This patch wasn't reviewed, and isn't correctly preserving the behaviors
relied upon by QT. I don't have a direct example of fallout, but it
should go through the standard code review process. For example, it
should never have removed the QT test case that was added when fixing
those users.
llvm-svn: 193174
This is a fix to PR17649, caused by fix in r193073. QT uses 'break' statement
to implement their 'foreach' macro. To enable build of QT, this fix reenables
break but only in 'for' statement specifier and only in the third expression.
llvm-svn: 193170
Due to statement expressions supported as GCC extension, it is possible
to put 'break' or 'continue' into a loop/switch statement but outside its
body, for example:
for ( ; ({ if (first) { first = 0; continue; } 0; }); )
Such usage must be diagnosed as an error, GCC rejects it. To recognize
this and similar patterns the flags BreakScope and ContinueScope are
temporarily turned off while parsing condition expression.
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D1762
llvm-svn: 193073
- 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
using "-parse-ast -verify".
Updated all test cases (using a sed script) that invoked -parse-ast-check to
now use -parse-ast -verify.
Fixed a bug where using "-verify" instead of "-parse-ast-check" would not
correctly create the DiagClient needed to accumulate diagnostics.
llvm-svn: 42365
switch statements. Make break/continue check that they are inside of an
appropriate control-flow construct. This implements Parser/bad-control.c.
llvm-svn: 39136
Chandler Carruth