When a function returns a type and that type was declared [[nodiscard]], we diagnose any unused results from that call as though the function were marked nodiscard. The same behavior should apply to calls through a function pointer.
This addresses PR31526.
llvm-svn: 350317
This also clarifies some terminology used by the diagnostic (methods -> Objective-C methods, fields -> non-static data members, etc).
Many of the tests needed to be updated in multiple places for the diagnostic wording tweaks. The first instance of the diagnostic for that attribute is fully specified and subsequent instances cut off the complete list (to make it easier if additional subjects are added in the future for the attribute).
llvm-svn: 319002
Correct class-template deprecation behavior
Based on the comment in the test, and my reading of the standard, a deprecated warning should be issued in the following case:
template<typename T> [[deprecated]] class Foo{}; Foo<int> f;
This was not the case, because the ClassTemplateSpecializationDecl creation did not also copy the deprecated attribute.
Note: I did NOT audit the complete set of attributes to see WHICH ones should be copied, so instead I simply copy ONLY the deprecated attribute.
Previous DiffRev: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27486, was reverted.
This patch fixes the issues brought up here by the reverter: https://reviews.llvm.org/rL298410
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31245
llvm-svn: 298634
Based on the comment in the test, and my reading of the standard, a deprecated warning should be issued in the following case:
template<typename T> [[deprecated]] class Foo{}; Foo<int> f;
This was not the case, because the ClassTemplateSpecializationDecl creation did not also copy the deprecated attribute.
Note: I did NOT audit the complete set of attributes to see WHICH ones should be copied, so instead I simply copy ONLY the deprecated attribute.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27486
llvm-svn: 298410
We didn't consider any alignment attributes on an EnumDecl when
calculating alignment.
While we are here, ignore alignment specifications on typedef types if
one is used as the underlying type. Otherwise, weird things happen:
enum Y : int;
Y y;
typedef int __attribute__((aligned(64))) u;
enum Y : u {};
What is the alignment of 'Y'? It would be more consistent with the
overall design of enums with fixed underlying types to consider the
underlying type's UnqualifiedDesugaredType.
This fixes PR22279.
llvm-svn: 226653
Fixes <rdar://problem/15584219> and <rdar://problem/12241361>.
This change looks large, but all it does is reuse and consolidate
the delayed diagnostic logic for deprecation warnings with unavailability
warnings. By doing so, it showed various inconsistencies between the
diagnostics, which were close, but not consistent. It also revealed
some missing "note:"'s in the deprecated diagnostics that were showing
up in the unavailable diagnostics, etc.
This change also changes the wording of the core deprecation diagnostics.
Instead of saying "function has been explicitly marked deprecated"
we now saw "'X' has been been explicitly marked deprecated". It
turns out providing a bit more context is useful, and often we
got the actual term wrong or it was not very precise
(e.g., "function" instead of "destructor"). By just saying the name
of the thing that is deprecated/deleted/unavailable we define
this issue away. This diagnostic can likely be further wordsmithed
to be shorter.
llvm-svn: 197627
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 motion appears to have consensus in the C++ committee and is
expected to be voted into the C++14 draft tomorrow during the formal
vote.
No extension warning in C++11 as attributes not specified in the
standard using the standard syntax in C++11 have implementation defined
meaning, and we define the meaning proposed for C++14.
There is one bug exposed as we do not warn on a deprecated template
specialization. I've left a FIXME in the test case and will dig into
that next.
Also, I will add a few more exhaustive test cases of the other features
specified for this attribute in a follow-up commit.
llvm-svn: 191550
the normal attribute-merging path, because we can't merge alignment attributes
without knowing the complete set of alignment attributes which apply to a
particular declaration.
llvm-svn: 175861
This required plumbing through a new flag to determine whether a ParmVarDecl is
actually a parameter of a function declaration (as opposed to a function
typedef etc, where the attribute is prohibited). Weirdly, this attribute (just
like [[noreturn]]) cannot be applied to a function type, just to a function
declaration (and its parameters).
llvm-svn: 173726
it apart from [[gnu::noreturn]] / __attribute__((noreturn)), since their
semantics are not equivalent (for instance, we treat [[gnu::noreturn]] as
affecting the function type, whereas [[noreturn]] does not).
llvm-svn: 172691
- General C++11 attributes were previously parsed and ignored. Now they are parsed and stored in AST.
- Add support to parse arguments of attributes that in 'gnu' namespace.
- Differentiate unknown attributes and known attributes that can't be applied to statements when emitting diagnostic.
llvm-svn: 165082
* In C++11, '[[' is ill-formed unless it starts an attribute-specifier. Reject
array sizes and array indexes which begin with a lambda-expression. Recover by
parsing the lambda as a lambda.
* In Objective-C++11, either '[' could be the start of a message-send.
Fully disambiguate this case: it turns out that the grammars of message-sends,
lambdas and attributes do not actually overlap. Accept any occurrence of '[['
where either '[' starts a message send, but reject a lambda in an array index
just like in C++11 mode.
Implement a couple of changes to the attribute wording which occurred after our
attributes implementation landed:
* In a function-declaration, the attributes go after the exception specification,
not after the right paren.
* A reference type can have attributes applied.
* An 'identifier' in an attribute can also be a keyword. Support for alternative
tokens (iso646 keywords) in attributes to follow.
And some bug fixes:
* Parse attributes after declarator-ids, even if they are not simple identifiers.
* Do not accept attributes after a parenthesized declarator.
* Accept attributes after an array size in a new-type-id.
* Partially disamiguate 'delete' followed by a lambda. More work is required
here for the case where the lambda-introducer is '[]'.
llvm-svn: 154369
Richard Smith