semantics of a ctor/dtor function-try-block catch handler
by pushing a normal cleanup is not just overkill but actually
actively wrong when the handler contains an explicit return
(which is only legal in a dtor). Just emit the rethrow as
ordinary code at the fallthrough point. Fixes PR13102.
llvm-svn: 158488
- Support mangling virtual function tables (base tables need work on the
ManglerContext interface).
- Correct mangling of local scopes (i.e. functions and C++ methods).
- Replace every llvm_unreachable() for actually-reachable code with a
diagnostic.
llvm-svn: 158376
only using the linkage.
Use and test both, documenting that considering the visibility and linkage
of template parameters is a difference from gcc.
llvm-svn: 158309
struct HIDDEN foo {
};
template <class P>
struct bar {
};
template <>
struct HIDDEN bar<foo> {
DEFAULT static void zed();
};
void bar<foo>::zed() {
}
Before we would produce a hidden symbol in
struct HIDDEN foo {
};
template <class P>
struct bar {
};
template <>
struct bar<foo> {
DEFAULT static void zed();
};
void bar<foo>::zed() {
}
But adding HIDDEN to the specialization would cause us to produce a default
symbol.
llvm-svn: 157206
I'm pretty sure we are in fact doing the right thing here, but someone who knows the standard better should double-check that we are in fact supposed to zero out the member in the given testcase.
llvm-svn: 157138
* Don't copy the visibility attribute during instantiations. We have to be able
to distinguish
struct HIDDEN foo {};
template<class T>
DEFAULT void bar() {}
template DEFAULT void bar<foo>();
from
struct HIDDEN foo {};
template<class T>
DEFAULT void bar() {}
template void bar<foo>();
* If an instantiation has an attribute, it takes precedence over an attribute
in the template.
* With instantiation attributes handled with the above logic, we can now
select the minimum visibility when looking at template arguments.
llvm-svn: 156821
it is placed in a position which is never ambiguous with a
reference-to-function type. This follows some recent discussion
and ensuing proposal on cxx-abi-dev. It is not necessary to
change the mangling of CV-qualifiers because you cannot
apply CV-qualification in the normal sense to a function type.
It is not necessary to change the mangling of ref-qualifiers on
method declarations because they appear in an unambiguous
location.
In addition, mangle CV-qualifiers and ref-qualifiers on function
types when they occur in positions other than member pointers
(that is, when they appear as template arguments).
This is a minor ABI break with previous releases of clang. It
is not considered critical because (1) ref-qualifiers are
relatively rare, since AFAIK we're the only implementing compiler,
and (2) they're particularly likely to come up in contexts that
do not rely on the ODR for correctness. We apologize for any
inconvenience; this is the right thing to do.
llvm-svn: 156794
in-class initializer for one of its fields. Value-initialization of such
a type should use the in-class initializer!
The former was just a bug, the latter is a (reported) standard defect.
llvm-svn: 156274
It reduces the amount of emitted debug information:
1) DIEs in .debug_info have types DW_TAG_compile_unit, DW_TAG_subprogram,
DW_TAG_inlined_subroutine (for opt builds) and DW_TAG_lexical_block only.
2) .debug_str contains only function names.
3) No debug data for types/namespaces/variables is emitted.
4) The data in .debug_line is enough to produce valid stack traces with
function names and line numbers.
Reviewed by Eric Christopher.
llvm-svn: 156160
of templates by using the newly introduce FoldingSetVector. This
preserves insertion order for all iteration of specializations.
I've also included a somewhat terrifying testcase that rapidly builds up
a large number of functions. This is enough that any system with ASLR
will have non-deterministic debug information generated for the test
case without the fix here as the debug information is generated in part
by walking these specializations.
llvm-svn: 156133
x86_64-arguments.cpp test file and be sure to test the coerced
case as well. Thanks to Wei-Ren Chen for bringing this test
to my attention.
llvm-svn: 156047
and only consider using __cxa_atexit in the Itanium logic. The
default logic is to use atexit().
Emit "guarded" initializers in Microsoft mode unconditionally.
This is definitely not correct, but it's closer to correct than
just not emitting the initializer.
Based on a patch by Timur Iskhodzhanov!
llvm-svn: 155894
I broke this in r155838 by not actually instantiating non-dependent default arg
expressions. The motivation for that change was to avoid producing duplicate
conversion warnings for such default args (we produce them once when we parse
the template - there's no need to produce them at each instantiation) but
without actually instantiating the default arg, things break in weird ways.
Technically, I think we could still get the right diagnostic experience without
the bugs if we instantiated the non-dependent args (for non-dependent params
only) immediately, rather than lazily. But I'm not sure if such a refactoring/
change would be desirable so here's the conservative fix for now.
llvm-svn: 155893
what I'm going to treat as basically universal properties of
array-cookie code. Implement MS array cookies on top of that.
Based on a patch by Timur Iskhodzhanov!
llvm-svn: 155886
Eli Friedman