* if, switch, range-based for: warn if semicolon is on the same line.
* for, while: warn if semicolon is on the same line and either next
statement is compound statement or next statement has more
indentation.
Replacing the semicolon with {} or moving the semicolon to the next
line will always silence the warning.
Tests from SemaCXX/if-empty-body.cpp merged into SemaCXX/warn-empty-body.cpp.
llvm-svn: 150515
instead of having a special-purpose function.
- ActOnCXXDirectInitializer, which was mostly duplication of
AddInitializerToDecl (leading e.g. to PR10620, which Eli fixed a few days
ago), is dropped completely.
- MultiInitializer, which was an ugly hack I added, is dropped again.
- We now have the infrastructure in place to distinguish between
int x = {1};
int x({1});
int x{1};
-- VarDecl now has getInitStyle(), which indicates which of the above was used.
-- CXXConstructExpr now has a flag to indicate that it represents list-
initialization, although this is not yet used.
- InstantiateInitializer was renamed to SubstInitializer and simplified.
- ActOnParenOrParenListExpr has been replaced by ActOnParenListExpr, which
always produces a ParenListExpr. Placed that so far failed to convert that
back to a ParenExpr containing comma operators have been fixed. I'm pretty
sure I could have made a crashing test case before this.
The end result is a (I hope) considerably cleaner design of initializers.
More importantly, the fact that I can now distinguish between the various
initialization kinds means that I can get the tricky generalized initializer
test cases Johannes Schaub supplied to work. (This is not yet done.)
This commit passed self-host, with the resulting compiler passing the tests. I
hope it doesn't break more complicated code. It's a pretty big change, but one
that I feel is necessary.
llvm-svn: 150318
This is a great warning, but it was observed that a ton of real world code violates
it all the time for (semi-)legitimate reasons. This warnings is fairly pedantic, which is good,
but not for everyone. For example, there is a fair amount of idiomatic code out there
that does "default: abort()", and similar idioms.
Addresses <rdar://problem/10814651>.
llvm-svn: 150055
value of class type, look for a unique conversion operator converting to
integral or unscoped enumeration type and use that. Implements [expr.const]p5.
Sema::VerifyIntegerConstantExpression now performs the conversion and returns
the converted result. Some important callers of Expr::isIntegralConstantExpr
have been switched over to using it (including all of those required for C++11
conformance); this switch brings a side-benefit of improved diagnostics and, in
several cases, simpler code. However, some language extensions and attributes
have not been moved across and will not perform implicit conversions on
constant expressions of literal class type where an ICE is required.
In passing, fix static_assert to perform a contextual conversion to bool on its
argument.
llvm-svn: 149776
argument in strncat.
The warning is ignored by default since it needs more qualification.
TODO: The warning message and the note are messy when
strncat is a builtin due to the macro expansion.
llvm-svn: 149524
- Remove the printf0 special handling as we treat it as printf anyway.
- Perform basic checks (non-literal, empty) for all formats and not only printf/scanf.
llvm-svn: 149236
like Darwin that don't support it. We should also complain about
invalid -fvisibility=protected, but that information doesn't seem
to exist at the most appropriate time, so I've left a FIXME behind.
llvm-svn: 149186
Rewording the diagnostic to be more precise/correct: "default label in switch
which covers all enumeration values" and changed the switch to
-Wcovered-switch-default
llvm-svn: 148783
Changing wording to include the word "explicitly" (as in "enumeration value ...
not /explicitly/ handled by switch"), as suggested by Richard Smith.
Also, now that the diagnostic text differs between -Wswitch and -Wswitch-enum,
I've simplified the test cases a bit.
llvm-svn: 148781
This is for consistency, since the flag is actually under -Wswitch now, rather
than -Wswitch-enum (since it's really valuable for the former and rather
orthogonal to the latter)
llvm-svn: 148680
Clang previously implemented -Wswitch-enum the same as -Wswitch. This patch
corrects the behavior to match GCC's. The critical/only difference being that
-Wswitch-enum is not silenced by the presence of a default case in the switch.
llvm-svn: 148679
For consistency with GCC & reasonable sanity. The FIXME suggests that the
original author was perhaps using the default check for some other purpose,
not realizing the more obvious limitation/false-negatives it creates, but this
doesn't seem to produce any regressions & fixes the included test.
llvm-svn: 148649
This warning acts as the complement to the main -Wswitch-enum warning (which
warns whenever a switch over enum without a default doesn't cover all values of
the enum) & has been an an-doc coding convention in LLVM and Clang in my
experience. The purpose is to ensure there's never a "dead" default in a
switch-over-enum because this would hide future -Wswitch-enum errors.
The name warning has a separate flag name so it can be disabled but it's grouped
under -Wswitch-enum & is on-by-default because of this.
The existing violations of this rule in test cases have had the warning disabled
& I've added a specific test for the new behavior (many negative cases already
exist in the same test file - and none regressed - so I didn't add more).
Reviewed by Ted Kremenek ( http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/cfe-commits/Week-of-Mon-20120116/051690.html )
llvm-svn: 148640
Includes tests highlighting the cases where accuracy has improved
(there is one call that does no filtering beyond selecting the set
of allowed keywords, and one call that only triggers for ObjC code
for which a test by someone who knows ObjC would be welcome). Also
fixes a small typo in one of the suggestion messages, and drops a
malformed "expected-note" for a suggestion that did not occur even
when the malformed note was committed as r145930.
llvm-svn: 148420
not integer constant expressions. In passing, fix the 'folding is an extension'
diagnostic to not claim we're accepting the code, since that's not true in
-pedantic-errors mode, and add this diagnostic to -Wgnu.
llvm-svn: 148209
Dmitri Gribenko