in CheckExplicitlyDefaultedFunction just clear the
list of unused private fields if the defaulted function is a comparison
function.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D102186
This implements a more comprehensive fix than was done at D95409.
Instead of excluding just function pointer subobjects, we also
exclude any user-defined function pointer conversion operators.
Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com>
Reviewed By: rsmith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103855
Fixes PR50591.
When analyzing classes with members which have user-defined conversion
operators to builtin types, the defaulted comparison analyzer was
picking the member type instead of the type for the builtin operator
which was selected as the best match.
This could either result in wrong comparison category being selected,
or a crash when runtime checks are enabled.
Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com>
Reviewed By: rsmith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103760
<string> is currently the highest impact header in a clang+llvm build:
https://commondatastorage.googleapis.com/chromium-browser-clang/llvm-include-analysis.html
One of the most common places this is being included is the APInt.h header, which needs it for an old toString() implementation that returns std::string - an inefficient method compared to the SmallString versions that it actually wraps.
This patch replaces these APInt/APSInt methods with a pair of llvm::toString() helpers inside StringExtras.h, adjusts users accordingly and removes the <string> from APInt.h - I was hoping that more of these users could be converted to use the SmallString methods, but it appears that most end up creating a std::string anyhow. I avoided trying to use the raw_ostream << operators as well as I didn't want to lose having the integer radix explicit in the code.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103888
This renames the expression value categories from rvalue to prvalue,
keeping nomenclature consistent with C++11 onwards.
C++ has the most complicated taxonomy here, and every other language
only uses a subset of it, so it's less confusing to use the C++ names
consistently, and mentally remap to the C names when working on that
context (prvalue -> rvalue, no xvalues, etc).
Renames:
* VK_RValue -> VK_PRValue
* Expr::isRValue -> Expr::isPRValue
* SK_QualificationConversionRValue -> SK_QualificationConversionPRValue
* JSON AST Dumper Expression nodes value category: "rvalue" -> "prvalue"
Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com>
Reviewed By: rsmith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103720
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 adds support for p1099's 'using SCOPED_ENUM::MEMBER;'
functionality, bringing a member of an enumerator into the current
scope. The novel feature here, is that there need not be a class
hierarchical relationship between the current scope and the scope of
the SCOPED_ENUM. That's a new thing, the closest equivalent is a
typedef or alias declaration. But this means that
Sema::CheckUsingDeclQualifier needs adjustment. (a) one can't call it
until one knows the set of decls that are being referenced -- if
exactly one is an enumerator, we're in the new territory. Thus it
needs calling later in some cases. Also (b) there are two ways we hold
the set of such decls. During parsing (or instantiating a dependent
scope) we have a lookup result, and during instantiation we have a set
of shadow decls. Thus two optional arguments, at most one of which
should be non-null.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D100276
This fixes a build breakage. I managed to attach this particular
change to the wrong diff in the stack when rebasing. And flubbed
testing :(
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D101777
This is a pre-patch for adding using-enum support. It breaks out
the shadow decl handling of UsingDecl to a new intermediate base
class, BaseUsingDecl, altering the decl hierarchy to
def BaseUsing : DeclNode<Named, "", 1>;
def Using : DeclNode<BaseUsing>;
def UsingPack : DeclNode<Named>;
def UsingShadow : DeclNode<Named>;
def ConstructorUsingShadow : DeclNode<UsingShadow>;
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D101777
This fixes the missing address space on `this` in the implicit move
assignment operator.
The function called here is an abstraction around the lines that have
been removed which also sets the address space correctly.
This is copied from CopyConstructor, CopyAssignment and MoveConstructor,
all of which use this function, and now MoveAssignment does too.
Fixes: PR50259
Reviewed By: svenvh
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103252
This attribute applies to a using declaration, and permits importing a
declaration without knowing if that declaration exists. This is useful
for libc++ C wrapper headers that re-export declarations in std::, in
cases where the base C library doesn't provide all declarations.
This attribute was proposed in http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2020-June/066038.html.
rdar://69313357
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D90188
This is a re-application of dc67299 which was reverted in f63adf5b because
it broke the build. The issue should now be fixed.
Attribution note: The original author of this patch is Erik Pilkington.
I'm only trying to land it after rebasing.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D91630
This happens during the error-recovery, and it would esacpe all
dependent-type check guards in getTypeInfo/constexpr-evaluator code
paths, which lead to crashes.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D102773
Non-comprehensive list of cases:
* Dumping template arguments;
* Corresponding parameter contains a deduced type;
* Template arguments are for a DeclRefExpr that hadMultipleCandidates()
Type information is added in the form of prefixes (u8, u, U, L),
suffixes (U, L, UL, LL, ULL) or explicit casts to printed integral template
argument, if MSVC codeview mode is disabled.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D77598
Chuanqi Xu