This commit handles the following types:
- clang::ExternalASTSource
- clang::TargetInfo
- clang::ASTContext
- clang::SourceManager
- clang::FileManager
Part of cleanup #151026
Handles clang::DiagnosticsEngine and clang::DiagnosticIDs.
For DiagnosticIDs, this mostly migrates from `new DiagnosticIDs` to
convenience method `DiagnosticIDs::create()`.
Part of cleanup https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/151026
This reverts commit e2a885537f11f8d9ced1c80c2c90069ab5adeb1d. Build failures were fixed right away and reverting the original commit without the fixes breaks the build again.
The `DiagnosticOptions` class is currently intrusively
reference-counted, which makes reasoning about its lifetime very
difficult in some cases. For example, `CompilerInvocation` owns the
`DiagnosticOptions` instance (wrapped in `llvm::IntrusiveRefCntPtr`) and
only exposes an accessor returning `DiagnosticOptions &`. One would
think this gives `CompilerInvocation` exclusive ownership of the object,
but that's not the case:
```c++
void shareOwnership(CompilerInvocation &CI) {
llvm::IntrusiveRefCntPtr<DiagnosticOptions> CoOwner = &CI.getDiagnosticOptions();
// ...
}
```
This is a perfectly valid pattern that is being actually used in the
codebase.
I would like to ensure the ownership of `DiagnosticOptions` by
`CompilerInvocation` is guaranteed to be exclusive. This can be
leveraged for a copy-on-write optimization later on. This PR changes
usages of `DiagnosticOptions` across `clang`, `clang-tools-extra` and
`lldb` to not be intrusively reference-counted.
Close https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/90154
This patch is also an optimization to the lookup process to utilize the
information provided by `export` keyword.
Previously, in the lookup process, the `export` keyword only takes part
in the check part, it doesn't get involved in the lookup process. That
said, previously, in a name lookup for 'name', we would load all of
declarations with the name 'name' and check if these declarations are
valid or not. It works well. But it is inefficient since it may load
declarations that may not be wanted.
Note that this patch actually did a trick in the lookup process instead
of bring module information to DeclarationName or considering module
information when deciding if two declarations are the same. So it may
not be a surprise to me if there are missing cases. But it is not a
regression. It should be already the case. Issue reports are welcomed.
In this patch, I tried to split the big lookup table into a lookup table
as before and a module local lookup table, which takes a combination of
the ID of the DeclContext and hash value of the primary module name as
the key. And refactored `DeclContext::lookup()` method to take the
module information. So that a lookup in a DeclContext won't load
declarations that are local to **other** modules.
And also I think it is already beneficial to split the big lookup table
since it may reduce the conflicts during lookups in the hash table.
BTW, this patch introduced a **regression** for a reachability rule in
C++20 but it was false-negative. See
'clang/test/CXX/module/module.interface/p7.cpp' for details.
This patch is not expected to introduce any other
regressions for non-c++20-modules users since the module local lookup
table should be empty for them.
---
On the API side, this patch unfortunately add a maybe-confusing argument
`Module *NamedModule` to
`ExternalASTSource::FindExternalVisibleDeclsByName()`. People may think
we can get the information from the first argument `const DeclContext
*DC`. But sadly there are declarations (e.g., namespace) can appear in
multiple different modules as a single declaration. So we have to add
additional information to indicate this.
This implements
https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-add-support-for-controlling-diagnostics-severities-at-file-level-granularity-through-command-line/81292.
Users now can suppress warnings for certain headers by providing a
mapping with globs, a sample file looks like:
```
[unused]
src:*
src:*clang/*=emit
```
This will suppress warnings from `-Wunused` group in all files that
aren't under `clang/` directory. This mapping file can be passed to
clang via `--warning-suppression-mappings=foo.txt`.
At a high level, mapping file is stored in DiagnosticOptions and then
processed with rest of the warning flags when creating a
DiagnosticsEngine. This is a functor that uses SpecialCaseLists
underneath to match against globs coming from the mappings file.
This implies processing warning options now performs IO, relevant
interfaces are updated to take in a VFS, falling back to RealFileSystem
when one is not available.
This patch is based on clang-tidy's modernize-make-unique but limited
to those cases where type names are mentioned twice like
`std::unique_ptr<Type>(new Type())`, which is a bit mouthful.
This patch fixes:
clang/lib/Interpreter/CodeCompletion.cpp:126:35: error: 'startswith'
is deprecated: Use starts_with instead
[-Werror,-Wdeprecated-declarations]
clang/lib/Interpreter/CodeCompletion.cpp:189:42: error: 'startswith'
is deprecated: Use starts_with instead
[-Werror,-Wdeprecated-declarations]
This patch contains changes from
002d471a4a3cd8b429e4ca7c84fd54a642e50e4c, in
addition to a bug fix that added a virtual destructor to
`CompletionContextHandler`
The original changes in the orginal commit piggybacks on clang's
semantic modules to enable semantic completion. In particular, we use
`CodeCompletionContext` to differentiate two types of code completion.
We also
extract the relevant type information from it.
Original commit message:
"
This patch enabled code completion for ClangREPL. The feature was built upon
three existing Clang components: a list completer for LineEditor, a
CompletionConsumer from SemaCodeCompletion, and the ASTUnit::codeComplete method.
The first component serves as the main entry point of handling interactive inputs.
Because a completion point for a compiler instance has to be unchanged once it
is set, an incremental compiler instance is created for each code
completion. Such a compiler instance carries over AST context source from the
main interpreter compiler in order to obtain declarations or bindings from
previous input in the same REPL session.
The most important API codeComplete in Interpreter/CodeCompletion is a thin
wrapper that calls with ASTUnit::codeComplete with necessary arguments, such as
a code completion point and a ReplCompletionConsumer, which communicates
completion results from SemaCodeCompletion back to the list completer for the
REPL.
In addition, PCC_TopLevelOrExpression and CCC_TopLevelOrExpression` top levels
were added so that SemaCodeCompletion can treat top level statements like
expression statements at the REPL. For example,
clang-repl> int foo = 42;
clang-repl> f<tab>
From a parser's persective, the cursor is at a top level. If we used code
completion without any changes, PCC_Namespace would be supplied to
Sema::CodeCompleteOrdinaryName, and thus the completion results would not
include foo.
Currently, the way we use PCC_TopLevelOrExpression and
CCC_TopLevelOrExpression is no different from the way we use PCC_Statement
and CCC_Statement respectively.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D154382
"
The new patch also fixes clangd and several memory issues that the bots reported
and upload the missing files.
This patch enabled code completion for ClangREPL. The feature was built upon
three existing Clang components: a list completer for LineEditor, a
CompletionConsumer from SemaCodeCompletion, and the ASTUnit::codeComplete method.
The first component serves as the main entry point of handling interactive inputs.
Because a completion point for a compiler instance has to be unchanged once it
is set, an incremental compiler instance is created for each code
completion. Such a compiler instance carries over AST context source from the
main interpreter compiler in order to obtain declarations or bindings from
previous input in the same REPL session.
The most important API codeComplete in Interpreter/CodeCompletion is a thin
wrapper that calls with ASTUnit::codeComplete with necessary arguments, such as
a code completion point and a ReplCompletionConsumer, which communicates
completion results from SemaCodeCompletion back to the list completer for the
REPL.
In addition, PCC_TopLevelOrExpression and CCC_TopLevelOrExpression` top levels
were added so that SemaCodeCompletion can treat top level statements like
expression statements at the REPL. For example,
clang-repl> int foo = 42;
clang-repl> f<tab>
From a parser's persective, the cursor is at a top level. If we used code
completion without any changes, PCC_Namespace would be supplied to
Sema::CodeCompleteOrdinaryName, and thus the completion results would not
include foo.
Currently, the way we use PCC_TopLevelOrExpression and
CCC_TopLevelOrExpression is no different from the way we use PCC_Statement
and CCC_Statement respectively.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D154382
