array from a braced-init-list. There seems to be a core wording wart
here (it suggests we should be testing whether the elements of the init
list are implicitly convertible to the array element type, not whether
there is an implicit conversion sequence) but our prior behavior appears
to be a bug, not a deliberate effort to implement the standard as written.
llvm-svn: 169690
the cases where we can't determine whether special members would be trivial
while building the class, we eagerly declare those special members. The impact
of this is bounded, since it does not trigger implicit declarations of special
members in classes which merely *use* those classes.
In order to determine whether we need to apply this rule, we also need to
eagerly declare move operations and destructors in cases where they might be
deleted. If a move operation were supposed to be deleted, it would instead
be suppressed, and we could need overload resolution to determine if we fall
back to a trivial copy operation. If a destructor were implicitly deleted,
it would cause the move constructor of any derived classes to be suppressed.
As discussed on cxx-abi-dev, C++11's selected constructor rules are also
retroactively applied as a defect resolution in C++03 mode, in order to
identify that class B has a non-trivial copy constructor (since it calls
A's constructor template, not A's copy constructor):
struct A { template<typename T> A(T &); };
struct B { mutable A a; };
llvm-svn: 169673
Remove pre-standard restriction on explicitly-defaulted copy constructors with
'incorrect' parameter types, and instead just make those special members
non-trivial as the standard requires.
This required making CXXRecordDecl correctly handle classes which have both a
trivial and a non-trivial special member of the same kind.
This also fixes PR13217 by reimplementing DiagnoseNontrivial in terms of the
new triviality computation technology.
llvm-svn: 169667
performed, to determine whether that special member is deleted or constexpr.
That overload resolution process can in turn trigger the instantiation of a
template, which can do anything, including triggering the declaration of that
very same special member function. When this happens, do not try to recursively
declare the special member -- that's impossible. Instead, only try to realise
the truth. There is no special member.
llvm-svn: 168847
a special member" diagnostic from warning to error, and fix the cases where it
produced diagnostics with incorrect wording.
We don't support this as an extension, and we ban it even in C++98 mode. This
breaks too much (for instance, the ABI-specified calling convention for a type
can change if it acquires a copy constructor through the addition of a default
argument).
llvm-svn: 168769
getUnderlyingDecl()) so that derivatives of
CorrectionCandidateCallback::ValidateCandidate(...) don't have to worry
about being thrown by UsingDecls and such.
llvm-svn: 168317
width of an enum with negative values in IntRange. Include a test for
-Wtautological-constant-out-of-range-compare where this had manifested.
llvm-svn: 168126
type-name is looked up in the context of the complete postfix-expression. Don't
forget to pass the scope into this lookup when the type-name is a template-id;
it might name an alias template which can't be found within the class itself.
Bug spotted by Johannes Schaub on #llvm.
llvm-svn: 168011
type conversion between integers. This allows the warning to be more accurate.
Also, turned the warning off in an analyzer test. The relavent test cases
are covered by the tests in Sema.
llvm-svn: 167992
pointer, otherwise we will double free it when ExpressionEvaluationContextRecord
gets copied.
Fixes crash in rdar://12645424 & http://llvm.org/PR14252
llvm-svn: 167946
This corrects the mangling and linkage of classes (& their member functions) in
cases like this:
struct foo {
struct {
void func() { ... }
} x;
};
we were accidentally giving this nested unnamed struct 'no' linkage where it
should've had the linkage of the outer class. The mangling was incorrecty too,
mangling as TU-wide unnamed type mangling of $_X rather than class-scoped
mangling of UtX_.
This also fixes -Wunused-member-function which would incorrectly diagnose
'func' as unused due to it having no linkage & thus appearing to be TU-local
when in fact it might be correctly used in another TU.
Similar mangling should be applied to function local classes in similar cases
but I've deferred that for a subsequent patch.
Review/discussion by Richard Smith, John McCall, & especially Eli Friedman.
llvm-svn: 167906
applied to CXXRecordDecls, where functions with that return type will
inherit the warn_unused_result attribute.
Also includes a tiny fix (with no discernable behavior change for
existing code) to re-sync AttributeDeclKind enum and
err_attribute_wrong_decl_type with warn_attribute_wrong_decl_type since
the enum is used with both diagnostic messages to chose the correct
description.
llvm-svn: 167783
There was enough consensus that we *can* get a good language solution
to have an annotation outside of C++11, and without this annotation
this warning doesn't quite mean's completeness criteria for this
kind of warning. For now, restrict this warning to C++11 (where an
annotation exists), and make this the behavior for the LLVM 3.2 release.
Afterwards, we will hammer out a language solution that we are all
happy with.
llvm-svn: 167749
function that takes a const Foo&, where Foo is convertible from a large number
of pointer types, we print ALL the overloads, no matter the setting of
-fshow-overloads.
There is potential follow-on work in unifying the "print candidates, but not
too many" logic between OverloadCandidateSet::NoteCandidates and
ImplicitConversionSequence::DiagnoseAmbiguousConversion.
llvm-svn: 167596
instantiate it if it can be instantiated and implicitly define it if it can be
implicitly defined. This matches g++'s approach. Remove some cases from
SemaOverload which were marking functions as referenced when just planning how
overload resolution would proceed; such cases are not actually references.
llvm-svn: 167514
We don't support any C++11 attributes that appertain to declaration specifiers so reject
the attributes in parser until we support them; this also conforms to what g++ 4.8 is doing.
llvm-svn: 167481
The problem is as follows: C++11 has contexts which are not
potentially-evaluated, and yet in which we are required or encouraged to
perform constant evaluation. In such contexts, we are not permitted to
implicitly define special member functions for literal types, therefore
we cannot evalaute those constant expressions.
Punt on this in one more context for now by skipping checking constexpr
variable initializers if they occur in dependent contexts.
llvm-svn: 166956
whether the initializer is value-dependent rather than whether we are in a
dependent context. This allows us to detect some errors sooner, and fixes a
crash-on-invalid if a dependent type leaks out to a non-dependent context in
error recovery.
llvm-svn: 166898
might have been used in constant expressions, rather than suppressing it for
variables which are const. The important thing here is that such variables
can have their values used without actually being marked as 'used'.
llvm-svn: 166896
Aaron Ballman