Fixes github.com/clangd/clangd/issues/1216
If the Snippet string is empty, Snippet.front() would trigger a crash.
Move the Snippet->empty() check up a few lines to avoid this. Should not
break any existing behavior.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D134137
Several different places in the code had similar computations for the parameters that were eventually passed to the TypeInfo constructor.
This centralizes that code in one function, and allows passing TypeInfo to the various other *Info structures that need it.
Remove some "auto" types and replace with the real type for getting declarations. This was making some duplicate checking difficult to see.
Reviewed By: paulkirth
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D134225
Add support for explicitly typed enums:
enum Foo : unsigned { ... };
to the internal representation and to the YAML output.
Add support for getting the value of an enum constant, as well as accessing the original expression that produced it. This changes the YAML output of enums from an array of strings for the enum members to an array of dictionaries. These dictionaries now report the name, value, and original expression.
The markdown and HTML outputs are unchanged, they still output the name from the new enhanced internal schema.
Reviewed By: paulkirth
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D134055
- Update `transfer` and `diagnose` to take `const CFGElement *` as input in `Analysis/FlowSensitive/Models/UncheckedOptionalAccessModel`.
- Update `clang-tools-extra/clang-tidy/bugprone/UncheckedOptionalAccessCheck.cpp` accordingly.
- Rename `runDataflowAnalysisOnCFG` to `runDataflowAnalysis` and remove the deprecated `runDataflowAnalysis` (this was only used by the now updated optional check).
Reviewed By: gribozavr2, sgatev
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D133930
This feature relies on Relations in the index being complete.
An out-of-tree index implementation is missing some override relations, so
such renames end up breaking the code.
We plan to fix it, but this flag is a cheap band-aid for now.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D133440
This improves consistency with other places (e.g. llvm::compression::decompress,
llvm::object::Decompressor::decompress, llvm-objcopy).
Note: when zstd::uncompress was added, we noticed that the API `ZSTD_decompress`
is fine while the zlib API `uncompress` is a misnomer.
Adds support for default arguments in the internal representation and reads these values from the source. Implements writing these values to YAML but does not implement this for the HTML or markdown outputs.
Reviewed By: paulkirth
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D133732
For this patch, a simple search was performed for patterns where there are
two types (usually an LHS and an RHS) which are structurally the same, and there
is some result type which is resolved as either one of them (typically LHS for
consistency).
We change those cases to resolve as the common sugared type between those two,
utilizing the new infrastructure created for this purpose.
Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com>
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111509
For this patch, a simple search was performed for patterns where there are
two types (usually an LHS and an RHS) which are structurally the same, and there
is some result type which is resolved as either one of them (typically LHS for
consistency).
We change those cases to resolve as the common sugared type between those two,
utilizing the new infrastructure created for this purpose.
Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com>
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111509
After upgrading the type deduction machinery to retain type sugar in
D110216, we were left with a situation where there is no general
well behaved mechanism in Clang to unify the type sugar of multiple
deductions of the same type parameter.
So we ended up making an arbitrary choice: keep the sugar of the first
deduction, ignore subsequent ones.
In general, we already had this problem, but in a smaller scale.
The result of the conditional operator and many other binary ops
could benefit from such a mechanism.
This patch implements such a type sugar unification mechanism.
The basics:
This patch introduces a `getCommonSugaredType(QualType X, QualType Y)`
method to ASTContext which implements this functionality, and uses it
for unifying the results of type deduction and return type deduction.
This will return the most derived type sugar which occurs in both X and
Y.
Example:
Suppose we have these types:
```
using Animal = int;
using Cat = Animal;
using Dog = Animal;
using Tom = Cat;
using Spike = Dog;
using Tyke = Dog;
```
For `X = Tom, Y = Spike`, this will result in `Animal`.
For `X = Spike, Y = Tyke`, this will result in `Dog`.
How it works:
We take two types, X and Y, which we wish to unify as input.
These types must have the same (qualified or unqualified) canonical
type.
We dive down fast through top-level type sugar nodes, to the
underlying canonical node. If these canonical nodes differ, we
build a common one out of the two, unifying any sugar they had.
Note that this might involve a recursive call to unify any children
of those. We then return that canonical node, handling any qualifiers.
If they don't differ, we walk up the list of sugar type nodes we dived
through, finding the last identical pair, and returning that as the
result, again handling qualifiers.
Note that this patch will not unify sugar nodes if they are not
identical already. We will simply strip off top-level sugar nodes that
differ between X and Y. This sugar node unification will instead be
implemented in a subsequent patch.
This patch also implements a few users of this mechanism:
* Template argument deduction.
* Auto deduction, for functions returning auto / decltype(auto), with
special handling for initializer_list as well.
Further users will be implemented in a subsequent patch.
Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com>
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111283
This reverts commit d200db3863, which causes a
clang crash. See https://reviews.llvm.org/D111283#3785755
Test case for convenience:
```
template <typename T>
using P = int T::*;
template <typename T, typename... A>
void j(P<T>, T, A...);
template <typename T>
void j(P<T>, T);
struct S {
int b;
};
void g(P<S> k, S s) { j(k, s); }
```
For this patch, a simple search was performed for patterns where there are
two types (usually an LHS and an RHS) which are structurally the same, and there
is some result type which is resolved as either one of them (typically LHS for
consistency).
We change those cases to resolve as the common sugared type between those two,
utilizing the new infrastructure created for this purpose.
Depends on D111283
Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com>
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111509
After upgrading the type deduction machinery to retain type sugar in
D110216, we were left with a situation where there is no general
well behaved mechanism in Clang to unify the type sugar of multiple
deductions of the same type parameter.
So we ended up making an arbitrary choice: keep the sugar of the first
deduction, ignore subsequent ones.
In general, we already had this problem, but in a smaller scale.
The result of the conditional operator and many other binary ops
could benefit from such a mechanism.
This patch implements such a type sugar unification mechanism.
The basics:
This patch introduces a `getCommonSugaredType(QualType X, QualType Y)`
method to ASTContext which implements this functionality, and uses it
for unifying the results of type deduction and return type deduction.
This will return the most derived type sugar which occurs in both X and
Y.
Example:
Suppose we have these types:
```
using Animal = int;
using Cat = Animal;
using Dog = Animal;
using Tom = Cat;
using Spike = Dog;
using Tyke = Dog;
```
For `X = Tom, Y = Spike`, this will result in `Animal`.
For `X = Spike, Y = Tyke`, this will result in `Dog`.
How it works:
We take two types, X and Y, which we wish to unify as input.
These types must have the same (qualified or unqualified) canonical
type.
We dive down fast through top-level type sugar nodes, to the
underlying canonical node. If these canonical nodes differ, we
build a common one out of the two, unifying any sugar they had.
Note that this might involve a recursive call to unify any children
of those. We then return that canonical node, handling any qualifiers.
If they don't differ, we walk up the list of sugar type nodes we dived
through, finding the last identical pair, and returning that as the
result, again handling qualifiers.
Note that this patch will not unify sugar nodes if they are not
identical already. We will simply strip off top-level sugar nodes that
differ between X and Y. This sugar node unification will instead be
implemented in a subsequent patch.
This patch also implements a few users of this mechanism:
* Template argument deduction.
* Auto deduction, for functions returning auto / decltype(auto), with
special handling for initializer_list as well.
Further users will be implemented in a subsequent patch.
Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com>
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111283
- Render protocols as interfaces to differentiate them from classes
since a protocol and class can have the same name. Take this one step
further though, and only recommend protocols in ObjC protocol completions.
- Properly call `includeSymbolFromIndex` even with a cached
speculative fuzzy find request
- Don't use the index to provide completions for category names,
symbols there don't make sense
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D132962
This patch adds macro expansion preview to hover info. Basically, the refactor infrastructure for expanding macro is used for this purpose. The following steps are added to getHoverContents for macros:
1. calling AST.getTokens().expansionStartingAt(...) to get expanded tokens
2. calling reformat(...) to format expanded tokens
Some opinions are wanted:
1. Should we present macro expansion before definition in the hover card?
2. Should we truncate/ignore macro expansion if it's too long? For performance and presentation reason, it might not be a good idea to expand pages worth of tokens in hover card. If so, what's the preferred threshold?
Also, some limitation applies:
1. Expansion isn't available in macro definition/arguments as the refactor code action isn't either.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D127082
When pretty printing the value of an expression, we cannot infer from
the type of the expression the type of the constant that the expression
evaluates to, as the expression might contain a type cast.
17 vs 14 have different ASTs, this causes D131465 to have to touch this test.
While here, make sure we're being clear about *which* nodes we're matching.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D133423
some regular files(e.g. files have no shebang and no execute
bit in source dir) are wrongly assigned an execution permission,
such as scanview.css and ear.c from libscanbuild, which is
unnecessary and introduces warnings in some envs.
Reviewed By: MaskRay, phosek
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D133308
Skip unions/union-like classes since in this case constructors
with empty bodies behave differently in comparison with regular
structs/classes.
Test plan: ninja check-clang-tools
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D132713
The Opts.LineFoldingOnly must be set before the clangdServer
construction, otherwise this flag is always false when using clangd in VSCode.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D133299
Skip copy assignment operators with nonstandard return types
since they cannot be defaulted.
Test plan: ninja check-clang-tools
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D133006
This change refactors the MuiltiplexExternalSemaSource to take ownership
of the underlying sources. As a result it makes a larger cleanup of
external source ownership in Sema and the ChainedIncludesSource.
Reviewed By: aaron.ballman, aprantl
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D133158
clangd code fixes at D122983 were not right.
We need to check that clangd provides IncludeFixer fixits for implicit function declaration even if this is not an error (e.g. implicit function declaration in C89).
Reviewed By: sammccall
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D133043
Sometimes in the AST we can have an ArraySubscriptExpr,
where the index is an ArrayInitIndexExpr.
ArrayInitIndexExpr is not a constant, so
ProBoundsConstantArrayIndexCheck reports a warning when
it sees such expression. This expression can only be
implicitly generated, and always appears inside an
ArrayInitLoopExpr, so we shouldn't report a warning.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D132654
Tom Praschan