"previous token" location at the end of the class definition. This
eliminates a badly-placed error + Fix-It when the ';' following a
class definition is missing. Fixes <rdar://problem/8066414>.
llvm-svn: 106175
- 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
introduce a Scope for the body of a tag. This reduces the number of
semantic differences between C and C++ structs and unions, and will
help with other features (e.g., anonymous unions) in C. Some important
points:
- Fields are now in the "member" namespace (IDNS_Member), to keep
them separate from tags and ordinary names in C. See the new test
in Sema/member-reference.c for an example of why this matters. In
C++, ordinary and member name lookup will find members in both the
ordinary and member namespace, so the difference between
IDNS_Member and IDNS_Ordinary is erased by Sema::LookupDecl (but
only in C++!).
- We always introduce a Scope and push a DeclContext when we're
defining a tag, in both C and C++. Previously, we had different
actions and different Scope/CurContext behavior for enums, C
structs/unions, and C++ structs/unions/classes. Now, it's one pair
of actions. (Yay!)
There's still some fuzziness in the handling of struct/union/enum
definitions within other struct/union/enum definitions in C. We'll
need to do some more cleanup to eliminate some reliance on CurContext
before we can solve this issue for real. What we want is for something
like this:
struct X {
struct T { int x; } t;
};
to introduce T into translation unit scope (placing it at the
appropriate point in the IdentifierResolver chain, too), but it should
still have struct X as its lexical declaration
context. PushOnScopeChains isn't smart enough to do that yet, though,
so there's a FIXME test in nested-redef.c
llvm-svn: 61940
class C {
static const int number = 50;
static int arr[number];
};
Here's how it worked:
-GetTypeForDeclarator was called from both Sema::ActOnCXXMemberDeclarator and Sema::ActOnDeclarator.
-VariableArrayTypes are not uniqued so two VariableArrayTypes were created with the same DeclRefExpr.
-On exit they both tried to destroy that one DeclRefExpr.
The fix is not to use GetTypeForDeclarator from the Sema::ActOnCXXMemberDeclarator.
llvm-svn: 57313
Argyrios Kyrtzidis