forked from OSchip/llvm-project
3261 lines
150 KiB
ReStructuredText
3261 lines
150 KiB
ReStructuredText
============================
|
||
"Clang" CFE Internals Manual
|
||
============================
|
||
|
||
.. contents::
|
||
:local:
|
||
|
||
Introduction
|
||
============
|
||
|
||
This document describes some of the more important APIs and internal design
|
||
decisions made in the Clang C front-end. The purpose of this document is to
|
||
both capture some of this high level information and also describe some of the
|
||
design decisions behind it. This is meant for people interested in hacking on
|
||
Clang, not for end-users. The description below is categorized by libraries,
|
||
and does not describe any of the clients of the libraries.
|
||
|
||
LLVM Support Library
|
||
====================
|
||
|
||
The LLVM ``libSupport`` library provides many underlying libraries and
|
||
`data-structures <https://llvm.org/docs/ProgrammersManual.html>`_, including
|
||
command line option processing, various containers and a system abstraction
|
||
layer, which is used for file system access.
|
||
|
||
The Clang "Basic" Library
|
||
=========================
|
||
|
||
This library certainly needs a better name. The "basic" library contains a
|
||
number of low-level utilities for tracking and manipulating source buffers,
|
||
locations within the source buffers, diagnostics, tokens, target abstraction,
|
||
and information about the subset of the language being compiled for.
|
||
|
||
Part of this infrastructure is specific to C (such as the ``TargetInfo``
|
||
class), other parts could be reused for other non-C-based languages
|
||
(``SourceLocation``, ``SourceManager``, ``Diagnostics``, ``FileManager``).
|
||
When and if there is future demand we can figure out if it makes sense to
|
||
introduce a new library, move the general classes somewhere else, or introduce
|
||
some other solution.
|
||
|
||
We describe the roles of these classes in order of their dependencies.
|
||
|
||
The Diagnostics Subsystem
|
||
-------------------------
|
||
|
||
The Clang Diagnostics subsystem is an important part of how the compiler
|
||
communicates with the human. Diagnostics are the warnings and errors produced
|
||
when the code is incorrect or dubious. In Clang, each diagnostic produced has
|
||
(at the minimum) a unique ID, an English translation associated with it, a
|
||
:ref:`SourceLocation <SourceLocation>` to "put the caret", and a severity
|
||
(e.g., ``WARNING`` or ``ERROR``). They can also optionally include a number of
|
||
arguments to the diagnostic (which fill in "%0"'s in the string) as well as a
|
||
number of source ranges that related to the diagnostic.
|
||
|
||
In this section, we'll be giving examples produced by the Clang command line
|
||
driver, but diagnostics can be :ref:`rendered in many different ways
|
||
<DiagnosticConsumer>` depending on how the ``DiagnosticConsumer`` interface is
|
||
implemented. A representative example of a diagnostic is:
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: text
|
||
|
||
t.c:38:15: error: invalid operands to binary expression ('int *' and '_Complex float')
|
||
P = (P-42) + Gamma*4;
|
||
~~~~~~ ^ ~~~~~~~
|
||
|
||
In this example, you can see the English translation, the severity (error), you
|
||
can see the source location (the caret ("``^``") and file/line/column info),
|
||
the source ranges "``~~~~``", arguments to the diagnostic ("``int*``" and
|
||
"``_Complex float``"). You'll have to believe me that there is a unique ID
|
||
backing the diagnostic :).
|
||
|
||
Getting all of this to happen has several steps and involves many moving
|
||
pieces, this section describes them and talks about best practices when adding
|
||
a new diagnostic.
|
||
|
||
The ``Diagnostic*Kinds.td`` files
|
||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||
|
||
Diagnostics are created by adding an entry to one of the
|
||
``clang/Basic/Diagnostic*Kinds.td`` files, depending on what library will be
|
||
using it. From this file, :program:`tblgen` generates the unique ID of the
|
||
diagnostic, the severity of the diagnostic and the English translation + format
|
||
string.
|
||
|
||
There is little sanity with the naming of the unique ID's right now. Some
|
||
start with ``err_``, ``warn_``, ``ext_`` to encode the severity into the name.
|
||
Since the enum is referenced in the C++ code that produces the diagnostic, it
|
||
is somewhat useful for it to be reasonably short.
|
||
|
||
The severity of the diagnostic comes from the set {``NOTE``, ``REMARK``,
|
||
``WARNING``,
|
||
``EXTENSION``, ``EXTWARN``, ``ERROR``}. The ``ERROR`` severity is used for
|
||
diagnostics indicating the program is never acceptable under any circumstances.
|
||
When an error is emitted, the AST for the input code may not be fully built.
|
||
The ``EXTENSION`` and ``EXTWARN`` severities are used for extensions to the
|
||
language that Clang accepts. This means that Clang fully understands and can
|
||
represent them in the AST, but we produce diagnostics to tell the user their
|
||
code is non-portable. The difference is that the former are ignored by
|
||
default, and the later warn by default. The ``WARNING`` severity is used for
|
||
constructs that are valid in the currently selected source language but that
|
||
are dubious in some way. The ``REMARK`` severity provides generic information
|
||
about the compilation that is not necessarily related to any dubious code. The
|
||
``NOTE`` level is used to staple more information onto previous diagnostics.
|
||
|
||
These *severities* are mapped into a smaller set (the ``Diagnostic::Level``
|
||
enum, {``Ignored``, ``Note``, ``Remark``, ``Warning``, ``Error``, ``Fatal``}) of
|
||
output
|
||
*levels* by the diagnostics subsystem based on various configuration options.
|
||
Clang internally supports a fully fine grained mapping mechanism that allows
|
||
you to map almost any diagnostic to the output level that you want. The only
|
||
diagnostics that cannot be mapped are ``NOTE``\ s, which always follow the
|
||
severity of the previously emitted diagnostic and ``ERROR``\ s, which can only
|
||
be mapped to ``Fatal`` (it is not possible to turn an error into a warning, for
|
||
example).
|
||
|
||
Diagnostic mappings are used in many ways. For example, if the user specifies
|
||
``-pedantic``, ``EXTENSION`` maps to ``Warning``, if they specify
|
||
``-pedantic-errors``, it turns into ``Error``. This is used to implement
|
||
options like ``-Wunused_macros``, ``-Wundef`` etc.
|
||
|
||
Mapping to ``Fatal`` should only be used for diagnostics that are considered so
|
||
severe that error recovery won't be able to recover sensibly from them (thus
|
||
spewing a ton of bogus errors). One example of this class of error are failure
|
||
to ``#include`` a file.
|
||
|
||
The Format String
|
||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||
|
||
The format string for the diagnostic is very simple, but it has some power. It
|
||
takes the form of a string in English with markers that indicate where and how
|
||
arguments to the diagnostic are inserted and formatted. For example, here are
|
||
some simple format strings:
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: c++
|
||
|
||
"binary integer literals are an extension"
|
||
"format string contains '\\0' within the string body"
|
||
"more '%%' conversions than data arguments"
|
||
"invalid operands to binary expression (%0 and %1)"
|
||
"overloaded '%0' must be a %select{unary|binary|unary or binary}2 operator"
|
||
" (has %1 parameter%s1)"
|
||
|
||
These examples show some important points of format strings. You can use any
|
||
plain ASCII character in the diagnostic string except "``%``" without a
|
||
problem, but these are C strings, so you have to use and be aware of all the C
|
||
escape sequences (as in the second example). If you want to produce a "``%``"
|
||
in the output, use the "``%%``" escape sequence, like the third diagnostic.
|
||
Finally, Clang uses the "``%...[digit]``" sequences to specify where and how
|
||
arguments to the diagnostic are formatted.
|
||
|
||
Arguments to the diagnostic are numbered according to how they are specified by
|
||
the C++ code that :ref:`produces them <internals-producing-diag>`, and are
|
||
referenced by ``%0`` .. ``%9``. If you have more than 10 arguments to your
|
||
diagnostic, you are doing something wrong :). Unlike ``printf``, there is no
|
||
requirement that arguments to the diagnostic end up in the output in the same
|
||
order as they are specified, you could have a format string with "``%1 %0``"
|
||
that swaps them, for example. The text in between the percent and digit are
|
||
formatting instructions. If there are no instructions, the argument is just
|
||
turned into a string and substituted in.
|
||
|
||
Here are some "best practices" for writing the English format string:
|
||
|
||
* Keep the string short. It should ideally fit in the 80 column limit of the
|
||
``DiagnosticKinds.td`` file. This avoids the diagnostic wrapping when
|
||
printed, and forces you to think about the important point you are conveying
|
||
with the diagnostic.
|
||
* Take advantage of location information. The user will be able to see the
|
||
line and location of the caret, so you don't need to tell them that the
|
||
problem is with the 4th argument to the function: just point to it.
|
||
* Do not capitalize the diagnostic string, and do not end it with a period.
|
||
* If you need to quote something in the diagnostic string, use single quotes.
|
||
|
||
Diagnostics should never take random English strings as arguments: you
|
||
shouldn't use "``you have a problem with %0``" and pass in things like "``your
|
||
argument``" or "``your return value``" as arguments. Doing this prevents
|
||
:ref:`translating <internals-diag-translation>` the Clang diagnostics to other
|
||
languages (because they'll get random English words in their otherwise
|
||
localized diagnostic). The exceptions to this are C/C++ language keywords
|
||
(e.g., ``auto``, ``const``, ``mutable``, etc) and C/C++ operators (``/=``).
|
||
Note that things like "pointer" and "reference" are not keywords. On the other
|
||
hand, you *can* include anything that comes from the user's source code,
|
||
including variable names, types, labels, etc. The "``select``" format can be
|
||
used to achieve this sort of thing in a localizable way, see below.
|
||
|
||
Formatting a Diagnostic Argument
|
||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||
|
||
Arguments to diagnostics are fully typed internally, and come from a couple
|
||
different classes: integers, types, names, and random strings. Depending on
|
||
the class of the argument, it can be optionally formatted in different ways.
|
||
This gives the ``DiagnosticConsumer`` information about what the argument means
|
||
without requiring it to use a specific presentation (consider this MVC for
|
||
Clang :).
|
||
|
||
Here are the different diagnostic argument formats currently supported by
|
||
Clang:
|
||
|
||
**"s" format**
|
||
|
||
Example:
|
||
``"requires %1 parameter%s1"``
|
||
Class:
|
||
Integers
|
||
Description:
|
||
This is a simple formatter for integers that is useful when producing English
|
||
diagnostics. When the integer is 1, it prints as nothing. When the integer
|
||
is not 1, it prints as "``s``". This allows some simple grammatical forms to
|
||
be to be handled correctly, and eliminates the need to use gross things like
|
||
``"requires %1 parameter(s)"``.
|
||
|
||
**"select" format**
|
||
|
||
Example:
|
||
``"must be a %select{unary|binary|unary or binary}2 operator"``
|
||
Class:
|
||
Integers
|
||
Description:
|
||
This format specifier is used to merge multiple related diagnostics together
|
||
into one common one, without requiring the difference to be specified as an
|
||
English string argument. Instead of specifying the string, the diagnostic
|
||
gets an integer argument and the format string selects the numbered option.
|
||
In this case, the "``%2``" value must be an integer in the range [0..2]. If
|
||
it is 0, it prints "unary", if it is 1 it prints "binary" if it is 2, it
|
||
prints "unary or binary". This allows other language translations to
|
||
substitute reasonable words (or entire phrases) based on the semantics of the
|
||
diagnostic instead of having to do things textually. The selected string
|
||
does undergo formatting.
|
||
|
||
**"plural" format**
|
||
|
||
Example:
|
||
``"you have %1 %plural{1:mouse|:mice}1 connected to your computer"``
|
||
Class:
|
||
Integers
|
||
Description:
|
||
This is a formatter for complex plural forms. It is designed to handle even
|
||
the requirements of languages with very complex plural forms, as many Baltic
|
||
languages have. The argument consists of a series of expression/form pairs,
|
||
separated by ":", where the first form whose expression evaluates to true is
|
||
the result of the modifier.
|
||
|
||
An expression can be empty, in which case it is always true. See the example
|
||
at the top. Otherwise, it is a series of one or more numeric conditions,
|
||
separated by ",". If any condition matches, the expression matches. Each
|
||
numeric condition can take one of three forms.
|
||
|
||
* number: A simple decimal number matches if the argument is the same as the
|
||
number. Example: ``"%plural{1:mouse|:mice}4"``
|
||
* range: A range in square brackets matches if the argument is within the
|
||
range. Then range is inclusive on both ends. Example:
|
||
``"%plural{0:none|1:one|[2,5]:some|:many}2"``
|
||
* modulo: A modulo operator is followed by a number, and equals sign and
|
||
either a number or a range. The tests are the same as for plain numbers
|
||
and ranges, but the argument is taken modulo the number first. Example:
|
||
``"%plural{%100=0:even hundred|%100=[1,50]:lower half|:everything else}1"``
|
||
|
||
The parser is very unforgiving. A syntax error, even whitespace, will abort,
|
||
as will a failure to match the argument against any expression.
|
||
|
||
**"ordinal" format**
|
||
|
||
Example:
|
||
``"ambiguity in %ordinal0 argument"``
|
||
Class:
|
||
Integers
|
||
Description:
|
||
This is a formatter which represents the argument number as an ordinal: the
|
||
value ``1`` becomes ``1st``, ``3`` becomes ``3rd``, and so on. Values less
|
||
than ``1`` are not supported. This formatter is currently hard-coded to use
|
||
English ordinals.
|
||
|
||
**"objcclass" format**
|
||
|
||
Example:
|
||
``"method %objcclass0 not found"``
|
||
Class:
|
||
``DeclarationName``
|
||
Description:
|
||
This is a simple formatter that indicates the ``DeclarationName`` corresponds
|
||
to an Objective-C class method selector. As such, it prints the selector
|
||
with a leading "``+``".
|
||
|
||
**"objcinstance" format**
|
||
|
||
Example:
|
||
``"method %objcinstance0 not found"``
|
||
Class:
|
||
``DeclarationName``
|
||
Description:
|
||
This is a simple formatter that indicates the ``DeclarationName`` corresponds
|
||
to an Objective-C instance method selector. As such, it prints the selector
|
||
with a leading "``-``".
|
||
|
||
**"q" format**
|
||
|
||
Example:
|
||
``"candidate found by name lookup is %q0"``
|
||
Class:
|
||
``NamedDecl *``
|
||
Description:
|
||
This formatter indicates that the fully-qualified name of the declaration
|
||
should be printed, e.g., "``std::vector``" rather than "``vector``".
|
||
|
||
**"diff" format**
|
||
|
||
Example:
|
||
``"no known conversion %diff{from $ to $|from argument type to parameter type}1,2"``
|
||
Class:
|
||
``QualType``
|
||
Description:
|
||
This formatter takes two ``QualType``\ s and attempts to print a template
|
||
difference between the two. If tree printing is off, the text inside the
|
||
braces before the pipe is printed, with the formatted text replacing the $.
|
||
If tree printing is on, the text after the pipe is printed and a type tree is
|
||
printed after the diagnostic message.
|
||
|
||
It is really easy to add format specifiers to the Clang diagnostics system, but
|
||
they should be discussed before they are added. If you are creating a lot of
|
||
repetitive diagnostics and/or have an idea for a useful formatter, please bring
|
||
it up on the cfe-dev mailing list.
|
||
|
||
**"sub" format**
|
||
|
||
Example:
|
||
Given the following record definition of type ``TextSubstitution``:
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: text
|
||
|
||
def select_ovl_candidate : TextSubstitution<
|
||
"%select{function|constructor}0%select{| template| %2}1">;
|
||
|
||
which can be used as
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: text
|
||
|
||
def note_ovl_candidate : Note<
|
||
"candidate %sub{select_ovl_candidate}3,2,1 not viable">;
|
||
|
||
and will act as if it was written
|
||
``"candidate %select{function|constructor}3%select{| template| %1}2 not viable"``.
|
||
Description:
|
||
This format specifier is used to avoid repeating strings verbatim in multiple
|
||
diagnostics. The argument to ``%sub`` must name a ``TextSubstitution`` tblgen
|
||
record. The substitution must specify all arguments used by the substitution,
|
||
and the modifier indexes in the substitution are re-numbered accordingly. The
|
||
substituted text must itself be a valid format string before substitution.
|
||
|
||
.. _internals-producing-diag:
|
||
|
||
Producing the Diagnostic
|
||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||
|
||
Now that you've created the diagnostic in the ``Diagnostic*Kinds.td`` file, you
|
||
need to write the code that detects the condition in question and emits the new
|
||
diagnostic. Various components of Clang (e.g., the preprocessor, ``Sema``,
|
||
etc.) provide a helper function named "``Diag``". It creates a diagnostic and
|
||
accepts the arguments, ranges, and other information that goes along with it.
|
||
|
||
For example, the binary expression error comes from code like this:
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: c++
|
||
|
||
if (various things that are bad)
|
||
Diag(Loc, diag::err_typecheck_invalid_operands)
|
||
<< lex->getType() << rex->getType()
|
||
<< lex->getSourceRange() << rex->getSourceRange();
|
||
|
||
This shows that use of the ``Diag`` method: it takes a location (a
|
||
:ref:`SourceLocation <SourceLocation>` object) and a diagnostic enum value
|
||
(which matches the name from ``Diagnostic*Kinds.td``). If the diagnostic takes
|
||
arguments, they are specified with the ``<<`` operator: the first argument
|
||
becomes ``%0``, the second becomes ``%1``, etc. The diagnostic interface
|
||
allows you to specify arguments of many different types, including ``int`` and
|
||
``unsigned`` for integer arguments, ``const char*`` and ``std::string`` for
|
||
string arguments, ``DeclarationName`` and ``const IdentifierInfo *`` for names,
|
||
``QualType`` for types, etc. ``SourceRange``\ s are also specified with the
|
||
``<<`` operator, but do not have a specific ordering requirement.
|
||
|
||
As you can see, adding and producing a diagnostic is pretty straightforward.
|
||
The hard part is deciding exactly what you need to say to help the user,
|
||
picking a suitable wording, and providing the information needed to format it
|
||
correctly. The good news is that the call site that issues a diagnostic should
|
||
be completely independent of how the diagnostic is formatted and in what
|
||
language it is rendered.
|
||
|
||
Fix-It Hints
|
||
^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||
|
||
In some cases, the front end emits diagnostics when it is clear that some small
|
||
change to the source code would fix the problem. For example, a missing
|
||
semicolon at the end of a statement or a use of deprecated syntax that is
|
||
easily rewritten into a more modern form. Clang tries very hard to emit the
|
||
diagnostic and recover gracefully in these and other cases.
|
||
|
||
However, for these cases where the fix is obvious, the diagnostic can be
|
||
annotated with a hint (referred to as a "fix-it hint") that describes how to
|
||
change the code referenced by the diagnostic to fix the problem. For example,
|
||
it might add the missing semicolon at the end of the statement or rewrite the
|
||
use of a deprecated construct into something more palatable. Here is one such
|
||
example from the C++ front end, where we warn about the right-shift operator
|
||
changing meaning from C++98 to C++11:
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: text
|
||
|
||
test.cpp:3:7: warning: use of right-shift operator ('>>') in template argument
|
||
will require parentheses in C++11
|
||
A<100 >> 2> *a;
|
||
^
|
||
( )
|
||
|
||
Here, the fix-it hint is suggesting that parentheses be added, and showing
|
||
exactly where those parentheses would be inserted into the source code. The
|
||
fix-it hints themselves describe what changes to make to the source code in an
|
||
abstract manner, which the text diagnostic printer renders as a line of
|
||
"insertions" below the caret line. :ref:`Other diagnostic clients
|
||
<DiagnosticConsumer>` might choose to render the code differently (e.g., as
|
||
markup inline) or even give the user the ability to automatically fix the
|
||
problem.
|
||
|
||
Fix-it hints on errors and warnings need to obey these rules:
|
||
|
||
* Since they are automatically applied if ``-Xclang -fixit`` is passed to the
|
||
driver, they should only be used when it's very likely they match the user's
|
||
intent.
|
||
* Clang must recover from errors as if the fix-it had been applied.
|
||
* Fix-it hints on a warning must not change the meaning of the code.
|
||
However, a hint may clarify the meaning as intentional, for example by adding
|
||
parentheses when the precedence of operators isn't obvious.
|
||
|
||
If a fix-it can't obey these rules, put the fix-it on a note. Fix-its on notes
|
||
are not applied automatically.
|
||
|
||
All fix-it hints are described by the ``FixItHint`` class, instances of which
|
||
should be attached to the diagnostic using the ``<<`` operator in the same way
|
||
that highlighted source ranges and arguments are passed to the diagnostic.
|
||
Fix-it hints can be created with one of three constructors:
|
||
|
||
* ``FixItHint::CreateInsertion(Loc, Code)``
|
||
|
||
Specifies that the given ``Code`` (a string) should be inserted before the
|
||
source location ``Loc``.
|
||
|
||
* ``FixItHint::CreateRemoval(Range)``
|
||
|
||
Specifies that the code in the given source ``Range`` should be removed.
|
||
|
||
* ``FixItHint::CreateReplacement(Range, Code)``
|
||
|
||
Specifies that the code in the given source ``Range`` should be removed,
|
||
and replaced with the given ``Code`` string.
|
||
|
||
.. _DiagnosticConsumer:
|
||
|
||
The ``DiagnosticConsumer`` Interface
|
||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||
|
||
Once code generates a diagnostic with all of the arguments and the rest of the
|
||
relevant information, Clang needs to know what to do with it. As previously
|
||
mentioned, the diagnostic machinery goes through some filtering to map a
|
||
severity onto a diagnostic level, then (assuming the diagnostic is not mapped
|
||
to "``Ignore``") it invokes an object that implements the ``DiagnosticConsumer``
|
||
interface with the information.
|
||
|
||
It is possible to implement this interface in many different ways. For
|
||
example, the normal Clang ``DiagnosticConsumer`` (named
|
||
``TextDiagnosticPrinter``) turns the arguments into strings (according to the
|
||
various formatting rules), prints out the file/line/column information and the
|
||
string, then prints out the line of code, the source ranges, and the caret.
|
||
However, this behavior isn't required.
|
||
|
||
Another implementation of the ``DiagnosticConsumer`` interface is the
|
||
``TextDiagnosticBuffer`` class, which is used when Clang is in ``-verify``
|
||
mode. Instead of formatting and printing out the diagnostics, this
|
||
implementation just captures and remembers the diagnostics as they fly by.
|
||
Then ``-verify`` compares the list of produced diagnostics to the list of
|
||
expected ones. If they disagree, it prints out its own output. Full
|
||
documentation for the ``-verify`` mode can be found in the Clang API
|
||
documentation for `VerifyDiagnosticConsumer
|
||
</doxygen/classclang_1_1VerifyDiagnosticConsumer.html#details>`_.
|
||
|
||
There are many other possible implementations of this interface, and this is
|
||
why we prefer diagnostics to pass down rich structured information in
|
||
arguments. For example, an HTML output might want declaration names be
|
||
linkified to where they come from in the source. Another example is that a GUI
|
||
might let you click on typedefs to expand them. This application would want to
|
||
pass significantly more information about types through to the GUI than a
|
||
simple flat string. The interface allows this to happen.
|
||
|
||
.. _internals-diag-translation:
|
||
|
||
Adding Translations to Clang
|
||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||
|
||
Not possible yet! Diagnostic strings should be written in UTF-8, the client can
|
||
translate to the relevant code page if needed. Each translation completely
|
||
replaces the format string for the diagnostic.
|
||
|
||
.. _SourceLocation:
|
||
.. _SourceManager:
|
||
|
||
The ``SourceLocation`` and ``SourceManager`` classes
|
||
----------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
||
Strangely enough, the ``SourceLocation`` class represents a location within the
|
||
source code of the program. Important design points include:
|
||
|
||
#. ``sizeof(SourceLocation)`` must be extremely small, as these are embedded
|
||
into many AST nodes and are passed around often. Currently it is 32 bits.
|
||
#. ``SourceLocation`` must be a simple value object that can be efficiently
|
||
copied.
|
||
#. We should be able to represent a source location for any byte of any input
|
||
file. This includes in the middle of tokens, in whitespace, in trigraphs,
|
||
etc.
|
||
#. A ``SourceLocation`` must encode the current ``#include`` stack that was
|
||
active when the location was processed. For example, if the location
|
||
corresponds to a token, it should contain the set of ``#include``\ s active
|
||
when the token was lexed. This allows us to print the ``#include`` stack
|
||
for a diagnostic.
|
||
#. ``SourceLocation`` must be able to describe macro expansions, capturing both
|
||
the ultimate instantiation point and the source of the original character
|
||
data.
|
||
|
||
In practice, the ``SourceLocation`` works together with the ``SourceManager``
|
||
class to encode two pieces of information about a location: its spelling
|
||
location and its expansion location. For most tokens, these will be the
|
||
same. However, for a macro expansion (or tokens that came from a ``_Pragma``
|
||
directive) these will describe the location of the characters corresponding to
|
||
the token and the location where the token was used (i.e., the macro
|
||
expansion point or the location of the ``_Pragma`` itself).
|
||
|
||
The Clang front-end inherently depends on the location of a token being tracked
|
||
correctly. If it is ever incorrect, the front-end may get confused and die.
|
||
The reason for this is that the notion of the "spelling" of a ``Token`` in
|
||
Clang depends on being able to find the original input characters for the
|
||
token. This concept maps directly to the "spelling location" for the token.
|
||
|
||
``SourceRange`` and ``CharSourceRange``
|
||
---------------------------------------
|
||
|
||
.. mostly taken from https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2010-August/010595.html
|
||
|
||
Clang represents most source ranges by [first, last], where "first" and "last"
|
||
each point to the beginning of their respective tokens. For example consider
|
||
the ``SourceRange`` of the following statement:
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: text
|
||
|
||
x = foo + bar;
|
||
^first ^last
|
||
|
||
To map from this representation to a character-based representation, the "last"
|
||
location needs to be adjusted to point to (or past) the end of that token with
|
||
either ``Lexer::MeasureTokenLength()`` or ``Lexer::getLocForEndOfToken()``. For
|
||
the rare cases where character-level source ranges information is needed we use
|
||
the ``CharSourceRange`` class.
|
||
|
||
The Driver Library
|
||
==================
|
||
|
||
The clang Driver and library are documented :doc:`here <DriverInternals>`.
|
||
|
||
Precompiled Headers
|
||
===================
|
||
|
||
Clang supports precompiled headers (:doc:`PCH <PCHInternals>`), which uses a
|
||
serialized representation of Clang's internal data structures, encoded with the
|
||
`LLVM bitstream format <https://llvm.org/docs/BitCodeFormat.html>`_.
|
||
|
||
The Frontend Library
|
||
====================
|
||
|
||
The Frontend library contains functionality useful for building tools on top of
|
||
the Clang libraries, for example several methods for outputting diagnostics.
|
||
|
||
Compiler Invocation
|
||
-------------------
|
||
|
||
One of the classes provided by the Frontend library is ``CompilerInvocation``,
|
||
which holds information that describe current invocation of the Clang frontend.
|
||
The information typically comes from the command line constructed by the Clang
|
||
driver or from clients performing custom initialization. The data structure is
|
||
split into logical units used by different parts of the compiler, for example
|
||
``PreprocessorOptions``, ``LanguageOptions`` or ``CodeGenOptions``.
|
||
|
||
Command Line Interface
|
||
----------------------
|
||
|
||
The command line interface of the Clang ``-cc1`` frontend is defined alongside
|
||
the driver options in ``clang/Driver/Options.td``. The information making up an
|
||
option definition includes its prefix and name (for example ``-std=``), form and
|
||
position of the option value, help text, aliases and more. Each option may
|
||
belong to a certain group and can be marked with zero or more flags. Options
|
||
accepted by the ``-cc1`` frontend are marked with the ``CC1Option`` flag.
|
||
|
||
Command Line Parsing
|
||
--------------------
|
||
|
||
Option definitions are processed by the ``-gen-opt-parser-defs`` tablegen
|
||
backend during early stages of the build. Options are then used for querying an
|
||
instance ``llvm::opt::ArgList``, a wrapper around the command line arguments.
|
||
This is done in the Clang driver to construct individual jobs based on the
|
||
driver arguments and also in the ``CompilerInvocation::CreateFromArgs`` function
|
||
that parses the ``-cc1`` frontend arguments.
|
||
|
||
Command Line Generation
|
||
-----------------------
|
||
|
||
Any valid ``CompilerInvocation`` created from a ``-cc1`` command line can be
|
||
also serialized back into semantically equivalent command line in a
|
||
deterministic manner. This enables features such as implicitly discovered,
|
||
explicitly built modules.
|
||
|
||
..
|
||
TODO: Create and link corresponding section in Modules.rst.
|
||
|
||
Adding new Command Line Option
|
||
------------------------------
|
||
|
||
When adding a new command line option, the first place of interest is the header
|
||
file declaring the corresponding options class (e.g. ``CodeGenOptions.h`` for
|
||
command line option that affects the code generation). Create new member
|
||
variable for the option value:
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: diff
|
||
|
||
class CodeGenOptions : public CodeGenOptionsBase {
|
||
|
||
+ /// List of dynamic shared object files to be loaded as pass plugins.
|
||
+ std::vector<std::string> PassPlugins;
|
||
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
Next, declare the command line interface of the option in the tablegen file
|
||
``clang/include/clang/Driver/Options.td``. This is done by instantiating the
|
||
``Option`` class (defined in ``llvm/include/llvm/Option/OptParser.td``). The
|
||
instance is typically created through one of the helper classes that encode the
|
||
acceptable ways to specify the option value on the command line:
|
||
|
||
* ``Flag`` - the option does not accept any value,
|
||
* ``Joined`` - the value must immediately follow the option name within the same
|
||
argument,
|
||
* ``Separate`` - the value must follow the option name in the next command line
|
||
argument,
|
||
* ``JoinedOrSeparate`` - the value can be specified either as ``Joined`` or
|
||
``Separate``,
|
||
* ``CommaJoined`` - the values are comma-separated and must immediately follow
|
||
the option name within the same argument (see ``Wl,`` for an example).
|
||
|
||
The helper classes take a list of acceptable prefixes of the option (e.g.
|
||
``"-"``, ``"--"`` or ``"/"``) and the option name:
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: diff
|
||
|
||
// Options.td
|
||
|
||
+ def fpass_plugin_EQ : Joined<["-"], "fpass-plugin=">;
|
||
|
||
Then, specify additional attributes via mix-ins:
|
||
|
||
* ``HelpText`` holds the text that will be printed besides the option name when
|
||
the user requests help (e.g. via ``clang --help``).
|
||
* ``Group`` specifies the "category" of options this option belongs to. This is
|
||
used by various tools to filter certain options of interest.
|
||
* ``Flags`` may contain a number of "tags" associated with the option. This
|
||
enables more granular filtering than the ``Group`` attribute.
|
||
* ``Alias`` denotes that the option is an alias of another option. This may be
|
||
combined with ``AliasArgs`` that holds the implied value.
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: diff
|
||
|
||
// Options.td
|
||
|
||
def fpass_plugin_EQ : Joined<["-"], "fpass-plugin=">,
|
||
+ Group<f_Group>, Flags<[CC1Option]>,
|
||
+ HelpText<"Load pass plugin from a dynamic shared object file.">;
|
||
|
||
New options are recognized by the Clang driver unless marked with the
|
||
``NoDriverOption`` flag. On the other hand, options intended for the ``-cc1``
|
||
frontend must be explicitly marked with the ``CC1Option`` flag.
|
||
|
||
Next, parse (or manufacture) the command line arguments in the Clang driver and
|
||
use them to construct the ``-cc1`` job:
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: diff
|
||
|
||
void Clang::ConstructJob(const ArgList &Args /*...*/) const {
|
||
ArgStringList CmdArgs;
|
||
// ...
|
||
|
||
+ for (const Arg *A : Args.filtered(OPT_fpass_plugin_EQ)) {
|
||
+ CmdArgs.push_back(Args.MakeArgString(Twine("-fpass-plugin=") + A->getValue()));
|
||
+ A->claim();
|
||
+ }
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
The last step is implementing the ``-cc1`` command line argument
|
||
parsing/generation that initializes/serializes the option class (in our case
|
||
``CodeGenOptions``) stored within ``CompilerInvocation``. This can be done
|
||
automatically by using the marshalling annotations on the option definition:
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: diff
|
||
|
||
// Options.td
|
||
|
||
def fpass_plugin_EQ : Joined<["-"], "fpass-plugin=">,
|
||
Group<f_Group>, Flags<[CC1Option]>,
|
||
HelpText<"Load pass plugin from a dynamic shared object file.">,
|
||
+ MarshallingInfoStringVector<CodeGenOpts<"PassPlugins">>;
|
||
|
||
Inner workings of the system are introduced in the :ref:`marshalling
|
||
infrastructure <OptionMarshalling>` section and the available annotations are
|
||
listed :ref:`here <OptionMarshallingAnnotations>`.
|
||
|
||
In case the marshalling infrastructure does not support the desired semantics,
|
||
consider simplifying it to fit the existing model. This makes the command line
|
||
more uniform and reduces the amount of custom, manually written code. Remember
|
||
that the ``-cc1`` command line interface is intended only for Clang developers,
|
||
meaning it does not need to mirror the driver interface, maintain backward
|
||
compatibility or be compatible with GCC.
|
||
|
||
If the option semantics cannot be encoded via marshalling annotations, you can
|
||
resort to parsing/serializing the command line arguments manually:
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: diff
|
||
|
||
// CompilerInvocation.cpp
|
||
|
||
static bool ParseCodeGenArgs(CodeGenOptions &Opts, ArgList &Args /*...*/) {
|
||
// ...
|
||
|
||
+ Opts.PassPlugins = Args.getAllArgValues(OPT_fpass_plugin_EQ);
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
static void GenerateCodeGenArgs(const CodeGenOptions &Opts,
|
||
SmallVectorImpl<const char *> &Args,
|
||
CompilerInvocation::StringAllocator SA /*...*/) {
|
||
// ...
|
||
|
||
+ for (const std::string &PassPlugin : Opts.PassPlugins)
|
||
+ GenerateArg(Args, OPT_fpass_plugin_EQ, PassPlugin, SA);
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
Finally, you can specify the argument on the command line:
|
||
``clang -fpass-plugin=a -fpass-plugin=b`` and use the new member variable as
|
||
desired.
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: diff
|
||
|
||
void EmitAssemblyHelper::EmitAssemblyWithNewPassManager(/*...*/) {
|
||
// ...
|
||
+ for (auto &PluginFN : CodeGenOpts.PassPlugins)
|
||
+ if (auto PassPlugin = PassPlugin::Load(PluginFN))
|
||
+ PassPlugin->registerPassBuilderCallbacks(PB);
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
.. _OptionMarshalling:
|
||
|
||
Option Marshalling Infrastructure
|
||
---------------------------------
|
||
|
||
The option marshalling infrastructure automates the parsing of command line
|
||
arguments into ``CompilerInvocation`` and their generation from
|
||
``CompilerInvocation``. The system replaces lots of repetitive C++ code with
|
||
simple, declarative tablegen annotations and it's being used for the majority of
|
||
the ``-cc1`` command line interface. This section provides an overview of the
|
||
system.
|
||
|
||
To read and modify contents of ``CompilerInvocation``, the marshalling system
|
||
uses key paths, which are declared in two steps. First, a tablegen definition
|
||
for the ``CompilerInvocation`` member is created by inheriting from
|
||
``KeyPathAndMacro``:
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: text
|
||
|
||
// Options.td
|
||
|
||
class LangOpts<string field> : KeyPathAndMacro<"LangOpts->", field, "LANG_"> {}
|
||
// CompilerInvocation member ^^^^^^^^^^
|
||
// OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING prefix ^^^^^
|
||
|
||
The first argument to the parent class is the beginning of the key path that
|
||
references the ``CompilerInvocation`` member. This argument ends with ``->`` if
|
||
the member is a pointer type or with ``.`` if it's a value type. The child class
|
||
takes a single parameter ``field`` that is forwarded as the second argument to
|
||
the base class. The child class can then be used like so:
|
||
``LangOpts<"IgnoreExceptions">``, constructing a key path to the field
|
||
``LangOpts->IgnoreExceptions``. The third argument passed to the parent class is
|
||
a string that the tablegen backend uses as a prefix to the
|
||
``OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING`` macro. Using the key path as a mix-in on an
|
||
``Option`` instance instructs the backend to generate the following code:
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: c++
|
||
|
||
// Options.inc
|
||
|
||
#ifdef LANG_OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING
|
||
LANG_OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING([...], LangOpts->IgnoreExceptions, [...])
|
||
#endif // LANG_OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING
|
||
|
||
Such definition can be used used in the function for parsing and generating
|
||
command line:
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: c++
|
||
|
||
// clang/lib/Frontend/CompilerInvoation.cpp
|
||
|
||
bool CompilerInvocation::ParseLangArgs(LangOptions *LangOpts, ArgList &Args,
|
||
DiagnosticsEngine &Diags) {
|
||
bool Success = true;
|
||
|
||
#define LANG_OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING( \
|
||
PREFIX_TYPE, NAME, ID, KIND, GROUP, ALIAS, ALIASARGS, FLAGS, PARAM, \
|
||
HELPTEXT, METAVAR, VALUES, SPELLING, SHOULD_PARSE, ALWAYS_EMIT, KEYPATH, \
|
||
DEFAULT_VALUE, IMPLIED_CHECK, IMPLIED_VALUE, NORMALIZER, DENORMALIZER, \
|
||
MERGER, EXTRACTOR, TABLE_INDEX) \
|
||
PARSE_OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING(Args, Diags, Success, ID, FLAGS, PARAM, \
|
||
SHOULD_PARSE, KEYPATH, DEFAULT_VALUE, \
|
||
IMPLIED_CHECK, IMPLIED_VALUE, NORMALIZER, \
|
||
MERGER, TABLE_INDEX)
|
||
#include "clang/Driver/Options.inc"
|
||
#undef LANG_OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING
|
||
|
||
// ...
|
||
|
||
return Success;
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
void CompilerInvocation::GenerateLangArgs(LangOptions *LangOpts,
|
||
SmallVectorImpl<const char *> &Args,
|
||
StringAllocator SA) {
|
||
#define LANG_OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING( \
|
||
PREFIX_TYPE, NAME, ID, KIND, GROUP, ALIAS, ALIASARGS, FLAGS, PARAM, \
|
||
HELPTEXT, METAVAR, VALUES, SPELLING, SHOULD_PARSE, ALWAYS_EMIT, KEYPATH, \
|
||
DEFAULT_VALUE, IMPLIED_CHECK, IMPLIED_VALUE, NORMALIZER, DENORMALIZER, \
|
||
MERGER, EXTRACTOR, TABLE_INDEX) \
|
||
GENERATE_OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING( \
|
||
Args, SA, KIND, FLAGS, SPELLING, ALWAYS_EMIT, KEYPATH, DEFAULT_VALUE, \
|
||
IMPLIED_CHECK, IMPLIED_VALUE, DENORMALIZER, EXTRACTOR, TABLE_INDEX)
|
||
#include "clang/Driver/Options.inc"
|
||
#undef LANG_OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING
|
||
|
||
// ...
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
The ``PARSE_OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING`` and ``GENERATE_OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING``
|
||
macros are defined in ``CompilerInvocation.cpp`` and they implement the generic
|
||
algorithm for parsing and generating command line arguments.
|
||
|
||
.. _OptionMarshallingAnnotations:
|
||
|
||
Option Marshalling Annotations
|
||
------------------------------
|
||
|
||
How does the tablegen backend know what to put in place of ``[...]`` in the
|
||
generated ``Options.inc``? This is specified by the ``Marshalling`` utilities
|
||
described below. All of them take a key path argument and possibly other
|
||
information required for parsing or generating the command line argument.
|
||
|
||
**Positive Flag**
|
||
|
||
The key path defaults to ``false`` and is set to ``true`` when the flag is
|
||
present on command line.
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: text
|
||
|
||
def fignore_exceptions : Flag<["-"], "fignore-exceptions">, Flags<[CC1Option]>,
|
||
MarshallingInfoFlag<LangOpts<"IgnoreExceptions">>;
|
||
|
||
**Negative Flag**
|
||
|
||
The key path defaults to ``true`` and is set to ``false`` when the flag is
|
||
present on command line.
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: text
|
||
|
||
def fno_verbose_asm : Flag<["-"], "fno-verbose-asm">, Flags<[CC1Option]>,
|
||
MarshallingInfoNegativeFlag<CodeGenOpts<"AsmVerbose">>;
|
||
|
||
**Negative and Positive Flag**
|
||
|
||
The key path defaults to the specified value (``false``, ``true`` or some
|
||
boolean value that's statically unknown in the tablegen file). Then, the key
|
||
path is set to the value associated with the flag that appears last on command
|
||
line.
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: text
|
||
|
||
defm legacy_pass_manager : BoolOption<"f", "legacy-pass-manager",
|
||
CodeGenOpts<"LegacyPassManager">, DefaultFalse,
|
||
PosFlag<SetTrue, [], "Use the legacy pass manager in LLVM">,
|
||
NegFlag<SetFalse, [], "Use the new pass manager in LLVM">,
|
||
BothFlags<[CC1Option]>>;
|
||
|
||
With most such pair of flags, the ``-cc1`` frontend accepts only the flag that
|
||
changes the default key path value. The Clang driver is responsible for
|
||
accepting both and either forwarding the changing flag or discarding the flag
|
||
that would just set the key path to its default.
|
||
|
||
The first argument to ``BoolOption`` is a prefix that is used to construct the
|
||
full names of both flags. The positive flag would then be named
|
||
``flegacy-pass-manager`` and the negative ``fno-legacy-pass-manager``.
|
||
``BoolOption`` also implies the ``-`` prefix for both flags. It's also possible
|
||
to use ``BoolFOption`` that implies the ``"f"`` prefix and ``Group<f_Group>``.
|
||
The ``PosFlag`` and ``NegFlag`` classes hold the associated boolean value, an
|
||
array of elements passed to the ``Flag`` class and the help text. The optional
|
||
``BothFlags`` class holds an array of ``Flag`` elements that are common for both
|
||
the positive and negative flag and their common help text suffix.
|
||
|
||
**String**
|
||
|
||
The key path defaults to the specified string, or an empty one, if omitted. When
|
||
the option appears on the command line, the argument value is simply copied.
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: text
|
||
|
||
def isysroot : JoinedOrSeparate<["-"], "isysroot">, Flags<[CC1Option]>,
|
||
MarshallingInfoString<HeaderSearchOpts<"Sysroot">, [{"/"}]>;
|
||
|
||
**List of Strings**
|
||
|
||
The key path defaults to an empty ``std::vector<std::string>``. Values specified
|
||
with each appearance of the option on the command line are appended to the
|
||
vector.
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: text
|
||
|
||
def frewrite_map_file : Separate<["-"], "frewrite-map-file">, Flags<[CC1Option]>,
|
||
MarshallingInfoStringVector<CodeGenOpts<"RewriteMapFiles">>;
|
||
|
||
**Integer**
|
||
|
||
The key path defaults to the specified integer value, or ``0`` if omitted. When
|
||
the option appears on the command line, its value gets parsed by ``llvm::APInt``
|
||
and the result is assigned to the key path on success.
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: text
|
||
|
||
def mstack_probe_size : Joined<["-"], "mstack-probe-size=">, Flags<[CC1Option]>,
|
||
MarshallingInfoInt<CodeGenOpts<"StackProbeSize">, "4096">;
|
||
|
||
**Enumeration**
|
||
|
||
The key path defaults to the value specified in ``MarshallingInfoEnum`` prefixed
|
||
by the contents of ``NormalizedValuesScope`` and ``::``. This ensures correct
|
||
reference to an enum case is formed even if the enum resides in different
|
||
namespace or is an enum class. If the value present on command line does not
|
||
match any of the comma-separated values from ``Values``, an error diagnostics is
|
||
issued. Otherwise, the corresponding element from ``NormalizedValues`` at the
|
||
same index is assigned to the key path (also correctly scoped). The number of
|
||
comma-separated string values and elements of the array within
|
||
``NormalizedValues`` must match.
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: text
|
||
|
||
def mthread_model : Separate<["-"], "mthread-model">, Flags<[CC1Option]>,
|
||
Values<"posix,single">, NormalizedValues<["POSIX", "Single"]>,
|
||
NormalizedValuesScope<"LangOptions::ThreadModelKind">,
|
||
MarshallingInfoEnum<LangOpts<"ThreadModel">, "POSIX">;
|
||
|
||
..
|
||
Intentionally omitting MarshallingInfoBitfieldFlag. It's adding some
|
||
complexity to the marshalling infrastructure and might be removed.
|
||
|
||
It is also possible to define relationships between options.
|
||
|
||
**Implication**
|
||
|
||
The key path defaults to the default value from the primary ``Marshalling``
|
||
annotation. Then, if any of the elements of ``ImpliedByAnyOf`` evaluate to true,
|
||
the key path value is changed to the specified value or ``true`` if missing.
|
||
Finally, the command line is parsed according to the primary annotation.
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: text
|
||
|
||
def fms_extensions : Flag<["-"], "fms-extensions">, Flags<[CC1Option]>,
|
||
MarshallingInfoFlag<LangOpts<"MicrosoftExt">>,
|
||
ImpliedByAnyOf<[fms_compatibility.KeyPath], "true">;
|
||
|
||
**Condition**
|
||
|
||
The option is parsed only if the expression in ``ShouldParseIf`` evaluates to
|
||
true.
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: text
|
||
|
||
def fopenmp_enable_irbuilder : Flag<["-"], "fopenmp-enable-irbuilder">, Flags<[CC1Option]>,
|
||
MarshallingInfoFlag<LangOpts<"OpenMPIRBuilder">>,
|
||
ShouldParseIf<fopenmp.KeyPath>;
|
||
|
||
The Lexer and Preprocessor Library
|
||
==================================
|
||
|
||
The Lexer library contains several tightly-connected classes that are involved
|
||
with the nasty process of lexing and preprocessing C source code. The main
|
||
interface to this library for outside clients is the large ``Preprocessor``
|
||
class. It contains the various pieces of state that are required to coherently
|
||
read tokens out of a translation unit.
|
||
|
||
The core interface to the ``Preprocessor`` object (once it is set up) is the
|
||
``Preprocessor::Lex`` method, which returns the next :ref:`Token <Token>` from
|
||
the preprocessor stream. There are two types of token providers that the
|
||
preprocessor is capable of reading from: a buffer lexer (provided by the
|
||
:ref:`Lexer <Lexer>` class) and a buffered token stream (provided by the
|
||
:ref:`TokenLexer <TokenLexer>` class).
|
||
|
||
.. _Token:
|
||
|
||
The Token class
|
||
---------------
|
||
|
||
The ``Token`` class is used to represent a single lexed token. Tokens are
|
||
intended to be used by the lexer/preprocess and parser libraries, but are not
|
||
intended to live beyond them (for example, they should not live in the ASTs).
|
||
|
||
Tokens most often live on the stack (or some other location that is efficient
|
||
to access) as the parser is running, but occasionally do get buffered up. For
|
||
example, macro definitions are stored as a series of tokens, and the C++
|
||
front-end periodically needs to buffer tokens up for tentative parsing and
|
||
various pieces of look-ahead. As such, the size of a ``Token`` matters. On a
|
||
32-bit system, ``sizeof(Token)`` is currently 16 bytes.
|
||
|
||
Tokens occur in two forms: :ref:`annotation tokens <AnnotationToken>` and
|
||
normal tokens. Normal tokens are those returned by the lexer, annotation
|
||
tokens represent semantic information and are produced by the parser, replacing
|
||
normal tokens in the token stream. Normal tokens contain the following
|
||
information:
|
||
|
||
* **A SourceLocation** --- This indicates the location of the start of the
|
||
token.
|
||
|
||
* **A length** --- This stores the length of the token as stored in the
|
||
``SourceBuffer``. For tokens that include them, this length includes
|
||
trigraphs and escaped newlines which are ignored by later phases of the
|
||
compiler. By pointing into the original source buffer, it is always possible
|
||
to get the original spelling of a token completely accurately.
|
||
|
||
* **IdentifierInfo** --- If a token takes the form of an identifier, and if
|
||
identifier lookup was enabled when the token was lexed (e.g., the lexer was
|
||
not reading in "raw" mode) this contains a pointer to the unique hash value
|
||
for the identifier. Because the lookup happens before keyword
|
||
identification, this field is set even for language keywords like "``for``".
|
||
|
||
* **TokenKind** --- This indicates the kind of token as classified by the
|
||
lexer. This includes things like ``tok::starequal`` (for the "``*=``"
|
||
operator), ``tok::ampamp`` for the "``&&``" token, and keyword values (e.g.,
|
||
``tok::kw_for``) for identifiers that correspond to keywords. Note that
|
||
some tokens can be spelled multiple ways. For example, C++ supports
|
||
"operator keywords", where things like "``and``" are treated exactly like the
|
||
"``&&``" operator. In these cases, the kind value is set to ``tok::ampamp``,
|
||
which is good for the parser, which doesn't have to consider both forms. For
|
||
something that cares about which form is used (e.g., the preprocessor
|
||
"stringize" operator) the spelling indicates the original form.
|
||
|
||
* **Flags** --- There are currently four flags tracked by the
|
||
lexer/preprocessor system on a per-token basis:
|
||
|
||
#. **StartOfLine** --- This was the first token that occurred on its input
|
||
source line.
|
||
#. **LeadingSpace** --- There was a space character either immediately before
|
||
the token or transitively before the token as it was expanded through a
|
||
macro. The definition of this flag is very closely defined by the
|
||
stringizing requirements of the preprocessor.
|
||
#. **DisableExpand** --- This flag is used internally to the preprocessor to
|
||
represent identifier tokens which have macro expansion disabled. This
|
||
prevents them from being considered as candidates for macro expansion ever
|
||
in the future.
|
||
#. **NeedsCleaning** --- This flag is set if the original spelling for the
|
||
token includes a trigraph or escaped newline. Since this is uncommon,
|
||
many pieces of code can fast-path on tokens that did not need cleaning.
|
||
|
||
One interesting (and somewhat unusual) aspect of normal tokens is that they
|
||
don't contain any semantic information about the lexed value. For example, if
|
||
the token was a pp-number token, we do not represent the value of the number
|
||
that was lexed (this is left for later pieces of code to decide).
|
||
Additionally, the lexer library has no notion of typedef names vs variable
|
||
names: both are returned as identifiers, and the parser is left to decide
|
||
whether a specific identifier is a typedef or a variable (tracking this
|
||
requires scope information among other things). The parser can do this
|
||
translation by replacing tokens returned by the preprocessor with "Annotation
|
||
Tokens".
|
||
|
||
.. _AnnotationToken:
|
||
|
||
Annotation Tokens
|
||
-----------------
|
||
|
||
Annotation tokens are tokens that are synthesized by the parser and injected
|
||
into the preprocessor's token stream (replacing existing tokens) to record
|
||
semantic information found by the parser. For example, if "``foo``" is found
|
||
to be a typedef, the "``foo``" ``tok::identifier`` token is replaced with an
|
||
``tok::annot_typename``. This is useful for a couple of reasons: 1) this makes
|
||
it easy to handle qualified type names (e.g., "``foo::bar::baz<42>::t``") in
|
||
C++ as a single "token" in the parser. 2) if the parser backtracks, the
|
||
reparse does not need to redo semantic analysis to determine whether a token
|
||
sequence is a variable, type, template, etc.
|
||
|
||
Annotation tokens are created by the parser and reinjected into the parser's
|
||
token stream (when backtracking is enabled). Because they can only exist in
|
||
tokens that the preprocessor-proper is done with, it doesn't need to keep
|
||
around flags like "start of line" that the preprocessor uses to do its job.
|
||
Additionally, an annotation token may "cover" a sequence of preprocessor tokens
|
||
(e.g., "``a::b::c``" is five preprocessor tokens). As such, the valid fields
|
||
of an annotation token are different than the fields for a normal token (but
|
||
they are multiplexed into the normal ``Token`` fields):
|
||
|
||
* **SourceLocation "Location"** --- The ``SourceLocation`` for the annotation
|
||
token indicates the first token replaced by the annotation token. In the
|
||
example above, it would be the location of the "``a``" identifier.
|
||
* **SourceLocation "AnnotationEndLoc"** --- This holds the location of the last
|
||
token replaced with the annotation token. In the example above, it would be
|
||
the location of the "``c``" identifier.
|
||
* **void* "AnnotationValue"** --- This contains an opaque object that the
|
||
parser gets from ``Sema``. The parser merely preserves the information for
|
||
``Sema`` to later interpret based on the annotation token kind.
|
||
* **TokenKind "Kind"** --- This indicates the kind of Annotation token this is.
|
||
See below for the different valid kinds.
|
||
|
||
Annotation tokens currently come in three kinds:
|
||
|
||
#. **tok::annot_typename**: This annotation token represents a resolved
|
||
typename token that is potentially qualified. The ``AnnotationValue`` field
|
||
contains the ``QualType`` returned by ``Sema::getTypeName()``, possibly with
|
||
source location information attached.
|
||
#. **tok::annot_cxxscope**: This annotation token represents a C++ scope
|
||
specifier, such as "``A::B::``". This corresponds to the grammar
|
||
productions "*::*" and "*:: [opt] nested-name-specifier*". The
|
||
``AnnotationValue`` pointer is a ``NestedNameSpecifier *`` returned by the
|
||
``Sema::ActOnCXXGlobalScopeSpecifier`` and
|
||
``Sema::ActOnCXXNestedNameSpecifier`` callbacks.
|
||
#. **tok::annot_template_id**: This annotation token represents a C++
|
||
template-id such as "``foo<int, 4>``", where "``foo``" is the name of a
|
||
template. The ``AnnotationValue`` pointer is a pointer to a ``malloc``'d
|
||
``TemplateIdAnnotation`` object. Depending on the context, a parsed
|
||
template-id that names a type might become a typename annotation token (if
|
||
all we care about is the named type, e.g., because it occurs in a type
|
||
specifier) or might remain a template-id token (if we want to retain more
|
||
source location information or produce a new type, e.g., in a declaration of
|
||
a class template specialization). template-id annotation tokens that refer
|
||
to a type can be "upgraded" to typename annotation tokens by the parser.
|
||
|
||
As mentioned above, annotation tokens are not returned by the preprocessor,
|
||
they are formed on demand by the parser. This means that the parser has to be
|
||
aware of cases where an annotation could occur and form it where appropriate.
|
||
This is somewhat similar to how the parser handles Translation Phase 6 of C99:
|
||
String Concatenation (see C99 5.1.1.2). In the case of string concatenation,
|
||
the preprocessor just returns distinct ``tok::string_literal`` and
|
||
``tok::wide_string_literal`` tokens and the parser eats a sequence of them
|
||
wherever the grammar indicates that a string literal can occur.
|
||
|
||
In order to do this, whenever the parser expects a ``tok::identifier`` or
|
||
``tok::coloncolon``, it should call the ``TryAnnotateTypeOrScopeToken`` or
|
||
``TryAnnotateCXXScopeToken`` methods to form the annotation token. These
|
||
methods will maximally form the specified annotation tokens and replace the
|
||
current token with them, if applicable. If the current tokens is not valid for
|
||
an annotation token, it will remain an identifier or "``::``" token.
|
||
|
||
.. _Lexer:
|
||
|
||
The ``Lexer`` class
|
||
-------------------
|
||
|
||
The ``Lexer`` class provides the mechanics of lexing tokens out of a source
|
||
buffer and deciding what they mean. The ``Lexer`` is complicated by the fact
|
||
that it operates on raw buffers that have not had spelling eliminated (this is
|
||
a necessity to get decent performance), but this is countered with careful
|
||
coding as well as standard performance techniques (for example, the comment
|
||
handling code is vectorized on X86 and PowerPC hosts).
|
||
|
||
The lexer has a couple of interesting modal features:
|
||
|
||
* The lexer can operate in "raw" mode. This mode has several features that
|
||
make it possible to quickly lex the file (e.g., it stops identifier lookup,
|
||
doesn't specially handle preprocessor tokens, handles EOF differently, etc).
|
||
This mode is used for lexing within an "``#if 0``" block, for example.
|
||
* The lexer can capture and return comments as tokens. This is required to
|
||
support the ``-C`` preprocessor mode, which passes comments through, and is
|
||
used by the diagnostic checker to identifier expect-error annotations.
|
||
* The lexer can be in ``ParsingFilename`` mode, which happens when
|
||
preprocessing after reading a ``#include`` directive. This mode changes the
|
||
parsing of "``<``" to return an "angled string" instead of a bunch of tokens
|
||
for each thing within the filename.
|
||
* When parsing a preprocessor directive (after "``#``") the
|
||
``ParsingPreprocessorDirective`` mode is entered. This changes the parser to
|
||
return EOD at a newline.
|
||
* The ``Lexer`` uses a ``LangOptions`` object to know whether trigraphs are
|
||
enabled, whether C++ or ObjC keywords are recognized, etc.
|
||
|
||
In addition to these modes, the lexer keeps track of a couple of other features
|
||
that are local to a lexed buffer, which change as the buffer is lexed:
|
||
|
||
* The ``Lexer`` uses ``BufferPtr`` to keep track of the current character being
|
||
lexed.
|
||
* The ``Lexer`` uses ``IsAtStartOfLine`` to keep track of whether the next
|
||
lexed token will start with its "start of line" bit set.
|
||
* The ``Lexer`` keeps track of the current "``#if``" directives that are active
|
||
(which can be nested).
|
||
* The ``Lexer`` keeps track of an :ref:`MultipleIncludeOpt
|
||
<MultipleIncludeOpt>` object, which is used to detect whether the buffer uses
|
||
the standard "``#ifndef XX`` / ``#define XX``" idiom to prevent multiple
|
||
inclusion. If a buffer does, subsequent includes can be ignored if the
|
||
"``XX``" macro is defined.
|
||
|
||
.. _TokenLexer:
|
||
|
||
The ``TokenLexer`` class
|
||
------------------------
|
||
|
||
The ``TokenLexer`` class is a token provider that returns tokens from a list of
|
||
tokens that came from somewhere else. It typically used for two things: 1)
|
||
returning tokens from a macro definition as it is being expanded 2) returning
|
||
tokens from an arbitrary buffer of tokens. The later use is used by
|
||
``_Pragma`` and will most likely be used to handle unbounded look-ahead for the
|
||
C++ parser.
|
||
|
||
.. _MultipleIncludeOpt:
|
||
|
||
The ``MultipleIncludeOpt`` class
|
||
--------------------------------
|
||
|
||
The ``MultipleIncludeOpt`` class implements a really simple little state
|
||
machine that is used to detect the standard "``#ifndef XX`` / ``#define XX``"
|
||
idiom that people typically use to prevent multiple inclusion of headers. If a
|
||
buffer uses this idiom and is subsequently ``#include``'d, the preprocessor can
|
||
simply check to see whether the guarding condition is defined or not. If so,
|
||
the preprocessor can completely ignore the include of the header.
|
||
|
||
.. _Parser:
|
||
|
||
The Parser Library
|
||
==================
|
||
|
||
This library contains a recursive-descent parser that polls tokens from the
|
||
preprocessor and notifies a client of the parsing progress.
|
||
|
||
Historically, the parser used to talk to an abstract ``Action`` interface that
|
||
had virtual methods for parse events, for example ``ActOnBinOp()``. When Clang
|
||
grew C++ support, the parser stopped supporting general ``Action`` clients --
|
||
it now always talks to the :ref:`Sema library <Sema>`. However, the Parser
|
||
still accesses AST objects only through opaque types like ``ExprResult`` and
|
||
``StmtResult``. Only :ref:`Sema <Sema>` looks at the AST node contents of these
|
||
wrappers.
|
||
|
||
.. _AST:
|
||
|
||
The AST Library
|
||
===============
|
||
|
||
.. _ASTPhilosophy:
|
||
|
||
Design philosophy
|
||
-----------------
|
||
|
||
Immutability
|
||
^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||
|
||
Clang AST nodes (types, declarations, statements, expressions, and so on) are
|
||
generally designed to be immutable once created. This provides a number of key
|
||
benefits:
|
||
|
||
* Canonicalization of the "meaning" of nodes is possible as soon as the nodes
|
||
are created, and is not invalidated by later addition of more information.
|
||
For example, we :ref:`canonicalize types <CanonicalType>`, and use a
|
||
canonicalized representation of expressions when determining whether two
|
||
function template declarations involving dependent expressions declare the
|
||
same entity.
|
||
* AST nodes can be reused when they have the same meaning. For example, we
|
||
reuse ``Type`` nodes when representing the same type (but maintain separate
|
||
``TypeLoc``\s for each instance where a type is written), and we reuse
|
||
non-dependent ``Stmt`` and ``Expr`` nodes across instantiations of a
|
||
template.
|
||
* Serialization and deserialization of the AST to/from AST files is simpler:
|
||
we do not need to track modifications made to AST nodes imported from AST
|
||
files and serialize separate "update records".
|
||
|
||
There are unfortunately exceptions to this general approach, such as:
|
||
|
||
* The first declaration of a redeclarable entity maintains a pointer to the
|
||
most recent declaration of that entity, which naturally needs to change as
|
||
more declarations are parsed.
|
||
* Name lookup tables in declaration contexts change after the namespace
|
||
declaration is formed.
|
||
* We attempt to maintain only a single declaration for an instantiation of a
|
||
template, rather than having distinct declarations for an instantiation of
|
||
the declaration versus the definition, so template instantiation often
|
||
updates parts of existing declarations.
|
||
* Some parts of declarations are required to be instantiated separately (this
|
||
includes default arguments and exception specifications), and such
|
||
instantiations update the existing declaration.
|
||
|
||
These cases tend to be fragile; mutable AST state should be avoided where
|
||
possible.
|
||
|
||
As a consequence of this design principle, we typically do not provide setters
|
||
for AST state. (Some are provided for short-term modifications intended to be
|
||
used immediately after an AST node is created and before it's "published" as
|
||
part of the complete AST, or where language semantics require after-the-fact
|
||
updates.)
|
||
|
||
Faithfulness
|
||
^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||
|
||
The AST intends to provide a representation of the program that is faithful to
|
||
the original source. We intend for it to be possible to write refactoring tools
|
||
using only information stored in, or easily reconstructible from, the Clang AST.
|
||
This means that the AST representation should either not desugar source-level
|
||
constructs to simpler forms, or -- where made necessary by language semantics
|
||
or a clear engineering tradeoff -- should desugar minimally and wrap the result
|
||
in a construct representing the original source form.
|
||
|
||
For example, ``CXXForRangeStmt`` directly represents the syntactic form of a
|
||
range-based for statement, but also holds a semantic representation of the
|
||
range declaration and iterator declarations. It does not contain a
|
||
fully-desugared ``ForStmt``, however.
|
||
|
||
Some AST nodes (for example, ``ParenExpr``) represent only syntax, and others
|
||
(for example, ``ImplicitCastExpr``) represent only semantics, but most nodes
|
||
will represent a combination of syntax and associated semantics. Inheritance
|
||
is typically used when representing different (but related) syntaxes for nodes
|
||
with the same or similar semantics.
|
||
|
||
.. _Type:
|
||
|
||
The ``Type`` class and its subclasses
|
||
-------------------------------------
|
||
|
||
The ``Type`` class (and its subclasses) are an important part of the AST.
|
||
Types are accessed through the ``ASTContext`` class, which implicitly creates
|
||
and uniques them as they are needed. Types have a couple of non-obvious
|
||
features: 1) they do not capture type qualifiers like ``const`` or ``volatile``
|
||
(see :ref:`QualType <QualType>`), and 2) they implicitly capture typedef
|
||
information. Once created, types are immutable (unlike decls).
|
||
|
||
Typedefs in C make semantic analysis a bit more complex than it would be without
|
||
them. The issue is that we want to capture typedef information and represent it
|
||
in the AST perfectly, but the semantics of operations need to "see through"
|
||
typedefs. For example, consider this code:
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: c++
|
||
|
||
void func() {
|
||
typedef int foo;
|
||
foo X, *Y;
|
||
typedef foo *bar;
|
||
bar Z;
|
||
*X; // error
|
||
**Y; // error
|
||
**Z; // error
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
The code above is illegal, and thus we expect there to be diagnostics emitted
|
||
on the annotated lines. In this example, we expect to get:
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: text
|
||
|
||
test.c:6:1: error: indirection requires pointer operand ('foo' invalid)
|
||
*X; // error
|
||
^~
|
||
test.c:7:1: error: indirection requires pointer operand ('foo' invalid)
|
||
**Y; // error
|
||
^~~
|
||
test.c:8:1: error: indirection requires pointer operand ('foo' invalid)
|
||
**Z; // error
|
||
^~~
|
||
|
||
While this example is somewhat silly, it illustrates the point: we want to
|
||
retain typedef information where possible, so that we can emit errors about
|
||
"``std::string``" instead of "``std::basic_string<char, std:...``". Doing this
|
||
requires properly keeping typedef information (for example, the type of ``X``
|
||
is "``foo``", not "``int``"), and requires properly propagating it through the
|
||
various operators (for example, the type of ``*Y`` is "``foo``", not
|
||
"``int``"). In order to retain this information, the type of these expressions
|
||
is an instance of the ``TypedefType`` class, which indicates that the type of
|
||
these expressions is a typedef for "``foo``".
|
||
|
||
Representing types like this is great for diagnostics, because the
|
||
user-specified type is always immediately available. There are two problems
|
||
with this: first, various semantic checks need to make judgements about the
|
||
*actual structure* of a type, ignoring typedefs. Second, we need an efficient
|
||
way to query whether two types are structurally identical to each other,
|
||
ignoring typedefs. The solution to both of these problems is the idea of
|
||
canonical types.
|
||
|
||
.. _CanonicalType:
|
||
|
||
Canonical Types
|
||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||
|
||
Every instance of the ``Type`` class contains a canonical type pointer. For
|
||
simple types with no typedefs involved (e.g., "``int``", "``int*``",
|
||
"``int**``"), the type just points to itself. For types that have a typedef
|
||
somewhere in their structure (e.g., "``foo``", "``foo*``", "``foo**``",
|
||
"``bar``"), the canonical type pointer points to their structurally equivalent
|
||
type without any typedefs (e.g., "``int``", "``int*``", "``int**``", and
|
||
"``int*``" respectively).
|
||
|
||
This design provides a constant time operation (dereferencing the canonical type
|
||
pointer) that gives us access to the structure of types. For example, we can
|
||
trivially tell that "``bar``" and "``foo*``" are the same type by dereferencing
|
||
their canonical type pointers and doing a pointer comparison (they both point
|
||
to the single "``int*``" type).
|
||
|
||
Canonical types and typedef types bring up some complexities that must be
|
||
carefully managed. Specifically, the ``isa``/``cast``/``dyn_cast`` operators
|
||
generally shouldn't be used in code that is inspecting the AST. For example,
|
||
when type checking the indirection operator (unary "``*``" on a pointer), the
|
||
type checker must verify that the operand has a pointer type. It would not be
|
||
correct to check that with "``isa<PointerType>(SubExpr->getType())``", because
|
||
this predicate would fail if the subexpression had a typedef type.
|
||
|
||
The solution to this problem are a set of helper methods on ``Type``, used to
|
||
check their properties. In this case, it would be correct to use
|
||
"``SubExpr->getType()->isPointerType()``" to do the check. This predicate will
|
||
return true if the *canonical type is a pointer*, which is true any time the
|
||
type is structurally a pointer type. The only hard part here is remembering
|
||
not to use the ``isa``/``cast``/``dyn_cast`` operations.
|
||
|
||
The second problem we face is how to get access to the pointer type once we
|
||
know it exists. To continue the example, the result type of the indirection
|
||
operator is the pointee type of the subexpression. In order to determine the
|
||
type, we need to get the instance of ``PointerType`` that best captures the
|
||
typedef information in the program. If the type of the expression is literally
|
||
a ``PointerType``, we can return that, otherwise we have to dig through the
|
||
typedefs to find the pointer type. For example, if the subexpression had type
|
||
"``foo*``", we could return that type as the result. If the subexpression had
|
||
type "``bar``", we want to return "``foo*``" (note that we do *not* want
|
||
"``int*``"). In order to provide all of this, ``Type`` has a
|
||
``getAsPointerType()`` method that checks whether the type is structurally a
|
||
``PointerType`` and, if so, returns the best one. If not, it returns a null
|
||
pointer.
|
||
|
||
This structure is somewhat mystical, but after meditating on it, it will make
|
||
sense to you :).
|
||
|
||
.. _QualType:
|
||
|
||
The ``QualType`` class
|
||
----------------------
|
||
|
||
The ``QualType`` class is designed as a trivial value class that is small,
|
||
passed by-value and is efficient to query. The idea of ``QualType`` is that it
|
||
stores the type qualifiers (``const``, ``volatile``, ``restrict``, plus some
|
||
extended qualifiers required by language extensions) separately from the types
|
||
themselves. ``QualType`` is conceptually a pair of "``Type*``" and the bits
|
||
for these type qualifiers.
|
||
|
||
By storing the type qualifiers as bits in the conceptual pair, it is extremely
|
||
efficient to get the set of qualifiers on a ``QualType`` (just return the field
|
||
of the pair), add a type qualifier (which is a trivial constant-time operation
|
||
that sets a bit), and remove one or more type qualifiers (just return a
|
||
``QualType`` with the bitfield set to empty).
|
||
|
||
Further, because the bits are stored outside of the type itself, we do not need
|
||
to create duplicates of types with different sets of qualifiers (i.e. there is
|
||
only a single heap allocated "``int``" type: "``const int``" and "``volatile
|
||
const int``" both point to the same heap allocated "``int``" type). This
|
||
reduces the heap size used to represent bits and also means we do not have to
|
||
consider qualifiers when uniquing types (:ref:`Type <Type>` does not even
|
||
contain qualifiers).
|
||
|
||
In practice, the two most common type qualifiers (``const`` and ``restrict``)
|
||
are stored in the low bits of the pointer to the ``Type`` object, together with
|
||
a flag indicating whether extended qualifiers are present (which must be
|
||
heap-allocated). This means that ``QualType`` is exactly the same size as a
|
||
pointer.
|
||
|
||
.. _DeclarationName:
|
||
|
||
Declaration names
|
||
-----------------
|
||
|
||
The ``DeclarationName`` class represents the name of a declaration in Clang.
|
||
Declarations in the C family of languages can take several different forms.
|
||
Most declarations are named by simple identifiers, e.g., "``f``" and "``x``" in
|
||
the function declaration ``f(int x)``. In C++, declaration names can also name
|
||
class constructors ("``Class``" in ``struct Class { Class(); }``), class
|
||
destructors ("``~Class``"), overloaded operator names ("``operator+``"), and
|
||
conversion functions ("``operator void const *``"). In Objective-C,
|
||
declaration names can refer to the names of Objective-C methods, which involve
|
||
the method name and the parameters, collectively called a *selector*, e.g.,
|
||
"``setWidth:height:``". Since all of these kinds of entities --- variables,
|
||
functions, Objective-C methods, C++ constructors, destructors, and operators
|
||
--- are represented as subclasses of Clang's common ``NamedDecl`` class,
|
||
``DeclarationName`` is designed to efficiently represent any kind of name.
|
||
|
||
Given a ``DeclarationName`` ``N``, ``N.getNameKind()`` will produce a value
|
||
that describes what kind of name ``N`` stores. There are 10 options (all of
|
||
the names are inside the ``DeclarationName`` class).
|
||
|
||
``Identifier``
|
||
|
||
The name is a simple identifier. Use ``N.getAsIdentifierInfo()`` to retrieve
|
||
the corresponding ``IdentifierInfo*`` pointing to the actual identifier.
|
||
|
||
``ObjCZeroArgSelector``, ``ObjCOneArgSelector``, ``ObjCMultiArgSelector``
|
||
|
||
The name is an Objective-C selector, which can be retrieved as a ``Selector``
|
||
instance via ``N.getObjCSelector()``. The three possible name kinds for
|
||
Objective-C reflect an optimization within the ``DeclarationName`` class:
|
||
both zero- and one-argument selectors are stored as a masked
|
||
``IdentifierInfo`` pointer, and therefore require very little space, since
|
||
zero- and one-argument selectors are far more common than multi-argument
|
||
selectors (which use a different structure).
|
||
|
||
``CXXConstructorName``
|
||
|
||
The name is a C++ constructor name. Use ``N.getCXXNameType()`` to retrieve
|
||
the :ref:`type <QualType>` that this constructor is meant to construct. The
|
||
type is always the canonical type, since all constructors for a given type
|
||
have the same name.
|
||
|
||
``CXXDestructorName``
|
||
|
||
The name is a C++ destructor name. Use ``N.getCXXNameType()`` to retrieve
|
||
the :ref:`type <QualType>` whose destructor is being named. This type is
|
||
always a canonical type.
|
||
|
||
``CXXConversionFunctionName``
|
||
|
||
The name is a C++ conversion function. Conversion functions are named
|
||
according to the type they convert to, e.g., "``operator void const *``".
|
||
Use ``N.getCXXNameType()`` to retrieve the type that this conversion function
|
||
converts to. This type is always a canonical type.
|
||
|
||
``CXXOperatorName``
|
||
|
||
The name is a C++ overloaded operator name. Overloaded operators are named
|
||
according to their spelling, e.g., "``operator+``" or "``operator new []``".
|
||
Use ``N.getCXXOverloadedOperator()`` to retrieve the overloaded operator (a
|
||
value of type ``OverloadedOperatorKind``).
|
||
|
||
``CXXLiteralOperatorName``
|
||
|
||
The name is a C++11 user defined literal operator. User defined
|
||
Literal operators are named according to the suffix they define,
|
||
e.g., "``_foo``" for "``operator "" _foo``". Use
|
||
``N.getCXXLiteralIdentifier()`` to retrieve the corresponding
|
||
``IdentifierInfo*`` pointing to the identifier.
|
||
|
||
``CXXUsingDirective``
|
||
|
||
The name is a C++ using directive. Using directives are not really
|
||
NamedDecls, in that they all have the same name, but they are
|
||
implemented as such in order to store them in DeclContext
|
||
effectively.
|
||
|
||
``DeclarationName``\ s are cheap to create, copy, and compare. They require
|
||
only a single pointer's worth of storage in the common cases (identifiers,
|
||
zero- and one-argument Objective-C selectors) and use dense, uniqued storage
|
||
for the other kinds of names. Two ``DeclarationName``\ s can be compared for
|
||
equality (``==``, ``!=``) using a simple bitwise comparison, can be ordered
|
||
with ``<``, ``>``, ``<=``, and ``>=`` (which provide a lexicographical ordering
|
||
for normal identifiers but an unspecified ordering for other kinds of names),
|
||
and can be placed into LLVM ``DenseMap``\ s and ``DenseSet``\ s.
|
||
|
||
``DeclarationName`` instances can be created in different ways depending on
|
||
what kind of name the instance will store. Normal identifiers
|
||
(``IdentifierInfo`` pointers) and Objective-C selectors (``Selector``) can be
|
||
implicitly converted to ``DeclarationNames``. Names for C++ constructors,
|
||
destructors, conversion functions, and overloaded operators can be retrieved
|
||
from the ``DeclarationNameTable``, an instance of which is available as
|
||
``ASTContext::DeclarationNames``. The member functions
|
||
``getCXXConstructorName``, ``getCXXDestructorName``,
|
||
``getCXXConversionFunctionName``, and ``getCXXOperatorName``, respectively,
|
||
return ``DeclarationName`` instances for the four kinds of C++ special function
|
||
names.
|
||
|
||
.. _DeclContext:
|
||
|
||
Declaration contexts
|
||
--------------------
|
||
|
||
Every declaration in a program exists within some *declaration context*, such
|
||
as a translation unit, namespace, class, or function. Declaration contexts in
|
||
Clang are represented by the ``DeclContext`` class, from which the various
|
||
declaration-context AST nodes (``TranslationUnitDecl``, ``NamespaceDecl``,
|
||
``RecordDecl``, ``FunctionDecl``, etc.) will derive. The ``DeclContext`` class
|
||
provides several facilities common to each declaration context:
|
||
|
||
Source-centric vs. Semantics-centric View of Declarations
|
||
|
||
``DeclContext`` provides two views of the declarations stored within a
|
||
declaration context. The source-centric view accurately represents the
|
||
program source code as written, including multiple declarations of entities
|
||
where present (see the section :ref:`Redeclarations and Overloads
|
||
<Redeclarations>`), while the semantics-centric view represents the program
|
||
semantics. The two views are kept synchronized by semantic analysis while
|
||
the ASTs are being constructed.
|
||
|
||
Storage of declarations within that context
|
||
|
||
Every declaration context can contain some number of declarations. For
|
||
example, a C++ class (represented by ``RecordDecl``) contains various member
|
||
functions, fields, nested types, and so on. All of these declarations will
|
||
be stored within the ``DeclContext``, and one can iterate over the
|
||
declarations via [``DeclContext::decls_begin()``,
|
||
``DeclContext::decls_end()``). This mechanism provides the source-centric
|
||
view of declarations in the context.
|
||
|
||
Lookup of declarations within that context
|
||
|
||
The ``DeclContext`` structure provides efficient name lookup for names within
|
||
that declaration context. For example, if ``N`` is a namespace we can look
|
||
for the name ``N::f`` using ``DeclContext::lookup``. The lookup itself is
|
||
based on a lazily-constructed array (for declaration contexts with a small
|
||
number of declarations) or hash table (for declaration contexts with more
|
||
declarations). The lookup operation provides the semantics-centric view of
|
||
the declarations in the context.
|
||
|
||
Ownership of declarations
|
||
|
||
The ``DeclContext`` owns all of the declarations that were declared within
|
||
its declaration context, and is responsible for the management of their
|
||
memory as well as their (de-)serialization.
|
||
|
||
All declarations are stored within a declaration context, and one can query
|
||
information about the context in which each declaration lives. One can
|
||
retrieve the ``DeclContext`` that contains a particular ``Decl`` using
|
||
``Decl::getDeclContext``. However, see the section
|
||
:ref:`LexicalAndSemanticContexts` for more information about how to interpret
|
||
this context information.
|
||
|
||
.. _Redeclarations:
|
||
|
||
Redeclarations and Overloads
|
||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||
|
||
Within a translation unit, it is common for an entity to be declared several
|
||
times. For example, we might declare a function "``f``" and then later
|
||
re-declare it as part of an inlined definition:
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: c++
|
||
|
||
void f(int x, int y, int z = 1);
|
||
|
||
inline void f(int x, int y, int z) { /* ... */ }
|
||
|
||
The representation of "``f``" differs in the source-centric and
|
||
semantics-centric views of a declaration context. In the source-centric view,
|
||
all redeclarations will be present, in the order they occurred in the source
|
||
code, making this view suitable for clients that wish to see the structure of
|
||
the source code. In the semantics-centric view, only the most recent "``f``"
|
||
will be found by the lookup, since it effectively replaces the first
|
||
declaration of "``f``".
|
||
|
||
(Note that because ``f`` can be redeclared at block scope, or in a friend
|
||
declaration, etc. it is possible that the declaration of ``f`` found by name
|
||
lookup will not be the most recent one.)
|
||
|
||
In the semantics-centric view, overloading of functions is represented
|
||
explicitly. For example, given two declarations of a function "``g``" that are
|
||
overloaded, e.g.,
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: c++
|
||
|
||
void g();
|
||
void g(int);
|
||
|
||
the ``DeclContext::lookup`` operation will return a
|
||
``DeclContext::lookup_result`` that contains a range of iterators over
|
||
declarations of "``g``". Clients that perform semantic analysis on a program
|
||
that is not concerned with the actual source code will primarily use this
|
||
semantics-centric view.
|
||
|
||
.. _LexicalAndSemanticContexts:
|
||
|
||
Lexical and Semantic Contexts
|
||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||
|
||
Each declaration has two potentially different declaration contexts: a
|
||
*lexical* context, which corresponds to the source-centric view of the
|
||
declaration context, and a *semantic* context, which corresponds to the
|
||
semantics-centric view. The lexical context is accessible via
|
||
``Decl::getLexicalDeclContext`` while the semantic context is accessible via
|
||
``Decl::getDeclContext``, both of which return ``DeclContext`` pointers. For
|
||
most declarations, the two contexts are identical. For example:
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: c++
|
||
|
||
class X {
|
||
public:
|
||
void f(int x);
|
||
};
|
||
|
||
Here, the semantic and lexical contexts of ``X::f`` are the ``DeclContext``
|
||
associated with the class ``X`` (itself stored as a ``RecordDecl`` AST node).
|
||
However, we can now define ``X::f`` out-of-line:
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: c++
|
||
|
||
void X::f(int x = 17) { /* ... */ }
|
||
|
||
This definition of "``f``" has different lexical and semantic contexts. The
|
||
lexical context corresponds to the declaration context in which the actual
|
||
declaration occurred in the source code, e.g., the translation unit containing
|
||
``X``. Thus, this declaration of ``X::f`` can be found by traversing the
|
||
declarations provided by [``decls_begin()``, ``decls_end()``) in the
|
||
translation unit.
|
||
|
||
The semantic context of ``X::f`` corresponds to the class ``X``, since this
|
||
member function is (semantically) a member of ``X``. Lookup of the name ``f``
|
||
into the ``DeclContext`` associated with ``X`` will then return the definition
|
||
of ``X::f`` (including information about the default argument).
|
||
|
||
Transparent Declaration Contexts
|
||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||
|
||
In C and C++, there are several contexts in which names that are logically
|
||
declared inside another declaration will actually "leak" out into the enclosing
|
||
scope from the perspective of name lookup. The most obvious instance of this
|
||
behavior is in enumeration types, e.g.,
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: c++
|
||
|
||
enum Color {
|
||
Red,
|
||
Green,
|
||
Blue
|
||
};
|
||
|
||
Here, ``Color`` is an enumeration, which is a declaration context that contains
|
||
the enumerators ``Red``, ``Green``, and ``Blue``. Thus, traversing the list of
|
||
declarations contained in the enumeration ``Color`` will yield ``Red``,
|
||
``Green``, and ``Blue``. However, outside of the scope of ``Color`` one can
|
||
name the enumerator ``Red`` without qualifying the name, e.g.,
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: c++
|
||
|
||
Color c = Red;
|
||
|
||
There are other entities in C++ that provide similar behavior. For example,
|
||
linkage specifications that use curly braces:
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: c++
|
||
|
||
extern "C" {
|
||
void f(int);
|
||
void g(int);
|
||
}
|
||
// f and g are visible here
|
||
|
||
For source-level accuracy, we treat the linkage specification and enumeration
|
||
type as a declaration context in which its enclosed declarations ("``Red``",
|
||
"``Green``", and "``Blue``"; "``f``" and "``g``") are declared. However, these
|
||
declarations are visible outside of the scope of the declaration context.
|
||
|
||
These language features (and several others, described below) have roughly the
|
||
same set of requirements: declarations are declared within a particular lexical
|
||
context, but the declarations are also found via name lookup in scopes
|
||
enclosing the declaration itself. This feature is implemented via
|
||
*transparent* declaration contexts (see
|
||
``DeclContext::isTransparentContext()``), whose declarations are visible in the
|
||
nearest enclosing non-transparent declaration context. This means that the
|
||
lexical context of the declaration (e.g., an enumerator) will be the
|
||
transparent ``DeclContext`` itself, as will the semantic context, but the
|
||
declaration will be visible in every outer context up to and including the
|
||
first non-transparent declaration context (since transparent declaration
|
||
contexts can be nested).
|
||
|
||
The transparent ``DeclContext``\ s are:
|
||
|
||
* Enumerations (but not C++11 "scoped enumerations"):
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: c++
|
||
|
||
enum Color {
|
||
Red,
|
||
Green,
|
||
Blue
|
||
};
|
||
// Red, Green, and Blue are in scope
|
||
|
||
* C++ linkage specifications:
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: c++
|
||
|
||
extern "C" {
|
||
void f(int);
|
||
void g(int);
|
||
}
|
||
// f and g are in scope
|
||
|
||
* Anonymous unions and structs:
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: c++
|
||
|
||
struct LookupTable {
|
||
bool IsVector;
|
||
union {
|
||
std::vector<Item> *Vector;
|
||
std::set<Item> *Set;
|
||
};
|
||
};
|
||
|
||
LookupTable LT;
|
||
LT.Vector = 0; // Okay: finds Vector inside the unnamed union
|
||
|
||
* C++11 inline namespaces:
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: c++
|
||
|
||
namespace mylib {
|
||
inline namespace debug {
|
||
class X;
|
||
}
|
||
}
|
||
mylib::X *xp; // okay: mylib::X refers to mylib::debug::X
|
||
|
||
.. _MultiDeclContext:
|
||
|
||
Multiply-Defined Declaration Contexts
|
||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||
|
||
C++ namespaces have the interesting property that
|
||
the namespace can be defined multiple times, and the declarations provided by
|
||
each namespace definition are effectively merged (from the semantic point of
|
||
view). For example, the following two code snippets are semantically
|
||
indistinguishable:
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: c++
|
||
|
||
// Snippet #1:
|
||
namespace N {
|
||
void f();
|
||
}
|
||
namespace N {
|
||
void f(int);
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
// Snippet #2:
|
||
namespace N {
|
||
void f();
|
||
void f(int);
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
In Clang's representation, the source-centric view of declaration contexts will
|
||
actually have two separate ``NamespaceDecl`` nodes in Snippet #1, each of which
|
||
is a declaration context that contains a single declaration of "``f``".
|
||
However, the semantics-centric view provided by name lookup into the namespace
|
||
``N`` for "``f``" will return a ``DeclContext::lookup_result`` that contains a
|
||
range of iterators over declarations of "``f``".
|
||
|
||
``DeclContext`` manages multiply-defined declaration contexts internally. The
|
||
function ``DeclContext::getPrimaryContext`` retrieves the "primary" context for
|
||
a given ``DeclContext`` instance, which is the ``DeclContext`` responsible for
|
||
maintaining the lookup table used for the semantics-centric view. Given a
|
||
DeclContext, one can obtain the set of declaration contexts that are
|
||
semantically connected to this declaration context, in source order, including
|
||
this context (which will be the only result, for non-namespace contexts) via
|
||
``DeclContext::collectAllContexts``. Note that these functions are used
|
||
internally within the lookup and insertion methods of the ``DeclContext``, so
|
||
the vast majority of clients can ignore them.
|
||
|
||
Because the same entity can be defined multiple times in different modules,
|
||
it is also possible for there to be multiple definitions of (for instance)
|
||
a ``CXXRecordDecl``, all of which describe a definition of the same class.
|
||
In such a case, only one of those "definitions" is considered by Clang to be
|
||
the definition of the class, and the others are treated as non-defining
|
||
declarations that happen to also contain member declarations. Corresponding
|
||
members in each definition of such multiply-defined classes are identified
|
||
either by redeclaration chains (if the members are ``Redeclarable``)
|
||
or by simply a pointer to the canonical declaration (if the declarations
|
||
are not ``Redeclarable`` -- in that case, a ``Mergeable`` base class is used
|
||
instead).
|
||
|
||
Error Handling
|
||
--------------
|
||
|
||
Clang produces an AST even when the code contains errors. Clang won't generate
|
||
and optimize code for it, but it's used as parsing continues to detect further
|
||
errors in the input. Clang-based tools also depend on such ASTs, and IDEs in
|
||
particular benefit from a high-quality AST for broken code.
|
||
|
||
In presence of errors, clang uses a few error-recovery strategies to present the
|
||
broken code in the AST:
|
||
|
||
- correcting errors: in cases where clang is confident about the fix, it
|
||
provides a FixIt attaching to the error diagnostic and emits a corrected AST
|
||
(reflecting the written code with FixIts applied). The advantage of that is to
|
||
provide more accurate subsequent diagnostics. Typo correction is a typical
|
||
example.
|
||
- representing invalid node: the invalid node is preserved in the AST in some
|
||
form, e.g. when the "declaration" part of the declaration contains semantic
|
||
errors, the Decl node is marked as invalid.
|
||
- dropping invalid node: this often happens for errors that we don’t have
|
||
graceful recovery. Prior to Recovery AST, a mismatched-argument function call
|
||
expression was dropped though a CallExpr was created for semantic analysis.
|
||
|
||
With these strategies, clang surfaces better diagnostics, and provides AST
|
||
consumers a rich AST reflecting the written source code as much as possible even
|
||
for broken code.
|
||
|
||
Recovery AST
|
||
^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||
|
||
The idea of Recovery AST is to use recovery nodes which act as a placeholder to
|
||
maintain the rough structure of the parsing tree, preserve locations and
|
||
children but have no language semantics attached to them.
|
||
|
||
For example, consider the following mismatched function call:
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: c++
|
||
|
||
int NoArg();
|
||
void test(int abc) {
|
||
NoArg(abc); // oops, mismatched function arguments.
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
Without Recovery AST, the invalid function call expression (and its child
|
||
expressions) would be dropped in the AST:
|
||
|
||
::
|
||
|
||
|-FunctionDecl <line:1:1, col:11> NoArg 'int ()'
|
||
`-FunctionDecl <line:2:1, line:4:1> test 'void (int)'
|
||
|-ParmVarDecl <col:11, col:15> col:15 used abc 'int'
|
||
`-CompoundStmt <col:20, line:4:1>
|
||
|
||
|
||
With Recovery AST, the AST looks like:
|
||
|
||
::
|
||
|
||
|-FunctionDecl <line:1:1, col:11> NoArg 'int ()'
|
||
`-FunctionDecl <line:2:1, line:4:1> test 'void (int)'
|
||
|-ParmVarDecl <col:11, col:15> used abc 'int'
|
||
`-CompoundStmt <col:20, line:4:1>
|
||
`-RecoveryExpr <line:3:3, col:12> 'int' contains-errors
|
||
|-UnresolvedLookupExpr <col:3> '<overloaded function type>' lvalue (ADL) = 'NoArg'
|
||
`-DeclRefExpr <col:9> 'int' lvalue ParmVar 'abc' 'int'
|
||
|
||
|
||
An alternative is to use existing Exprs, e.g. CallExpr for the above example.
|
||
This would capture more call details (e.g. locations of parentheses) and allow
|
||
it to be treated uniformly with valid CallExprs. However, jamming the data we
|
||
have into CallExpr forces us to weaken its invariants, e.g. arg count may be
|
||
wrong. This would introduce a huge burden on consumers of the AST to handle such
|
||
"impossible" cases. So when we're representing (rather than correcting) errors,
|
||
we use a distinct recovery node type with extremely weak invariants instead.
|
||
|
||
``RecoveryExpr`` is the only recovery node so far. In practice, broken decls
|
||
need more detailed semantics preserved (the current ``Invalid`` flag works
|
||
fairly well), and completely broken statements with interesting internal
|
||
structure are rare (so dropping the statements is OK).
|
||
|
||
Types and dependence
|
||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||
|
||
``RecoveryExpr`` is an ``Expr``, so it must have a type. In many cases the true
|
||
type can't really be known until the code is corrected (e.g. a call to a
|
||
function that doesn't exist). And it means that we can't properly perform type
|
||
checks on some containing constructs, such as ``return 42 + unknownFunction()``.
|
||
|
||
To model this, we generalize the concept of dependence from C++ templates to
|
||
mean dependence on a template parameter or how an error is repaired. The
|
||
``RecoveryExpr`` ``unknownFunction()`` has the totally unknown type
|
||
``DependentTy``, and this suppresses type-based analysis in the same way it
|
||
would inside a template.
|
||
|
||
In cases where we are confident about the concrete type (e.g. the return type
|
||
for a broken non-overloaded function call), the ``RecoveryExpr`` will have this
|
||
type. This allows more code to be typechecked, and produces a better AST and
|
||
more diagnostics. For example:
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: C++
|
||
|
||
unknownFunction().size() // .size() is a CXXDependentScopeMemberExpr
|
||
std::string(42).size() // .size() is a resolved MemberExpr
|
||
|
||
Whether or not the ``RecoveryExpr`` has a dependent type, it is always
|
||
considered value-dependent, because its value isn't well-defined until the error
|
||
is resolved. Among other things, this means that clang doesn't emit more errors
|
||
where a RecoveryExpr is used as a constant (e.g. array size), but also won't try
|
||
to evaluate it.
|
||
|
||
ContainsErrors bit
|
||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||
|
||
Beyond the template dependence bits, we add a new “ContainsErrors” bit to
|
||
express “Does this expression or anything within it contain errors” semantic,
|
||
this bit is always set for RecoveryExpr, and propagated to other related nodes.
|
||
This provides a fast way to query whether any (recursive) child of an expression
|
||
had an error, which is often used to improve diagnostics.
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: C++
|
||
|
||
// C++
|
||
void recoveryExpr(int abc) {
|
||
unknownFunction(); // type-dependent, value-dependent, contains-errors
|
||
|
||
std::string(42).size(); // value-dependent, contains-errors,
|
||
// not type-dependent, as we know the type is std::string
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: C
|
||
|
||
// C
|
||
void recoveryExpr(int abc) {
|
||
unknownVar + abc; // type-dependent, value-dependent, contains-errors
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
|
||
The ASTImporter
|
||
---------------
|
||
|
||
The ``ASTImporter`` class imports nodes of an ``ASTContext`` into another
|
||
``ASTContext``. Please refer to the document :doc:`ASTImporter: Merging Clang
|
||
ASTs <LibASTImporter>` for an introduction. And please read through the
|
||
high-level `description of the import algorithm
|
||
<LibASTImporter.html#algorithm-of-the-import>`_, this is essential for
|
||
understanding further implementation details of the importer.
|
||
|
||
.. _templated:
|
||
|
||
Abstract Syntax Graph
|
||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||
|
||
Despite the name, the Clang AST is not a tree. It is a directed graph with
|
||
cycles. One example of a cycle is the connection between a
|
||
``ClassTemplateDecl`` and its "templated" ``CXXRecordDecl``. The *templated*
|
||
``CXXRecordDecl`` represents all the fields and methods inside the class
|
||
template, while the ``ClassTemplateDecl`` holds the information which is
|
||
related to being a template, i.e. template arguments, etc. We can get the
|
||
*templated* class (the ``CXXRecordDecl``) of a ``ClassTemplateDecl`` with
|
||
``ClassTemplateDecl::getTemplatedDecl()``. And we can get back a pointer of the
|
||
"described" class template from the *templated* class:
|
||
``CXXRecordDecl::getDescribedTemplate()``. So, this is a cycle between two
|
||
nodes: between the *templated* and the *described* node. There may be various
|
||
other kinds of cycles in the AST especially in case of declarations.
|
||
|
||
.. _structural-eq:
|
||
|
||
Structural Equivalency
|
||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||
|
||
Importing one AST node copies that node into the destination ``ASTContext``. To
|
||
copy one node means that we create a new node in the "to" context then we set
|
||
its properties to be equal to the properties of the source node. Before the
|
||
copy, we make sure that the source node is not *structurally equivalent* to any
|
||
existing node in the destination context. If it happens to be equivalent then
|
||
we skip the copy.
|
||
|
||
The informal definition of structural equivalency is the following:
|
||
Two nodes are **structurally equivalent** if they are
|
||
|
||
- builtin types and refer to the same type, e.g. ``int`` and ``int`` are
|
||
structurally equivalent,
|
||
- function types and all their parameters have structurally equivalent types,
|
||
- record types and all their fields in order of their definition have the same
|
||
identifier names and structurally equivalent types,
|
||
- variable or function declarations and they have the same identifier name and
|
||
their types are structurally equivalent.
|
||
|
||
In C, two types are structurally equivalent if they are *compatible types*. For
|
||
a formal definition of *compatible types*, please refer to 6.2.7/1 in the C11
|
||
standard. However, there is no definition for *compatible types* in the C++
|
||
standard. Still, we extend the definition of structural equivalency to
|
||
templates and their instantiations similarly: besides checking the previously
|
||
mentioned properties, we have to check for equivalent template
|
||
parameters/arguments, etc.
|
||
|
||
The structural equivalent check can be and is used independently from the
|
||
ASTImporter, e.g. the ``clang::Sema`` class uses it also.
|
||
|
||
The equivalence of nodes may depend on the equivalency of other pairs of nodes.
|
||
Thus, the check is implemented as a parallel graph traversal. We traverse
|
||
through the nodes of both graphs at the same time. The actual implementation is
|
||
similar to breadth-first-search. Let's say we start the traverse with the <A,B>
|
||
pair of nodes. Whenever the traversal reaches a pair <X,Y> then the following
|
||
statements are true:
|
||
|
||
- A and X are nodes from the same ASTContext.
|
||
- B and Y are nodes from the same ASTContext.
|
||
- A and B may or may not be from the same ASTContext.
|
||
- if A == X and B == Y (pointer equivalency) then (there is a cycle during the
|
||
traverse)
|
||
|
||
- A and B are structurally equivalent if and only if
|
||
|
||
- All dependent nodes on the path from <A,B> to <X,Y> are structurally
|
||
equivalent.
|
||
|
||
When we compare two classes or enums and one of them is incomplete or has
|
||
unloaded external lexical declarations then we cannot descend to compare their
|
||
contained declarations. So in these cases they are considered equal if they
|
||
have the same names. This is the way how we compare forward declarations with
|
||
definitions.
|
||
|
||
.. TODO Should we elaborate the actual implementation of the graph traversal,
|
||
.. which is a very weird BFS traversal?
|
||
|
||
Redeclaration Chains
|
||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||
|
||
The early version of the ``ASTImporter``'s merge mechanism squashed the
|
||
declarations, i.e. it aimed to have only one declaration instead of maintaining
|
||
a whole redeclaration chain. This early approach simply skipped importing a
|
||
function prototype, but it imported a definition. To demonstrate the problem
|
||
with this approach let's consider an empty "to" context and the following
|
||
``virtual`` function declarations of ``f`` in the "from" context:
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: c++
|
||
|
||
struct B { virtual void f(); };
|
||
void B::f() {} // <-- let's import this definition
|
||
|
||
If we imported the definition with the "squashing" approach then we would
|
||
end-up having one declaration which is indeed a definition, but ``isVirtual()``
|
||
returns ``false`` for it. The reason is that the definition is indeed not
|
||
virtual, it is the property of the prototype!
|
||
|
||
Consequently, we must either set the virtual flag for the definition (but then
|
||
we create a malformed AST which the parser would never create), or we import
|
||
the whole redeclaration chain of the function. The most recent version of the
|
||
``ASTImporter`` uses the latter mechanism. We do import all function
|
||
declarations - regardless if they are definitions or prototypes - in the order
|
||
as they appear in the "from" context.
|
||
|
||
.. One definition
|
||
|
||
If we have an existing definition in the "to" context, then we cannot import
|
||
another definition, we will use the existing definition. However, we can import
|
||
prototype(s): we chain the newly imported prototype(s) to the existing
|
||
definition. Whenever we import a new prototype from a third context, that will
|
||
be added to the end of the redeclaration chain. This may result in long
|
||
redeclaration chains in certain cases, e.g. if we import from several
|
||
translation units which include the same header with the prototype.
|
||
|
||
.. Squashing prototypes
|
||
|
||
To mitigate the problem of long redeclaration chains of free functions, we
|
||
could compare prototypes to see if they have the same properties and if yes
|
||
then we could merge these prototypes. The implementation of squashing of
|
||
prototypes for free functions is future work.
|
||
|
||
.. Exception: Cannot have more than 1 prototype in-class
|
||
|
||
Chaining functions this way ensures that we do copy all information from the
|
||
source AST. Nonetheless, there is a problem with member functions: While we can
|
||
have many prototypes for free functions, we must have only one prototype for a
|
||
member function.
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: c++
|
||
|
||
void f(); // OK
|
||
void f(); // OK
|
||
|
||
struct X {
|
||
void f(); // OK
|
||
void f(); // ERROR
|
||
};
|
||
void X::f() {} // OK
|
||
|
||
Thus, prototypes of member functions must be squashed, we cannot just simply
|
||
attach a new prototype to the existing in-class prototype. Consider the
|
||
following contexts:
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: c++
|
||
|
||
// "to" context
|
||
struct X {
|
||
void f(); // D0
|
||
};
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: c++
|
||
|
||
// "from" context
|
||
struct X {
|
||
void f(); // D1
|
||
};
|
||
void X::f() {} // D2
|
||
|
||
When we import the prototype and the definition of ``f`` from the "from"
|
||
context, then the resulting redecl chain will look like this ``D0 -> D2'``,
|
||
where ``D2'`` is the copy of ``D2`` in the "to" context.
|
||
|
||
.. Redecl chains of other declarations
|
||
|
||
Generally speaking, when we import declarations (like enums and classes) we do
|
||
attach the newly imported declaration to the existing redeclaration chain (if
|
||
there is structural equivalency). We do not import, however, the whole
|
||
redeclaration chain as we do in case of functions. Up till now, we haven't
|
||
found any essential property of forward declarations which is similar to the
|
||
case of the virtual flag in a member function prototype. In the future, this
|
||
may change, though.
|
||
|
||
Traversal during the Import
|
||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||
|
||
The node specific import mechanisms are implemented in
|
||
``ASTNodeImporter::VisitNode()`` functions, e.g. ``VisitFunctionDecl()``.
|
||
When we import a declaration then first we import everything which is needed to
|
||
call the constructor of that declaration node. Everything which can be set
|
||
later is set after the node is created. For example, in case of a
|
||
``FunctionDecl`` we first import the declaration context in which the function
|
||
is declared, then we create the ``FunctionDecl`` and only then we import the
|
||
body of the function. This means there are implicit dependencies between AST
|
||
nodes. These dependencies determine the order in which we visit nodes in the
|
||
"from" context. As with the regular graph traversal algorithms like DFS, we
|
||
keep track which nodes we have already visited in
|
||
``ASTImporter::ImportedDecls``. Whenever we create a node then we immediately
|
||
add that to the ``ImportedDecls``. We must not start the import of any other
|
||
declarations before we keep track of the newly created one. This is essential,
|
||
otherwise, we would not be able to handle circular dependencies. To enforce
|
||
this, we wrap all constructor calls of all AST nodes in
|
||
``GetImportedOrCreateDecl()``. This wrapper ensures that all newly created
|
||
declarations are immediately marked as imported; also, if a declaration is
|
||
already marked as imported then we just return its counterpart in the "to"
|
||
context. Consequently, calling a declaration's ``::Create()`` function directly
|
||
would lead to errors, please don't do that!
|
||
|
||
Even with the use of ``GetImportedOrCreateDecl()`` there is still a
|
||
probability of having an infinite import recursion if things are imported from
|
||
each other in wrong way. Imagine that during the import of ``A``, the import of
|
||
``B`` is requested before we could create the node for ``A`` (the constructor
|
||
needs a reference to ``B``). And the same could be true for the import of ``B``
|
||
(``A`` is requested to be imported before we could create the node for ``B``).
|
||
In case of the :ref:`templated-described swing <templated>` we take
|
||
extra attention to break the cyclical dependency: we import and set the
|
||
described template only after the ``CXXRecordDecl`` is created. As a best
|
||
practice, before creating the node in the "to" context, avoid importing of
|
||
other nodes which are not needed for the constructor of node ``A``.
|
||
|
||
Error Handling
|
||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||
|
||
Every import function returns with either an ``llvm::Error`` or an
|
||
``llvm::Expected<T>`` object. This enforces to check the return value of the
|
||
import functions. If there was an error during one import then we return with
|
||
that error. (Exception: when we import the members of a class, we collect the
|
||
individual errors with each member and we concatenate them in one Error
|
||
object.) We cache these errors in cases of declarations. During the next import
|
||
call if there is an existing error we just return with that. So, clients of the
|
||
library receive an Error object, which they must check.
|
||
|
||
During import of a specific declaration, it may happen that some AST nodes had
|
||
already been created before we recognize an error. In this case, we signal back
|
||
the error to the caller, but the "to" context remains polluted with those nodes
|
||
which had been created. Ideally, those nodes should not had been created, but
|
||
that time we did not know about the error, the error happened later. Since the
|
||
AST is immutable (most of the cases we can't remove existing nodes) we choose
|
||
to mark these nodes as erroneous.
|
||
|
||
We cache the errors associated with declarations in the "from" context in
|
||
``ASTImporter::ImportDeclErrors`` and the ones which are associated with the
|
||
"to" context in ``ASTImporterSharedState::ImportErrors``. Note that, there may
|
||
be several ASTImporter objects which import into the same "to" context but from
|
||
different "from" contexts; in this case, they have to share the associated
|
||
errors of the "to" context.
|
||
|
||
When an error happens, that propagates through the call stack, through all the
|
||
dependant nodes. However, in case of dependency cycles, this is not enough,
|
||
because we strive to mark the erroneous nodes so clients can act upon. In those
|
||
cases, we have to keep track of the errors for those nodes which are
|
||
intermediate nodes of a cycle.
|
||
|
||
An **import path** is the list of the AST nodes which we visit during an Import
|
||
call. If node ``A`` depends on node ``B`` then the path contains an ``A->B``
|
||
edge. From the call stack of the import functions, we can read the very same
|
||
path.
|
||
|
||
Now imagine the following AST, where the ``->`` represents dependency in terms
|
||
of the import (all nodes are declarations).
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: text
|
||
|
||
A->B->C->D
|
||
`->E
|
||
|
||
We would like to import A.
|
||
The import behaves like a DFS, so we will visit the nodes in this order: ABCDE.
|
||
During the visitation we will have the following import paths:
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: text
|
||
|
||
A
|
||
AB
|
||
ABC
|
||
ABCD
|
||
ABC
|
||
AB
|
||
ABE
|
||
AB
|
||
A
|
||
|
||
If during the visit of E there is an error then we set an error for E, then as
|
||
the call stack shrinks for B, then for A:
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: text
|
||
|
||
A
|
||
AB
|
||
ABC
|
||
ABCD
|
||
ABC
|
||
AB
|
||
ABE // Error! Set an error to E
|
||
AB // Set an error to B
|
||
A // Set an error to A
|
||
|
||
However, during the import we could import C and D without any error and they
|
||
are independent of A,B and E. We must not set up an error for C and D. So, at
|
||
the end of the import we have an entry in ``ImportDeclErrors`` for A,B,E but
|
||
not for C,D.
|
||
|
||
Now, what happens if there is a cycle in the import path? Let's consider this
|
||
AST:
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: text
|
||
|
||
A->B->C->A
|
||
`->E
|
||
|
||
During the visitation, we will have the below import paths and if during the
|
||
visit of E there is an error then we will set up an error for E,B,A. But what's
|
||
up with C?
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: text
|
||
|
||
A
|
||
AB
|
||
ABC
|
||
ABCA
|
||
ABC
|
||
AB
|
||
ABE // Error! Set an error to E
|
||
AB // Set an error to B
|
||
A // Set an error to A
|
||
|
||
This time we know that both B and C are dependent on A. This means we must set
|
||
up an error for C too. As the call stack reverses back we get to A and we must
|
||
set up an error to all nodes which depend on A (this includes C). But C is no
|
||
longer on the import path, it just had been previously. Such a situation can
|
||
happen only if during the visitation we had a cycle. If we didn't have any
|
||
cycle, then the normal way of passing an Error object through the call stack
|
||
could handle the situation. This is why we must track cycles during the import
|
||
process for each visited declaration.
|
||
|
||
Lookup Problems
|
||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||
|
||
When we import a declaration from the source context then we check whether we
|
||
already have a structurally equivalent node with the same name in the "to"
|
||
context. If the "from" node is a definition and the found one is also a
|
||
definition, then we do not create a new node, instead, we mark the found node
|
||
as the imported node. If the found definition and the one we want to import
|
||
have the same name but they are structurally in-equivalent, then we have an ODR
|
||
violation in case of C++. If the "from" node is not a definition then we add
|
||
that to the redeclaration chain of the found node. This behaviour is essential
|
||
when we merge ASTs from different translation units which include the same
|
||
header file(s). For example, we want to have only one definition for the class
|
||
template ``std::vector``, even if we included ``<vector>`` in several
|
||
translation units.
|
||
|
||
To find a structurally equivalent node we can use the regular C/C++ lookup
|
||
functions: ``DeclContext::noload_lookup()`` and
|
||
``DeclContext::localUncachedLookup()``. These functions do respect the C/C++
|
||
name hiding rules, thus you cannot find certain declarations in a given
|
||
declaration context. For instance, unnamed declarations (anonymous structs),
|
||
non-first ``friend`` declarations and template specializations are hidden. This
|
||
is a problem, because if we use the regular C/C++ lookup then we create
|
||
redundant AST nodes during the merge! Also, having two instances of the same
|
||
node could result in false :ref:`structural in-equivalencies <structural-eq>`
|
||
of other nodes which depend on the duplicated node. Because of these reasons,
|
||
we created a lookup class which has the sole purpose to register all
|
||
declarations, so later they can be looked up by subsequent import requests.
|
||
This is the ``ASTImporterLookupTable`` class. This lookup table should be
|
||
shared amongst the different ``ASTImporter`` instances if they happen to import
|
||
to the very same "to" context. This is why we can use the importer specific
|
||
lookup only via the ``ASTImporterSharedState`` class.
|
||
|
||
ExternalASTSource
|
||
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
||
|
||
The ``ExternalASTSource`` is an abstract interface associated with the
|
||
``ASTContext`` class. It provides the ability to read the declarations stored
|
||
within a declaration context either for iteration or for name lookup. A
|
||
declaration context with an external AST source may load its declarations
|
||
on-demand. This means that the list of declarations (represented as a linked
|
||
list, the head is ``DeclContext::FirstDecl``) could be empty. However, member
|
||
functions like ``DeclContext::lookup()`` may initiate a load.
|
||
|
||
Usually, external sources are associated with precompiled headers. For example,
|
||
when we load a class from a PCH then the members are loaded only if we do want
|
||
to look up something in the class' context.
|
||
|
||
In case of LLDB, an implementation of the ``ExternalASTSource`` interface is
|
||
attached to the AST context which is related to the parsed expression. This
|
||
implementation of the ``ExternalASTSource`` interface is realized with the help
|
||
of the ``ASTImporter`` class. This way, LLDB can reuse Clang's parsing
|
||
machinery while synthesizing the underlying AST from the debug data (e.g. from
|
||
DWARF). From the view of the ``ASTImporter`` this means both the "to" and the
|
||
"from" context may have declaration contexts with external lexical storage. If
|
||
a ``DeclContext`` in the "to" AST context has external lexical storage then we
|
||
must take extra attention to work only with the already loaded declarations!
|
||
Otherwise, we would end up with an uncontrolled import process. For instance,
|
||
if we used the regular ``DeclContext::lookup()`` to find the existing
|
||
declarations in the "to" context then the ``lookup()`` call itself would
|
||
initiate a new import while we are in the middle of importing a declaration!
|
||
(By the time we initiate the lookup we haven't registered yet that we already
|
||
started to import the node of the "from" context.) This is why we use
|
||
``DeclContext::noload_lookup()`` instead.
|
||
|
||
Class Template Instantiations
|
||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||
|
||
Different translation units may have class template instantiations with the
|
||
same template arguments, but with a different set of instantiated
|
||
``MethodDecls`` and ``FieldDecls``. Consider the following files:
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: c++
|
||
|
||
// x.h
|
||
template <typename T>
|
||
struct X {
|
||
int a{0}; // FieldDecl with InitListExpr
|
||
X(char) : a(3) {} // (1)
|
||
X(int) {} // (2)
|
||
};
|
||
|
||
// foo.cpp
|
||
void foo() {
|
||
// ClassTemplateSpec with ctor (1): FieldDecl without InitlistExpr
|
||
X<char> xc('c');
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
// bar.cpp
|
||
void bar() {
|
||
// ClassTemplateSpec with ctor (2): FieldDecl WITH InitlistExpr
|
||
X<char> xc(1);
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
In ``foo.cpp`` we use the constructor with number ``(1)``, which explicitly
|
||
initializes the member ``a`` to ``3``, thus the ``InitListExpr`` ``{0}`` is not
|
||
used here and the AST node is not instantiated. However, in the case of
|
||
``bar.cpp`` we use the constructor with number ``(2)``, which does not
|
||
explicitly initialize the ``a`` member, so the default ``InitListExpr`` is
|
||
needed and thus instantiated. When we merge the AST of ``foo.cpp`` and
|
||
``bar.cpp`` we must create an AST node for the class template instantiation of
|
||
``X<char>`` which has all the required nodes. Therefore, when we find an
|
||
existing ``ClassTemplateSpecializationDecl`` then we merge the fields of the
|
||
``ClassTemplateSpecializationDecl`` in the "from" context in a way that the
|
||
``InitListExpr`` is copied if not existent yet. The same merge mechanism should
|
||
be done in the cases of instantiated default arguments and exception
|
||
specifications of functions.
|
||
|
||
.. _visibility:
|
||
|
||
Visibility of Declarations
|
||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||
|
||
During import of a global variable with external visibility, the lookup will
|
||
find variables (with the same name) but with static visibility (linkage).
|
||
Clearly, we cannot put them into the same redeclaration chain. The same is true
|
||
the in case of functions. Also, we have to take care of other kinds of
|
||
declarations like enums, classes, etc. if they are in anonymous namespaces.
|
||
Therefore, we filter the lookup results and consider only those which have the
|
||
same visibility as the declaration we currently import.
|
||
|
||
We consider two declarations in two anonymous namespaces to have the same
|
||
visibility only if they are imported from the same AST context.
|
||
|
||
Strategies to Handle Conflicting Names
|
||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||
|
||
During the import we lookup existing declarations with the same name. We filter
|
||
the lookup results based on their :ref:`visibility <visibility>`. If any of the
|
||
found declarations are not structurally equivalent then we bumped to a name
|
||
conflict error (ODR violation in C++). In this case, we return with an
|
||
``Error`` and we set up the ``Error`` object for the declaration. However, some
|
||
clients of the ``ASTImporter`` may require a different, perhaps less
|
||
conservative and more liberal error handling strategy.
|
||
|
||
E.g. static analysis clients may benefit if the node is created even if there
|
||
is a name conflict. During the CTU analysis of certain projects, we recognized
|
||
that there are global declarations which collide with declarations from other
|
||
translation units, but they are not referenced outside from their translation
|
||
unit. These declarations should be in an unnamed namespace ideally. If we treat
|
||
these collisions liberally then CTU analysis can find more results. Note, the
|
||
feature be able to choose between name conflict handling strategies is still an
|
||
ongoing work.
|
||
|
||
.. _CFG:
|
||
|
||
The ``CFG`` class
|
||
-----------------
|
||
|
||
The ``CFG`` class is designed to represent a source-level control-flow graph
|
||
for a single statement (``Stmt*``). Typically instances of ``CFG`` are
|
||
constructed for function bodies (usually an instance of ``CompoundStmt``), but
|
||
can also be instantiated to represent the control-flow of any class that
|
||
subclasses ``Stmt``, which includes simple expressions. Control-flow graphs
|
||
are especially useful for performing `flow- or path-sensitive
|
||
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_flow_analysis#Sensitivities>`_ program
|
||
analyses on a given function.
|
||
|
||
Basic Blocks
|
||
^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||
|
||
Concretely, an instance of ``CFG`` is a collection of basic blocks. Each basic
|
||
block is an instance of ``CFGBlock``, which simply contains an ordered sequence
|
||
of ``Stmt*`` (each referring to statements in the AST). The ordering of
|
||
statements within a block indicates unconditional flow of control from one
|
||
statement to the next. :ref:`Conditional control-flow
|
||
<ConditionalControlFlow>` is represented using edges between basic blocks. The
|
||
statements within a given ``CFGBlock`` can be traversed using the
|
||
``CFGBlock::*iterator`` interface.
|
||
|
||
A ``CFG`` object owns the instances of ``CFGBlock`` within the control-flow
|
||
graph it represents. Each ``CFGBlock`` within a CFG is also uniquely numbered
|
||
(accessible via ``CFGBlock::getBlockID()``). Currently the number is based on
|
||
the ordering the blocks were created, but no assumptions should be made on how
|
||
``CFGBlocks`` are numbered other than their numbers are unique and that they
|
||
are numbered from 0..N-1 (where N is the number of basic blocks in the CFG).
|
||
|
||
Entry and Exit Blocks
|
||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||
|
||
Each instance of ``CFG`` contains two special blocks: an *entry* block
|
||
(accessible via ``CFG::getEntry()``), which has no incoming edges, and an
|
||
*exit* block (accessible via ``CFG::getExit()``), which has no outgoing edges.
|
||
Neither block contains any statements, and they serve the role of providing a
|
||
clear entrance and exit for a body of code such as a function body. The
|
||
presence of these empty blocks greatly simplifies the implementation of many
|
||
analyses built on top of CFGs.
|
||
|
||
.. _ConditionalControlFlow:
|
||
|
||
Conditional Control-Flow
|
||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||
|
||
Conditional control-flow (such as those induced by if-statements and loops) is
|
||
represented as edges between ``CFGBlocks``. Because different C language
|
||
constructs can induce control-flow, each ``CFGBlock`` also records an extra
|
||
``Stmt*`` that represents the *terminator* of the block. A terminator is
|
||
simply the statement that caused the control-flow, and is used to identify the
|
||
nature of the conditional control-flow between blocks. For example, in the
|
||
case of an if-statement, the terminator refers to the ``IfStmt`` object in the
|
||
AST that represented the given branch.
|
||
|
||
To illustrate, consider the following code example:
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: c++
|
||
|
||
int foo(int x) {
|
||
x = x + 1;
|
||
if (x > 2)
|
||
x++;
|
||
else {
|
||
x += 2;
|
||
x *= 2;
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
return x;
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
After invoking the parser+semantic analyzer on this code fragment, the AST of
|
||
the body of ``foo`` is referenced by a single ``Stmt*``. We can then construct
|
||
an instance of ``CFG`` representing the control-flow graph of this function
|
||
body by single call to a static class method:
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: c++
|
||
|
||
Stmt *FooBody = ...
|
||
std::unique_ptr<CFG> FooCFG = CFG::buildCFG(FooBody);
|
||
|
||
Along with providing an interface to iterate over its ``CFGBlocks``, the
|
||
``CFG`` class also provides methods that are useful for debugging and
|
||
visualizing CFGs. For example, the method ``CFG::dump()`` dumps a
|
||
pretty-printed version of the CFG to standard error. This is especially useful
|
||
when one is using a debugger such as gdb. For example, here is the output of
|
||
``FooCFG->dump()``:
|
||
|
||
.. code-block:: text
|
||
|
||
[ B5 (ENTRY) ]
|
||
Predecessors (0):
|
||
Successors (1): B4
|
||
|
||
[ B4 ]
|
||
1: x = x + 1
|
||
2: (x > 2)
|
||
T: if [B4.2]
|
||
Predecessors (1): B5
|
||
Successors (2): B3 B2
|
||
|
||
[ B3 ]
|
||
1: x++
|
||
Predecessors (1): B4
|
||
Successors (1): B1
|
||
|
||
[ B2 ]
|
||
1: x += 2
|
||
2: x *= 2
|
||
Predecessors (1): B4
|
||
Successors (1): B1
|
||
|
||
[ B1 ]
|
||
1: return x;
|
||
Predecessors (2): B2 B3
|
||
Successors (1): B0
|
||
|
||
[ B0 (EXIT) ]
|
||
Predecessors (1): B1
|
||
Successors (0):
|
||
|
||
For each block, the pretty-printed output displays for each block the number of
|
||
*predecessor* blocks (blocks that have outgoing control-flow to the given
|
||
block) and *successor* blocks (blocks that have control-flow that have incoming
|
||
control-flow from the given block). We can also clearly see the special entry
|
||
and exit blocks at the beginning and end of the pretty-printed output. For the
|
||
entry block (block B5), the number of predecessor blocks is 0, while for the
|
||
exit block (block B0) the number of successor blocks is 0.
|
||
|
||
The most interesting block here is B4, whose outgoing control-flow represents
|
||
the branching caused by the sole if-statement in ``foo``. Of particular
|
||
interest is the second statement in the block, ``(x > 2)``, and the terminator,
|
||
printed as ``if [B4.2]``. The second statement represents the evaluation of
|
||
the condition of the if-statement, which occurs before the actual branching of
|
||
control-flow. Within the ``CFGBlock`` for B4, the ``Stmt*`` for the second
|
||
statement refers to the actual expression in the AST for ``(x > 2)``. Thus
|
||
pointers to subclasses of ``Expr`` can appear in the list of statements in a
|
||
block, and not just subclasses of ``Stmt`` that refer to proper C statements.
|
||
|
||
The terminator of block B4 is a pointer to the ``IfStmt`` object in the AST.
|
||
The pretty-printer outputs ``if [B4.2]`` because the condition expression of
|
||
the if-statement has an actual place in the basic block, and thus the
|
||
terminator is essentially *referring* to the expression that is the second
|
||
statement of block B4 (i.e., B4.2). In this manner, conditions for
|
||
control-flow (which also includes conditions for loops and switch statements)
|
||
are hoisted into the actual basic block.
|
||
|
||
.. Implicit Control-Flow
|
||
.. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||
|
||
.. A key design principle of the ``CFG`` class was to not require any
|
||
.. transformations to the AST in order to represent control-flow. Thus the
|
||
.. ``CFG`` does not perform any "lowering" of the statements in an AST: loops
|
||
.. are not transformed into guarded gotos, short-circuit operations are not
|
||
.. converted to a set of if-statements, and so on.
|
||
|
||
Constant Folding in the Clang AST
|
||
---------------------------------
|
||
|
||
There are several places where constants and constant folding matter a lot to
|
||
the Clang front-end. First, in general, we prefer the AST to retain the source
|
||
code as close to how the user wrote it as possible. This means that if they
|
||
wrote "``5+4``", we want to keep the addition and two constants in the AST, we
|
||
don't want to fold to "``9``". This means that constant folding in various
|
||
ways turns into a tree walk that needs to handle the various cases.
|
||
|
||
However, there are places in both C and C++ that require constants to be
|
||
folded. For example, the C standard defines what an "integer constant
|
||
expression" (i-c-e) is with very precise and specific requirements. The
|
||
language then requires i-c-e's in a lot of places (for example, the size of a
|
||
bitfield, the value for a case statement, etc). For these, we have to be able
|
||
to constant fold the constants, to do semantic checks (e.g., verify bitfield
|
||
size is non-negative and that case statements aren't duplicated). We aim for
|
||
Clang to be very pedantic about this, diagnosing cases when the code does not
|
||
use an i-c-e where one is required, but accepting the code unless running with
|
||
``-pedantic-errors``.
|
||
|
||
Things get a little bit more tricky when it comes to compatibility with
|
||
real-world source code. Specifically, GCC has historically accepted a huge
|
||
superset of expressions as i-c-e's, and a lot of real world code depends on
|
||
this unfortunate accident of history (including, e.g., the glibc system
|
||
headers). GCC accepts anything its "fold" optimizer is capable of reducing to
|
||
an integer constant, which means that the definition of what it accepts changes
|
||
as its optimizer does. One example is that GCC accepts things like "``case
|
||
X-X:``" even when ``X`` is a variable, because it can fold this to 0.
|
||
|
||
Another issue are how constants interact with the extensions we support, such
|
||
as ``__builtin_constant_p``, ``__builtin_inf``, ``__extension__`` and many
|
||
others. C99 obviously does not specify the semantics of any of these
|
||
extensions, and the definition of i-c-e does not include them. However, these
|
||
extensions are often used in real code, and we have to have a way to reason
|
||
about them.
|
||
|
||
Finally, this is not just a problem for semantic analysis. The code generator
|
||
and other clients have to be able to fold constants (e.g., to initialize global
|
||
variables) and have to handle a superset of what C99 allows. Further, these
|
||
clients can benefit from extended information. For example, we know that
|
||
"``foo() || 1``" always evaluates to ``true``, but we can't replace the
|
||
expression with ``true`` because it has side effects.
|
||
|
||
Implementation Approach
|
||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||
|
||
After trying several different approaches, we've finally converged on a design
|
||
(Note, at the time of this writing, not all of this has been implemented,
|
||
consider this a design goal!). Our basic approach is to define a single
|
||
recursive evaluation method (``Expr::Evaluate``), which is implemented
|
||
in ``AST/ExprConstant.cpp``. Given an expression with "scalar" type (integer,
|
||
fp, complex, or pointer) this method returns the following information:
|
||
|
||
* Whether the expression is an integer constant expression, a general constant
|
||
that was folded but has no side effects, a general constant that was folded
|
||
but that does have side effects, or an uncomputable/unfoldable value.
|
||
* If the expression was computable in any way, this method returns the
|
||
``APValue`` for the result of the expression.
|
||
* If the expression is not evaluatable at all, this method returns information
|
||
on one of the problems with the expression. This includes a
|
||
``SourceLocation`` for where the problem is, and a diagnostic ID that explains
|
||
the problem. The diagnostic should have ``ERROR`` type.
|
||
* If the expression is not an integer constant expression, this method returns
|
||
information on one of the problems with the expression. This includes a
|
||
``SourceLocation`` for where the problem is, and a diagnostic ID that
|
||
explains the problem. The diagnostic should have ``EXTENSION`` type.
|
||
|
||
This information gives various clients the flexibility that they want, and we
|
||
will eventually have some helper methods for various extensions. For example,
|
||
``Sema`` should have a ``Sema::VerifyIntegerConstantExpression`` method, which
|
||
calls ``Evaluate`` on the expression. If the expression is not foldable, the
|
||
error is emitted, and it would return ``true``. If the expression is not an
|
||
i-c-e, the ``EXTENSION`` diagnostic is emitted. Finally it would return
|
||
``false`` to indicate that the AST is OK.
|
||
|
||
Other clients can use the information in other ways, for example, codegen can
|
||
just use expressions that are foldable in any way.
|
||
|
||
Extensions
|
||
^^^^^^^^^^
|
||
|
||
This section describes how some of the various extensions Clang supports
|
||
interacts with constant evaluation:
|
||
|
||
* ``__extension__``: The expression form of this extension causes any
|
||
evaluatable subexpression to be accepted as an integer constant expression.
|
||
* ``__builtin_constant_p``: This returns true (as an integer constant
|
||
expression) if the operand evaluates to either a numeric value (that is, not
|
||
a pointer cast to integral type) of integral, enumeration, floating or
|
||
complex type, or if it evaluates to the address of the first character of a
|
||
string literal (possibly cast to some other type). As a special case, if
|
||
``__builtin_constant_p`` is the (potentially parenthesized) condition of a
|
||
conditional operator expression ("``?:``"), only the true side of the
|
||
conditional operator is considered, and it is evaluated with full constant
|
||
folding.
|
||
* ``__builtin_choose_expr``: The condition is required to be an integer
|
||
constant expression, but we accept any constant as an "extension of an
|
||
extension". This only evaluates one operand depending on which way the
|
||
condition evaluates.
|
||
* ``__builtin_classify_type``: This always returns an integer constant
|
||
expression.
|
||
* ``__builtin_inf, nan, ...``: These are treated just like a floating-point
|
||
literal.
|
||
* ``__builtin_abs, copysign, ...``: These are constant folded as general
|
||
constant expressions.
|
||
* ``__builtin_strlen`` and ``strlen``: These are constant folded as integer
|
||
constant expressions if the argument is a string literal.
|
||
|
||
.. _Sema:
|
||
|
||
The Sema Library
|
||
================
|
||
|
||
This library is called by the :ref:`Parser library <Parser>` during parsing to
|
||
do semantic analysis of the input. For valid programs, Sema builds an AST for
|
||
parsed constructs.
|
||
|
||
.. _CodeGen:
|
||
|
||
The CodeGen Library
|
||
===================
|
||
|
||
CodeGen takes an :ref:`AST <AST>` as input and produces `LLVM IR code
|
||
<//llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html>`_ from it.
|
||
|
||
How to change Clang
|
||
===================
|
||
|
||
How to add an attribute
|
||
-----------------------
|
||
Attributes are a form of metadata that can be attached to a program construct,
|
||
allowing the programmer to pass semantic information along to the compiler for
|
||
various uses. For example, attributes may be used to alter the code generation
|
||
for a program construct, or to provide extra semantic information for static
|
||
analysis. This document explains how to add a custom attribute to Clang.
|
||
Documentation on existing attributes can be found `here
|
||
<//clang.llvm.org/docs/AttributeReference.html>`_.
|
||
|
||
Attribute Basics
|
||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||
Attributes in Clang are handled in three stages: parsing into a parsed attribute
|
||
representation, conversion from a parsed attribute into a semantic attribute,
|
||
and then the semantic handling of the attribute.
|
||
|
||
Parsing of the attribute is determined by the various syntactic forms attributes
|
||
can take, such as GNU, C++11, and Microsoft style attributes, as well as other
|
||
information provided by the table definition of the attribute. Ultimately, the
|
||
parsed representation of an attribute object is an ``ParsedAttr`` object.
|
||
These parsed attributes chain together as a list of parsed attributes attached
|
||
to a declarator or declaration specifier. The parsing of attributes is handled
|
||
automatically by Clang, except for attributes spelled as keywords. When
|
||
implementing a keyword attribute, the parsing of the keyword and creation of the
|
||
``ParsedAttr`` object must be done manually.
|
||
|
||
Eventually, ``Sema::ProcessDeclAttributeList()`` is called with a ``Decl`` and
|
||
a ``ParsedAttr``, at which point the parsed attribute can be transformed
|
||
into a semantic attribute. The process by which a parsed attribute is converted
|
||
into a semantic attribute depends on the attribute definition and semantic
|
||
requirements of the attribute. The end result, however, is that the semantic
|
||
attribute object is attached to the ``Decl`` object, and can be obtained by a
|
||
call to ``Decl::getAttr<T>()``. Similarly, for statement attributes,
|
||
``Sema::ProcessStmtAttributes()`` is called with a ``Stmt`` a list of
|
||
``ParsedAttr`` objects to be converted into a semantic attribute.
|
||
|
||
The structure of the semantic attribute is also governed by the attribute
|
||
definition given in Attr.td. This definition is used to automatically generate
|
||
functionality used for the implementation of the attribute, such as a class
|
||
derived from ``clang::Attr``, information for the parser to use, automated
|
||
semantic checking for some attributes, etc.
|
||
|
||
|
||
``include/clang/Basic/Attr.td``
|
||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||
The first step to adding a new attribute to Clang is to add its definition to
|
||
`include/clang/Basic/Attr.td
|
||
<https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/clang/include/clang/Basic/Attr.td>`_.
|
||
This tablegen definition must derive from the ``Attr`` (tablegen, not
|
||
semantic) type, or one of its derivatives. Most attributes will derive from the
|
||
``InheritableAttr`` type, which specifies that the attribute can be inherited by
|
||
later redeclarations of the ``Decl`` it is associated with.
|
||
``InheritableParamAttr`` is similar to ``InheritableAttr``, except that the
|
||
attribute is written on a parameter instead of a declaration. If the attribute
|
||
applies to statements, it should inherit from ``StmtAttr`. If the attribute is
|
||
intended to apply to a type instead of a declaration, such an attribute should
|
||
derive from ``TypeAttr``, and will generally not be given an AST representation.
|
||
(Note that this document does not cover the creation of type attributes.) An
|
||
attribute that inherits from ``IgnoredAttr`` is parsed, but will generate an
|
||
ignored attribute diagnostic when used, which may be useful when an attribute is
|
||
supported by another vendor but not supported by clang.
|
||
|
||
The definition will specify several key pieces of information, such as the
|
||
semantic name of the attribute, the spellings the attribute supports, the
|
||
arguments the attribute expects, and more. Most members of the ``Attr`` tablegen
|
||
type do not require definitions in the derived definition as the default
|
||
suffice. However, every attribute must specify at least a spelling list, a
|
||
subject list, and a documentation list.
|
||
|
||
Spellings
|
||
~~~~~~~~~
|
||
All attributes are required to specify a spelling list that denotes the ways in
|
||
which the attribute can be spelled. For instance, a single semantic attribute
|
||
may have a keyword spelling, as well as a C++11 spelling and a GNU spelling. An
|
||
empty spelling list is also permissible and may be useful for attributes which
|
||
are created implicitly. The following spellings are accepted:
|
||
|
||
============ ================================================================
|
||
Spelling Description
|
||
============ ================================================================
|
||
``GNU`` Spelled with a GNU-style ``__attribute__((attr))`` syntax and
|
||
placement.
|
||
``CXX11`` Spelled with a C++-style ``[[attr]]`` syntax with an optional
|
||
vendor-specific namespace.
|
||
``C2x`` Spelled with a C-style ``[[attr]]`` syntax with an optional
|
||
vendor-specific namespace.
|
||
``Declspec`` Spelled with a Microsoft-style ``__declspec(attr)`` syntax.
|
||
``Keyword`` The attribute is spelled as a keyword, and required custom
|
||
parsing.
|
||
``GCC`` Specifies two or three spellings: the first is a GNU-style
|
||
spelling, the second is a C++-style spelling with the ``gnu``
|
||
namespace, and the third is an optional C-style spelling with
|
||
the ``gnu`` namespace. Attributes should only specify this
|
||
spelling for attributes supported by GCC.
|
||
``Clang`` Specifies two or three spellings: the first is a GNU-style
|
||
spelling, the second is a C++-style spelling with the ``clang``
|
||
namespace, and the third is an optional C-style spelling with
|
||
the ``clang`` namespace. By default, a C-style spelling is
|
||
provided.
|
||
``Pragma`` The attribute is spelled as a ``#pragma``, and requires custom
|
||
processing within the preprocessor. If the attribute is meant to
|
||
be used by Clang, it should set the namespace to ``"clang"``.
|
||
Note that this spelling is not used for declaration attributes.
|
||
============ ================================================================
|
||
|
||
Subjects
|
||
~~~~~~~~
|
||
Attributes appertain to one or more subjects. If the attribute attempts to
|
||
attach to a subject that is not in the subject list, a diagnostic is issued
|
||
automatically. Whether the diagnostic is a warning or an error depends on how
|
||
the attribute's ``SubjectList`` is defined, but the default behavior is to warn.
|
||
The diagnostics displayed to the user are automatically determined based on the
|
||
subjects in the list, but a custom diagnostic parameter can also be specified in
|
||
the ``SubjectList``. The diagnostics generated for subject list violations are
|
||
calculated automatically or specified by the subject list itself. If a
|
||
previously unused Decl node is added to the ``SubjectList``, the logic used to
|
||
automatically determine the diagnostic parameter in `utils/TableGen/ClangAttrEmitter.cpp
|
||
<https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/clang/utils/TableGen/ClangAttrEmitter.cpp>`_
|
||
may need to be updated.
|
||
|
||
By default, all subjects in the SubjectList must either be a Decl node defined
|
||
in ``DeclNodes.td``, or a statement node defined in ``StmtNodes.td``. However,
|
||
more complex subjects can be created by creating a ``SubsetSubject`` object.
|
||
Each such object has a base subject which it appertains to (which must be a
|
||
Decl or Stmt node, and not a SubsetSubject node), and some custom code which is
|
||
called when determining whether an attribute appertains to the subject. For
|
||
instance, a ``NonBitField`` SubsetSubject appertains to a ``FieldDecl``, and
|
||
tests whether the given FieldDecl is a bit field. When a SubsetSubject is
|
||
specified in a SubjectList, a custom diagnostic parameter must also be provided.
|
||
|
||
Diagnostic checking for attribute subject lists for declaration and statement
|
||
attributes is automated except when ``HasCustomParsing`` is set to ``1``.
|
||
|
||
Documentation
|
||
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
||
All attributes must have some form of documentation associated with them.
|
||
Documentation is table generated on the public web server by a server-side
|
||
process that runs daily. Generally, the documentation for an attribute is a
|
||
stand-alone definition in `include/clang/Basic/AttrDocs.td
|
||
<https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/clang/include/clang/Basic/AttrDocs.td>`_
|
||
that is named after the attribute being documented.
|
||
|
||
If the attribute is not for public consumption, or is an implicitly-created
|
||
attribute that has no visible spelling, the documentation list can specify the
|
||
``Undocumented`` object. Otherwise, the attribute should have its documentation
|
||
added to AttrDocs.td.
|
||
|
||
Documentation derives from the ``Documentation`` tablegen type. All derived
|
||
types must specify a documentation category and the actual documentation itself.
|
||
Additionally, it can specify a custom heading for the attribute, though a
|
||
default heading will be chosen when possible.
|
||
|
||
There are four predefined documentation categories: ``DocCatFunction`` for
|
||
attributes that appertain to function-like subjects, ``DocCatVariable`` for
|
||
attributes that appertain to variable-like subjects, ``DocCatType`` for type
|
||
attributes, and ``DocCatStmt`` for statement attributes. A custom documentation
|
||
category should be used for groups of attributes with similar functionality.
|
||
Custom categories are good for providing overview information for the attributes
|
||
grouped under it. For instance, the consumed annotation attributes define a
|
||
custom category, ``DocCatConsumed``, that explains what consumed annotations are
|
||
at a high level.
|
||
|
||
Documentation content (whether it is for an attribute or a category) is written
|
||
using reStructuredText (RST) syntax.
|
||
|
||
After writing the documentation for the attribute, it should be locally tested
|
||
to ensure that there are no issues generating the documentation on the server.
|
||
Local testing requires a fresh build of clang-tblgen. To generate the attribute
|
||
documentation, execute the following command::
|
||
|
||
clang-tblgen -gen-attr-docs -I /path/to/clang/include /path/to/clang/include/clang/Basic/Attr.td -o /path/to/clang/docs/AttributeReference.rst
|
||
|
||
When testing locally, *do not* commit changes to ``AttributeReference.rst``.
|
||
This file is generated by the server automatically, and any changes made to this
|
||
file will be overwritten.
|
||
|
||
Arguments
|
||
~~~~~~~~~
|
||
Attributes may optionally specify a list of arguments that can be passed to the
|
||
attribute. Attribute arguments specify both the parsed form and the semantic
|
||
form of the attribute. For example, if ``Args`` is
|
||
``[StringArgument<"Arg1">, IntArgument<"Arg2">]`` then
|
||
``__attribute__((myattribute("Hello", 3)))`` will be a valid use; it requires
|
||
two arguments while parsing, and the Attr subclass' constructor for the
|
||
semantic attribute will require a string and integer argument.
|
||
|
||
All arguments have a name and a flag that specifies whether the argument is
|
||
optional. The associated C++ type of the argument is determined by the argument
|
||
definition type. If the existing argument types are insufficient, new types can
|
||
be created, but it requires modifying `utils/TableGen/ClangAttrEmitter.cpp
|
||
<https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/clang/utils/TableGen/ClangAttrEmitter.cpp>`_
|
||
to properly support the type.
|
||
|
||
Other Properties
|
||
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
||
The ``Attr`` definition has other members which control the behavior of the
|
||
attribute. Many of them are special-purpose and beyond the scope of this
|
||
document, however a few deserve mention.
|
||
|
||
If the parsed form of the attribute is more complex, or differs from the
|
||
semantic form, the ``HasCustomParsing`` bit can be set to ``1`` for the class,
|
||
and the parsing code in `Parser::ParseGNUAttributeArgs()
|
||
<https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/clang/lib/Parse/ParseDecl.cpp>`_
|
||
can be updated for the special case. Note that this only applies to arguments
|
||
with a GNU spelling -- attributes with a __declspec spelling currently ignore
|
||
this flag and are handled by ``Parser::ParseMicrosoftDeclSpec``.
|
||
|
||
Note that setting this member to 1 will opt out of common attribute semantic
|
||
handling, requiring extra implementation efforts to ensure the attribute
|
||
appertains to the appropriate subject, etc.
|
||
|
||
If the attribute should not be propagated from a template declaration to an
|
||
instantiation of the template, set the ``Clone`` member to 0. By default, all
|
||
attributes will be cloned to template instantiations.
|
||
|
||
Attributes that do not require an AST node should set the ``ASTNode`` field to
|
||
``0`` to avoid polluting the AST. Note that anything inheriting from
|
||
``TypeAttr`` or ``IgnoredAttr`` automatically do not generate an AST node. All
|
||
other attributes generate an AST node by default. The AST node is the semantic
|
||
representation of the attribute.
|
||
|
||
The ``LangOpts`` field specifies a list of language options required by the
|
||
attribute. For instance, all of the CUDA-specific attributes specify ``[CUDA]``
|
||
for the ``LangOpts`` field, and when the CUDA language option is not enabled, an
|
||
"attribute ignored" warning diagnostic is emitted. Since language options are
|
||
not table generated nodes, new language options must be created manually and
|
||
should specify the spelling used by ``LangOptions`` class.
|
||
|
||
Custom accessors can be generated for an attribute based on the spelling list
|
||
for that attribute. For instance, if an attribute has two different spellings:
|
||
'Foo' and 'Bar', accessors can be created:
|
||
``[Accessor<"isFoo", [GNU<"Foo">]>, Accessor<"isBar", [GNU<"Bar">]>]``
|
||
These accessors will be generated on the semantic form of the attribute,
|
||
accepting no arguments and returning a ``bool``.
|
||
|
||
Attributes that do not require custom semantic handling should set the
|
||
``SemaHandler`` field to ``0``. Note that anything inheriting from
|
||
``IgnoredAttr`` automatically do not get a semantic handler. All other
|
||
attributes are assumed to use a semantic handler by default. Attributes
|
||
without a semantic handler are not given a parsed attribute ``Kind`` enumerator.
|
||
|
||
"Simple" attributes, that require no custom semantic processing aside from what
|
||
is automatically provided, should set the ``SimpleHandler`` field to ``1``.
|
||
|
||
Target-specific attributes may share a spelling with other attributes in
|
||
different targets. For instance, the ARM and MSP430 targets both have an
|
||
attribute spelled ``GNU<"interrupt">``, but with different parsing and semantic
|
||
requirements. To support this feature, an attribute inheriting from
|
||
``TargetSpecificAttribute`` may specify a ``ParseKind`` field. This field
|
||
should be the same value between all arguments sharing a spelling, and
|
||
corresponds to the parsed attribute's ``Kind`` enumerator. This allows
|
||
attributes to share a parsed attribute kind, but have distinct semantic
|
||
attribute classes. For instance, ``ParsedAttr`` is the shared
|
||
parsed attribute kind, but ARMInterruptAttr and MSP430InterruptAttr are the
|
||
semantic attributes generated.
|
||
|
||
By default, attribute arguments are parsed in an evaluated context. If the
|
||
arguments for an attribute should be parsed in an unevaluated context (akin to
|
||
the way the argument to a ``sizeof`` expression is parsed), set
|
||
``ParseArgumentsAsUnevaluated`` to ``1``.
|
||
|
||
If additional functionality is desired for the semantic form of the attribute,
|
||
the ``AdditionalMembers`` field specifies code to be copied verbatim into the
|
||
semantic attribute class object, with ``public`` access.
|
||
|
||
If two or more attributes cannot be used in combination on the same declaration
|
||
or statement, a ``MutualExclusions`` definition can be supplied to automatically
|
||
generate diagnostic code. This will disallow the attribute combinations
|
||
regardless of spellings used. Additionally, it will diagnose combinations within
|
||
the same attribute list, different attribute list, and redeclarations, as
|
||
appropriate.
|
||
|
||
Boilerplate
|
||
^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||
All semantic processing of declaration attributes happens in `lib/Sema/SemaDeclAttr.cpp
|
||
<https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/clang/lib/Sema/SemaDeclAttr.cpp>`_,
|
||
and generally starts in the ``ProcessDeclAttribute()`` function. If the
|
||
attribute has the ``SimpleHandler`` field set to ``1`` then the function to
|
||
process the attribute will be automatically generated, and nothing needs to be
|
||
done here. Otherwise, write a new ``handleYourAttr()`` function, and add that to
|
||
the switch statement. Please do not implement handling logic directly in the
|
||
``case`` for the attribute.
|
||
|
||
Unless otherwise specified by the attribute definition, common semantic checking
|
||
of the parsed attribute is handled automatically. This includes diagnosing
|
||
parsed attributes that do not appertain to the given ``Decl`` or ``Stmt``,
|
||
ensuring the correct minimum number of arguments are passed, etc.
|
||
|
||
If the attribute adds additional warnings, define a ``DiagGroup`` in
|
||
`include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticGroups.td
|
||
<https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/clang/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticGroups.td>`_
|
||
named after the attribute's ``Spelling`` with "_"s replaced by "-"s. If there
|
||
is only a single diagnostic, it is permissible to use ``InGroup<DiagGroup<"your-attribute">>``
|
||
directly in `DiagnosticSemaKinds.td
|
||
<https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/clang/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td>`_
|
||
|
||
All semantic diagnostics generated for your attribute, including automatically-
|
||
generated ones (such as subjects and argument counts), should have a
|
||
corresponding test case.
|
||
|
||
Semantic handling
|
||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||
Most attributes are implemented to have some effect on the compiler. For
|
||
instance, to modify the way code is generated, or to add extra semantic checks
|
||
for an analysis pass, etc. Having added the attribute definition and conversion
|
||
to the semantic representation for the attribute, what remains is to implement
|
||
the custom logic requiring use of the attribute.
|
||
|
||
The ``clang::Decl`` object can be queried for the presence or absence of an
|
||
attribute using ``hasAttr<T>()``. To obtain a pointer to the semantic
|
||
representation of the attribute, ``getAttr<T>`` may be used.
|
||
|
||
The ``clang::AttributedStmt`` object can be queried for the presence or absence
|
||
of an attribute by calling ``getAttrs()`` and looping over the list of
|
||
attributes.
|
||
|
||
How to add an expression or statement
|
||
-------------------------------------
|
||
|
||
Expressions and statements are one of the most fundamental constructs within a
|
||
compiler, because they interact with many different parts of the AST, semantic
|
||
analysis, and IR generation. Therefore, adding a new expression or statement
|
||
kind into Clang requires some care. The following list details the various
|
||
places in Clang where an expression or statement needs to be introduced, along
|
||
with patterns to follow to ensure that the new expression or statement works
|
||
well across all of the C languages. We focus on expressions, but statements
|
||
are similar.
|
||
|
||
#. Introduce parsing actions into the parser. Recursive-descent parsing is
|
||
mostly self-explanatory, but there are a few things that are worth keeping
|
||
in mind:
|
||
|
||
* Keep as much source location information as possible! You'll want it later
|
||
to produce great diagnostics and support Clang's various features that map
|
||
between source code and the AST.
|
||
* Write tests for all of the "bad" parsing cases, to make sure your recovery
|
||
is good. If you have matched delimiters (e.g., parentheses, square
|
||
brackets, etc.), use ``Parser::BalancedDelimiterTracker`` to give nice
|
||
diagnostics when things go wrong.
|
||
|
||
#. Introduce semantic analysis actions into ``Sema``. Semantic analysis should
|
||
always involve two functions: an ``ActOnXXX`` function that will be called
|
||
directly from the parser, and a ``BuildXXX`` function that performs the
|
||
actual semantic analysis and will (eventually!) build the AST node. It's
|
||
fairly common for the ``ActOnCXX`` function to do very little (often just
|
||
some minor translation from the parser's representation to ``Sema``'s
|
||
representation of the same thing), but the separation is still important:
|
||
C++ template instantiation, for example, should always call the ``BuildXXX``
|
||
variant. Several notes on semantic analysis before we get into construction
|
||
of the AST:
|
||
|
||
* Your expression probably involves some types and some subexpressions.
|
||
Make sure to fully check that those types, and the types of those
|
||
subexpressions, meet your expectations. Add implicit conversions where
|
||
necessary to make sure that all of the types line up exactly the way you
|
||
want them. Write extensive tests to check that you're getting good
|
||
diagnostics for mistakes and that you can use various forms of
|
||
subexpressions with your expression.
|
||
* When type-checking a type or subexpression, make sure to first check
|
||
whether the type is "dependent" (``Type::isDependentType()``) or whether a
|
||
subexpression is type-dependent (``Expr::isTypeDependent()``). If any of
|
||
these return ``true``, then you're inside a template and you can't do much
|
||
type-checking now. That's normal, and your AST node (when you get there)
|
||
will have to deal with this case. At this point, you can write tests that
|
||
use your expression within templates, but don't try to instantiate the
|
||
templates.
|
||
* For each subexpression, be sure to call ``Sema::CheckPlaceholderExpr()``
|
||
to deal with "weird" expressions that don't behave well as subexpressions.
|
||
Then, determine whether you need to perform lvalue-to-rvalue conversions
|
||
(``Sema::DefaultLvalueConversions``) or the usual unary conversions
|
||
(``Sema::UsualUnaryConversions``), for places where the subexpression is
|
||
producing a value you intend to use.
|
||
* Your ``BuildXXX`` function will probably just return ``ExprError()`` at
|
||
this point, since you don't have an AST. That's perfectly fine, and
|
||
shouldn't impact your testing.
|
||
|
||
#. Introduce an AST node for your new expression. This starts with declaring
|
||
the node in ``include/Basic/StmtNodes.td`` and creating a new class for your
|
||
expression in the appropriate ``include/AST/Expr*.h`` header. It's best to
|
||
look at the class for a similar expression to get ideas, and there are some
|
||
specific things to watch for:
|
||
|
||
* If you need to allocate memory, use the ``ASTContext`` allocator to
|
||
allocate memory. Never use raw ``malloc`` or ``new``, and never hold any
|
||
resources in an AST node, because the destructor of an AST node is never
|
||
called.
|
||
* Make sure that ``getSourceRange()`` covers the exact source range of your
|
||
expression. This is needed for diagnostics and for IDE support.
|
||
* Make sure that ``children()`` visits all of the subexpressions. This is
|
||
important for a number of features (e.g., IDE support, C++ variadic
|
||
templates). If you have sub-types, you'll also need to visit those
|
||
sub-types in ``RecursiveASTVisitor``.
|
||
* Add printing support (``StmtPrinter.cpp``) for your expression.
|
||
* Add profiling support (``StmtProfile.cpp``) for your AST node, noting the
|
||
distinguishing (non-source location) characteristics of an instance of
|
||
your expression. Omitting this step will lead to hard-to-diagnose
|
||
failures regarding matching of template declarations.
|
||
* Add serialization support (``ASTReaderStmt.cpp``, ``ASTWriterStmt.cpp``)
|
||
for your AST node.
|
||
|
||
#. Teach semantic analysis to build your AST node. At this point, you can wire
|
||
up your ``Sema::BuildXXX`` function to actually create your AST. A few
|
||
things to check at this point:
|
||
|
||
* If your expression can construct a new C++ class or return a new
|
||
Objective-C object, be sure to update and then call
|
||
``Sema::MaybeBindToTemporary`` for your just-created AST node to be sure
|
||
that the object gets properly destructed. An easy way to test this is to
|
||
return a C++ class with a private destructor: semantic analysis should
|
||
flag an error here with the attempt to call the destructor.
|
||
* Inspect the generated AST by printing it using ``clang -cc1 -ast-print``,
|
||
to make sure you're capturing all of the important information about how
|
||
the AST was written.
|
||
* Inspect the generated AST under ``clang -cc1 -ast-dump`` to verify that
|
||
all of the types in the generated AST line up the way you want them.
|
||
Remember that clients of the AST should never have to "think" to
|
||
understand what's going on. For example, all implicit conversions should
|
||
show up explicitly in the AST.
|
||
* Write tests that use your expression as a subexpression of other,
|
||
well-known expressions. Can you call a function using your expression as
|
||
an argument? Can you use the ternary operator?
|
||
|
||
#. Teach code generation to create IR to your AST node. This step is the first
|
||
(and only) that requires knowledge of LLVM IR. There are several things to
|
||
keep in mind:
|
||
|
||
* Code generation is separated into scalar/aggregate/complex and
|
||
lvalue/rvalue paths, depending on what kind of result your expression
|
||
produces. On occasion, this requires some careful factoring of code to
|
||
avoid duplication.
|
||
* ``CodeGenFunction`` contains functions ``ConvertType`` and
|
||
``ConvertTypeForMem`` that convert Clang's types (``clang::Type*`` or
|
||
``clang::QualType``) to LLVM types. Use the former for values, and the
|
||
latter for memory locations: test with the C++ "``bool``" type to check
|
||
this. If you find that you are having to use LLVM bitcasts to make the
|
||
subexpressions of your expression have the type that your expression
|
||
expects, STOP! Go fix semantic analysis and the AST so that you don't
|
||
need these bitcasts.
|
||
* The ``CodeGenFunction`` class has a number of helper functions to make
|
||
certain operations easy, such as generating code to produce an lvalue or
|
||
an rvalue, or to initialize a memory location with a given value. Prefer
|
||
to use these functions rather than directly writing loads and stores,
|
||
because these functions take care of some of the tricky details for you
|
||
(e.g., for exceptions).
|
||
* If your expression requires some special behavior in the event of an
|
||
exception, look at the ``push*Cleanup`` functions in ``CodeGenFunction``
|
||
to introduce a cleanup. You shouldn't have to deal with
|
||
exception-handling directly.
|
||
* Testing is extremely important in IR generation. Use ``clang -cc1
|
||
-emit-llvm`` and `FileCheck
|
||
<https://llvm.org/docs/CommandGuide/FileCheck.html>`_ to verify that you're
|
||
generating the right IR.
|
||
|
||
#. Teach template instantiation how to cope with your AST node, which requires
|
||
some fairly simple code:
|
||
|
||
* Make sure that your expression's constructor properly computes the flags
|
||
for type dependence (i.e., the type your expression produces can change
|
||
from one instantiation to the next), value dependence (i.e., the constant
|
||
value your expression produces can change from one instantiation to the
|
||
next), instantiation dependence (i.e., a template parameter occurs
|
||
anywhere in your expression), and whether your expression contains a
|
||
parameter pack (for variadic templates). Often, computing these flags
|
||
just means combining the results from the various types and
|
||
subexpressions.
|
||
* Add ``TransformXXX`` and ``RebuildXXX`` functions to the ``TreeTransform``
|
||
class template in ``Sema``. ``TransformXXX`` should (recursively)
|
||
transform all of the subexpressions and types within your expression,
|
||
using ``getDerived().TransformYYY``. If all of the subexpressions and
|
||
types transform without error, it will then call the ``RebuildXXX``
|
||
function, which will in turn call ``getSema().BuildXXX`` to perform
|
||
semantic analysis and build your expression.
|
||
* To test template instantiation, take those tests you wrote to make sure
|
||
that you were type checking with type-dependent expressions and dependent
|
||
types (from step #2) and instantiate those templates with various types,
|
||
some of which type-check and some that don't, and test the error messages
|
||
in each case.
|
||
|
||
#. There are some "extras" that make other features work better. It's worth
|
||
handling these extras to give your expression complete integration into
|
||
Clang:
|
||
|
||
* Add code completion support for your expression in
|
||
``SemaCodeComplete.cpp``.
|
||
* If your expression has types in it, or has any "interesting" features
|
||
other than subexpressions, extend libclang's ``CursorVisitor`` to provide
|
||
proper visitation for your expression, enabling various IDE features such
|
||
as syntax highlighting, cross-referencing, and so on. The
|
||
``c-index-test`` helper program can be used to test these features.
|
||
|