ParsePostfixExpressionSuffix() for '->' (or '.') postfixes first calls
ActOnStartCXXMemberReference() to inform sema that a member reference is about
to start, and that function lets the parser know if sema thinks that the
base expression's type could allow a pseudo destructor from a semantic point of
view (for example, if the the base expression has a dependent type).
ParsePostfixExpressionSuffix() then calls ParseOptionalCXXScopeSpecifier() and
passes MayBePseudoDestructor on to that function, expecting the function to
set it to false if a pseudo destructor is impossible from a syntactic point of
view (due to a lack of '~' sigil). However, ParseOptionalCXXScopeSpecifier()
had early-outs for ::new and __super, so MayBePseudoDestructor stayed true,
so we tried to parse a pseudo dtor, and then became confused since we couldn't
find a '~'. Move the snippet in ParseOptionalCXXScopeSpecifier() that sets
MayBePseudoDestructor to false above the early exits.
Parts of this found by SLi's bot.
llvm-svn: 229449
The deprecated attribute was adopted as part of the C++14, however, there is a
GNU version available in C++11. When using C++ earlier than C++14, diagnose the
use of the attribute without the GNU scope, but only when using the generalised
attribute syntax.
llvm-svn: 229447
In the case that we diagnosed an invalid attribute due to missing or present
arguments, we would return false, indicating to the caller that the parsing
failed. However, we would have added the attribute in ParseAttributeArgsCommon
(which may have been called indirectly through ParseGNUAttributeArgs).
Returning true in this case ensures that a second copy of the attribute is not
added.
I haven't added a test case for this as the existing test will cover this with
the next commit which diagnoses a C++14 attribute applied in C++11 mode. Rather
than duplicating the existing test case, allow the tree to remain without a test
between this and the next change. We would see double warnings in the
[[deprecated()]] applied to a declaration in C++11 mode, which will cause an
error in the cxx0x-attributes test.
llvm-svn: 229446
This is a patch for PR22563 ( http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=22563 ).
We were not correctly unwrapping a single 256-bit AVX vector that was defined as an array of 1 inside a struct.
We would generate a <4 x float> param/return value instead of <8 x float> and lose half of the vector.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7614
llvm-svn: 229408
Bug report: http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=22561
Clang tries to create ObjCBoxedExpression of type 'NSNumber'
when 'NSNumber' has only forward declaration, this cause a crash later,
when 'Sema' refers to a nil QualType of the whole expression.
Please, refer to the bug report for the better explanation.
llvm-svn: 229402
For #pragma comment(linker, ...) MSVC expects the comment string to be quoted, but for #pragma comment(lib, ...) the compiler itself quotes the library name.
Since this distinction disappears by the time the directive reaches the backend, move quoting for the "lib" version to the frontend.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7653
llvm-svn: 229376
subobject initialization is not possible, be sure to note the overall
initialization as having failed so that overload resolution knows that the
relevant candidate is not viable.
llvm-svn: 229353
The first part of that line doesn't parse correctly and ParseClassSpecifier() for
some reason skips to tok::comma to recover, and then
ParseDeclarationSpecifiers() sees the next struct and calls
ParseClassSpecifier() again with the same DeclSpec object.
However, the first call already called ActOnCXXGlobalScopeSpecifier() on the
DeclSpec's CXXScopeSpec, and sema gets confused when this gets called again.
As a fix, let ParseClassSpecifier() (and ParseEnumSpecifier()) call
ParseOptionalCXXScopeSpec() with a temporary CXXScopeSpec object, and only
copy it into the DeclSpec if things work out. (This is also how all the other
functions that set the DeclSpec's TypeSpecScope set it.)
Found by SLi's bot.
llvm-svn: 229288
We had two bugs:
- We were missing the "on" prefix for unresolved operators.
- We didn't handle the mangling of destructors at all.
This fixes PR22584.
llvm-svn: 229255
Bools are a little tricky, they are i8 in memory and must be coerced
back to i1 before further operations can be performed on them.
This fixes PR22577.
llvm-svn: 229204
declarations and just use the legacy namespace qualifier in this file
and the permanent header name.
The old wrapper header is going away to make LLVM's build more modular,
and without updating Clang I can't easily start to add usage of the new
pass manager to Clang. This should make it more clear in the code which
set of types is doing what.
llvm-svn: 229090
The /volatile:ms semantics turn volatile loads and stores into atomic
acquire and release operations. This distinction is important because
volatile memory operations do not form a happens-before relationship
with non-atomic memory. This means that a volatile store is not
sufficient for implementing a mutex unlock routine.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7580
llvm-svn: 229082
Craig Topper