instantiation once we have committed to performing the
instantiation. As part of this, make our makeshift
template-instantiation location information suck slightly less.
Fixes PR5264.
llvm-svn: 85209
so that we maintain better source information after template argument
deduction and overloading resolves down to a specific
declaration. Found and dealt with a few more cases that
FixOverloadedFunctionReference didn't cope with.
(Finally) added a test case that puts together this change with the
DeclRefExpr change to (optionally) include nested-name-specifiers and
explicit template argument lists.
llvm-svn: 84974
CheckSpecializationInstantiationRedecl to check for
redeclarations/instantiations. Also fixes a longstanding issue where
our explicit-instantiation location information wasn't as good as it
could have been.
llvm-svn: 84216
template, make sure to get the template that corresponds to *this*
declaration of the class template or specialization, rather than the
canonical specialization. Fixes PR5187.
llvm-svn: 84119
to a member operator template. We missed updating this call site when
adding support for function templates; bug exposed by a test for
PR5072.
llvm-svn: 84111
unknown type name, e.g.,
foo::bar x;
when "bar" does not refer to a type in "foo".
With this change, the parser now calls into the action to perform
diagnostics and can try to recover by substituting in an appropriate
type. For example, this allows us to easily diagnose some missing
"typename" specifiers, which we now do:
test/SemaCXX/unknown-type-name.cpp:29:1: error: missing 'typename'
prior to dependent type name 'A<T>::type'
A<T>::type A<T>::f() { return type(); }
^~~~~~~~~~
typename
Fixes PR3990.
llvm-svn: 84053
what we found when we looked into <blah>", where <blah> is a
DeclContext*. We can now format DeclContext*'s in nice ways, e.g.,
"namespace N", "the global namespace", "'class Foo'".
This is part of PR3990, but we're not quite there yet.
llvm-svn: 84028
function templates.
This commit ensures that friend function templates are constructed as
FunctionTemplateDecls rather than partial FunctionDecls (as they
previously were). It then implements template instantiation for friend
function templates, injecting the friend function template only when
no previous declaration exists at the time of instantiation.
Oh, and make sure that explicit specialization declarations are not
friends.
llvm-svn: 83970
injected-class-name (e.g., when we're referring to other
specializations of the current class template). Make sure that we see
the template rather than the injected-class-name. Fixes PR4768.
llvm-svn: 83672
function of a class template was implicitly instantiated, explicitly
instantiated (declaration or definition), or explicitly
specialized. The same MemberSpecializationInfo structure will be used
for static data members and member classes as well.
llvm-svn: 83509
templates. Previously, these weren't handled as specializations at
all. The AST for representing these as specializations is still a work
in progress.
llvm-svn: 83498
declarations and explicit template instantiations, improving
diagnostics and making the code usable for function template
specializations (as well as class template specializations and partial
specializations).
llvm-svn: 83436
overload candidates (but not the built-in ones). We still rely on the
underlying built-in semantic analysis to produce the initial
diagnostic, then print the candidates following that diagnostic.
One side advantage of this approach is that we can perform more validation
of C++'s operator overloading with built-in candidates vs. the
semantic analysis for those built-in operators: when there are no
viable candidates, we know to expect an error from the built-in
operator handling code. Otherwise, we are not modeling the built-in
semantics properly within operator overloading. This is checked as:
assert(Result.isInvalid() &&
"C++ binary operator overloading is missing
candidates!");
if (Result.isInvalid())
PrintOverloadCandidates(CandidateSet, /*OnlyViable=*/false);
The assert() catches cases where we're wrong in a +Asserts build. The
"if" makes sure that, if this happens in a production clang
(-Asserts), we still build the proper built-in operator and continue
on our merry way. This is effectively what happened before this
change, but we've added the assert() to catch more flies.
llvm-svn: 83175
specializations such as:
friend class std::vector<int>;
by using the same code path as explicit specializations, customized to
reference an existing ClassTemplateSpecializationDecl (or build a new
"undeclared" one).
llvm-svn: 82875
class templates. We now treat friend class templates much more like
normal class templates, except that they still get special name lookup
rules. Fixes PR5057 and eliminates a bunch of spurious diagnostics in
<iostream>.
llvm-svn: 82848
template void f<int>(int);
~~~~~~
Previously, we silently dropped the template arguments. With this
change, we now use the template arguments (when available) as the
explicitly-specified template arguments used to aid template argument
deduction for explicit template instantiations.
llvm-svn: 82806
member functions of class template specializations, and static data
members. The mechanics are (mostly) present, but the semantic analysis
is very weak.
llvm-svn: 82789
value-dependent. Audit (and fixed) all calls to
Expr::isNullPointerConstant() to provide the correct behavior with
value-dependent expressions. Fixes PR5041 and a crash in libstdc++
<locale>.
In the same vein, properly compute value- and type-dependence for
ChooseExpr. Fixes PR4996.
llvm-svn: 82748
first implementation recognizes when a function declaration is an
explicit function template specialization (based on the presence of a
template<> header), performs template argument deduction + ambiguity
resolution to determine which template is being specialized, and hooks
There are many caveats here:
- We completely and totally drop any explicitly-specified template
arguments on the floor
- We don't diagnose any of the extra semantic things that we should
diagnose.
- I haven't looked to see that we're getting the right linkage for
explicit specializations
On a happy note, this silences a bunch of errors that show up in
libstdc++'s <iostream>, although Clang still can't get through the
entire header.
llvm-svn: 82728
when we are not instantiating the corresponding "current
instantiation." This happens, e.g., when we are instantiating a
declaration reference that refers into the "current instantiation" but
occurs in a default function argument. The libstdc++ vector default
constructor now instantiates properly.
llvm-svn: 82069
point at the template and print out its template arguments, e.g.,
ambiguous-ovl-print.cpp:5:8: note: candidate function template specialization
[with T = int]
void f(T*, long);
llvm-svn: 81907
instantiation definition can follow an explicit instantiation
declaration. This is as far as I want to go with extern templates now,
but they will still need quite a bit more work to get all of the C++0x
semantics right.
llvm-svn: 81573
- Diagnose attempts to add default arguments to templates (or member
functions of templates) after the initial declaration (DR217).
- Improve diagnostics when a default argument is redefined. Now, the
note will always point at the place where the default argument was
previously defined, rather than pointing to the most recent
declaration of the function.
llvm-svn: 81548
from its location. Initialize appropriately.
When implicitly creating a declaration of a class template specialization
after encountering the first reference to it, use the pattern class's
location instead of the location of the first reference.
llvm-svn: 81515
templates, e.g.,
x.template get<T>
We can now parse these, represent them within an UnresolvedMemberExpr
expression, then instantiate that expression node in simple cases.
This allows us to stumble through parsing LLVM's Casting.h.
llvm-svn: 81300
Now that parsing, semantic analysis, and (I think) code generation of
pseudo-destructor expressions and explicit destructor calls works,
update the example-dynarray.cpp test to destroy the objects it
allocates and update the test to actually compile + link.
The code seems correct, but the Clang-compiled version dies with a
malloc error. Time to debug!
llvm-svn: 81025
expressions, e.g.,
p->~T()
when p is a pointer to a scalar type.
We don't currently diagnose errors when pseudo-destructor expressions
are used in any way other than by forming a call.
llvm-svn: 81009
things, this means that we can properly cope with member access
expressions such as
t->operator T()
where T is a template parameter (or other dependent type).
llvm-svn: 80957
involve qualified names, e.g., x->Base::f. We now maintain enough
information in the AST to compare the results of the name lookup of
"Base" in the scope of the postfix-expression (determined at template
definition time) and in the type of the object expression.
llvm-svn: 80953
with to properly support member access expressions in templates. This
test is XFAIL'd, because we get it completely wrong, but I've made the
minimal changes to the representation to at least avoid a crash.
llvm-svn: 80856
x->Base::f
We no longer try to "enter" the context of the type that "x" points
to. Instead, we drag that object type through the parser and pass it
into the Sema routines that need to know how to perform lookup within
member access expressions.
We now implement most of the crazy name lookup rules in C++
[basic.lookup.classref] for non-templated code, including performing
lookup both in the context of the type referred to by the member
access and in the scope of the member access itself and then detecting
ambiguities when the two lookups collide (p1 and p4; p3 and p7 are
still TODO). This change also corrects our handling of name lookup
within template arguments of template-ids inside the
nested-name-specifier (p6; we used to look into the scope of the
object expression for them) and fixes PR4703.
I have disabled some tests that involve member access expressions
where the object expression has dependent type, because we don't yet
have the ability to describe dependent nested-name-specifiers starting
with an identifier.
llvm-svn: 80843
simple-template-id form), check whether the scope specifier is
computable as a declaration context rather than checking whether it is
dependent, so that we properly cope with members of the current
instantiation.
Improve testing for typename specifiers that terminate in a
simpe-template-id.
llvm-svn: 80783
to a multi-level template argument list by making it explicit. The
forced auditing of callers found a bug in the instantiation of member
classes inside member templates.
I *love* static type systems.
llvm-svn: 80391
When performing template instantiation of the definitions of member
templates (or members thereof), we build a data structure containing
the template arguments from each "level" of template
instantiation. During template instantiation, we substitute all levels
of template arguments simultaneously.
llvm-svn: 80389
templates within class templates, producing a member function template
of a class template specialization. If you can parse that, I'm
sorry. Example:
template<typename T>
struct X {
template<typename U> void f(T, U);
};
When we instantiate X<int>, we now instantiate the declaration
X<int>::f, which looks like this:
template<typename U> void X<int>::f(int, U);
The path this takes through
TemplateDeclInstantiator::VisitCXXMethodDecl is convoluted and
ugly, but I don't know how to improve it yet. I'm resting my hopes on
the multi-level substitution required to instantiate definitions of
nested templates, which may simplify this code as well.
More testing to come...
llvm-svn: 80252
TypenameType if getTypeName is looking at a member of an unknown
specialization. This allows us to properly parse class templates that
derived from type that could only otherwise be described by a typename type,
e.g.,
template<class T> struct X {};
template<typename T> struct Y : public X<T>::X { };
Fixes PR4381.
llvm-svn: 80123
qualified name does not actually refer into a class/class
template/class template partial specialization.
Improve printing of nested-name-specifiers to eliminate redudant
qualifiers. Also, make it possible to output a nested-name-specifier
through a DiagnosticBuilder, although there are relatively few places
that will use this leeway.
llvm-svn: 80056
their members, including member class template, member function
templates, and member classes and functions of member templates.
To actually parse the nested-name-specifiers that qualify the name of
an out-of-line definition of a member template, e.g.,
template<typename X> template<typename Y>
X Outer<X>::Inner1<Y>::foo(Y) {
return X();
}
we need to look for the template names (e.g., "Inner1") as a member of
the current instantiation (Outer<X>), even before we have entered the
scope of the current instantiation. Since we can't do this in general
(i.e., we should not be looking into all dependent
nested-name-specifiers as if they were the current instantiation), we
rely on the parser to tell us when it is parsing a declaration
specifier sequence, and, therefore, when we should consider the
current scope specifier to be a current instantiation.
Printing of complicated, dependent nested-name-specifiers may be
somewhat broken by this commit; I'll add tests for this issue and fix
the problem (if it still exists) in a subsequent commit.
llvm-svn: 80044
the logic is there for out-of-line definitions with multiple levels of
nested templates, but this is still a work-in-progress: we're having
trouble determining when we should look into a dependent
nested-name-specifier.
llvm-svn: 80003
John Thompson