Summary:
Microsoft seems to do this regardless of the language mode, so we must
also do it in order to be ABI compatible.
Fixes PR36125
Reviewers: thakis
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D47956
llvm-svn: 371642
We were previously just using a specialization in the class template instead of
creating a new specialization in the class instantiation.
Fixes llvm.org/PR42779.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D65359
llvm-svn: 367367
For 'x::template y', consistently give a "no member named 'y' in 'x'"
diagnostic if there is no such member, and give a 'template keyword not
followed by a template' name error if there is such a member but it's not a
template. In the latter case, add a note pointing at the non-template.
Don't suggest inserting a 'template' keyword in 'X::Y<' if X is dependent
if the lookup of X::Y was actually not a dependent lookup and found only
non-templates.
llvm-svn: 332076
template arguments.
This fixes some cases where we'd incorrectly accept "A::template B" when B is a
kind of template that requires template arguments (in particular, a variable
template or a concept).
llvm-svn: 331013
a preceding 'template' keyword.
We only diagnose in the dependent case (wherein we used to crash). Another bug
prevents the diagnostic from appearing in the non-template case.
llvm-svn: 330894
More generally, this permits a template to be specialized in any scope in which
it could be defined, so this also supersedes DR44 and DR374 (the latter of
which we previously only implemented in C++11 mode onwards due to unclarity as
to whether it was a DR).
llvm-svn: 327705
explicit specialization to a warning for C++98 mode (this is a defect report
resolution, so per our informal policy it should apply in C++98), and turn
the warning on by default for C++11 and later. In all cases where it fires, the
right thing to do is to remove the pointless explicit instantiation.
llvm-svn: 280308
We referred to all declaration in definitions in our diagnostic messages
which is can be inaccurate. Instead, classify the declaration and emit
an appropriate diagnostic for the new declaration and an appropriate
note pointing to the old one.
This fixes PR24116.
llvm-svn: 242190
r235046 turned "extern __declspec(selectany) int a;" from a declaration into
a definition to fix PR23242 (required for compatibility with mc.exe output).
However, this broke parsing Windows headers: A d3d11 headers contain something
like
struct SomeStruct {};
extern const __declspec(selectany) SomeStruct some_struct;
This is now a definition, and const objects either need an explicit default
ctor or an initializer so this errors out with
d3d11.h(1065,48) :
error: default initialization of an object of const type
'const CD3D11_DEFAULT' without a user-provided default constructor
(cl.exe just doesn't implement this rule, independent of selectany.)
To work around this, weaken this error into a warning for selectany decls
in microsoft mode, and recover with zero-initialization.
Doing this is a bit hairy since it adds a fixit on an error emitted
by InitializationSequence – this means it needs to build a correct AST, which
in turn means InitializationSequence::Failed() cannot return true when this
fixit is applied. As a workaround, the patch adds a fixit member to
InitializationSequence, and InitializationSequence::Perform() prints the
diagnostic if the fixit member is set right after its call to Diagnose.
That function is usually called when InitializationSequences are used –
InitListChecker::PerformEmptyInit() doesn't call it, but the InitListChecker
case never performs default-initialization, so this is technically OK.
This is the alternative, original fix for PR20208 that got reviewed in the
thread "[patch] Improve diagnostic on default-initializing const variables
(PR20208)". This change basically reverts r213725, adds the original fix for
PR20208, and makes the error a warning in Microsoft mode.
llvm-svn: 235166
This tweaks the diagnostic wording slighly, and adds a fixit on a note.
An alternative would be to add the fixit directly on the diagnostic, see
the review thread linked to from the bug for a few notes on that approach.
llvm-svn: 213725
data member definitions when the variable has an initializer
in its declaration.
For the following code:
struct S {
static const int x = 42;
};
const int S::x = 42;
This patch changes the diagnostic from:
a.cc:4:14: error: redefinition of 'x'
const int S::x = 42;
^
a.cc:2:20: note: previous definition is here
static const int x = 42;
^
to:
a.cc:4:18: error: static data member 'x' already has an initializer
const int S::x = 42;
^
a.cc:2:24: note: previous initialization is here
static const int x = 42;
^
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2235
llvm-svn: 195306
Reid Kleckner