(T(*)(int[x+y]));
is an (invalid) paren expression, but "x+y" will be parsed as part of the (rejected) type-id,
so unnecessary Action calls are made for an unused (and possibly leaked) "x+y".
Use a different scheme, similar to parsing inline methods. The parenthesized tokens are cached,
the context that follows is determined (possibly by parsing a cast-expression),
and then we re-introduce the cached tokens into the token stream and parse them appropriately.
llvm-svn: 72279
a paren expression without considering the context past the parentheses.
Behold:
(T())x; - type-id
(T())*x; - type-id
(T())/x; - expression
(T()); - expression
llvm-svn: 72260
Embed its functionality into it's only user, ParseCXXCasts.
CXXCasts now get the "actual" expression directly, they no longer always receive a ParenExpr. This is better since the
parentheses are always part of the C++ casts syntax.
llvm-svn: 72257
-Makes typeof consistent with sizeof/alignof
-Fixes a bug when '>' is in a typeof expression, inside a template type param:
A<typeof(x>1)> a;
llvm-svn: 72255
redundant functionality. The result (ASTOwningVector) lives in
clang/Parse/Ownership.h and is used by both the parser and semantic
analysis. No intended functionality change.
llvm-svn: 72214
template<typename T>
struct X {
struct Inner;
};
template struct X<int>::Inner;
This change is larger than it looks because it also fixes some
a problem with nested-name-specifiers and tags. We weren't requiring
the DeclContext associated with the scope specifier of a tag to be
complete. Therefore, when looking for something like "struct
X<int>::Inner", we weren't instantiating X<int>.
This, naturally, uncovered a problem with member pointers, where we
were requiring the left-hand side of a member pointer access
expression (e.g., x->*) to be a complete type. However, this is wrong:
the semantics of this expression does not require a complete type (EDG
agrees).
Stuart vouched for me. Blame him.
llvm-svn: 71756
template class X<int>;
This also cleans up the propagation of template information through
declaration parsing, which is used to improve some diagnostics.
llvm-svn: 71608
parse just a single declaration and provide a reasonable diagnostic
when the "only one declarator per template declaration" rule is
violated. This eliminates some ugly, ugly hackery where we used to
require thatn the layout of a DeclGroup of a single element be the
same as the layout of a single declaration.
llvm-svn: 71596
'objc_ownership_cfretain' -> 'cf_ownership_retain'
'objc_ownership_cfrelease' -> 'cf_ownership_release'
Motivation: Core Foundation objects can be used in isolation from Objective-C,
and this forces users to reason about the separate semantics of CF objects. More
Sema support pending.
llvm-svn: 70884
return type and the selector. This is inconsistent with C functions
(where such attributes would be placed on the return type, not the the
FunctionDecl), and is inconsistent with what people are use to seeing.
llvm-svn: 70878
appear between the return type and the selector. This is a separate code path
from regular attribute processing, as we only want to (a) accept only a specific
set of attributes in this place and (b) want to distinguish to clients the
context in which an attribute was added to an ObjCMethodDecl.
Currently, the attribute 'objc_ownership_returns' is the only attribute that
uses this new feature. Shortly I will add a warning for 'objc_ownership_returns'
to be placed at the end of a method declaration.
llvm-svn: 70504
type and argument types are missing, and let return type deduction
happen before we give errors for returning from a noreturn block.
Radar 6441502
llvm-svn: 70413
that if we're going to print an extension warning anyway,
there's no point to changing behavior based on NoExtensions: it will
only make error recovery worse.
Note that this doesn't cause any behavior change because NoExtensions
isn't used by the current front-end. I'm still considering what to do about
the remaining use of NoExtensions in IdentifierTable.cpp.
llvm-svn: 70273
Argyrios Kyrtzidis