If a virtual function is declared with `noexcept`, functions that
override this function in the derived classes must be declared with
`noexcept` as well. This PR updates code completion in clang Sema. It
adds `noexcept` specifier to override functions in the code completion
result if the functions override a `noexcept` virtual function.
Fixes#139375
Clang expects command line source locations to be provided using 1-based
indexing.
Currently, Clang does not reject zero as invalid argument for column or
line number, which can cause Clang to crash.
This commit extends validation in `ParsedSourceLocation::FromString` to
only accept (unsinged) non-zero integers.
Code complete `constexpr` and `consteval` keywords after `if` in the
relevant language modes. If pattern completion is enabled, the
completions also include placeholders for the condition (in the case
of `constexpr`) and statement block.
This skips the provisional resolution of CWG1432 just when ordering the
candidates for function call code completion, as otherwise this breaks
some assumptions the implementation makes about how closely related the
candidates are.
As a drive-by, deduplicate the implementation with the one used for
class template partial ordering, and strenghten an assertion which was
previosuly dependent on the order of candidates.
Also add a test for the fix for CWG1432 when partial ordering function
templates, which was otherwise untested.
Fixes#125500
This checks if the layout of `std::initializer_list` is something Clang
can handle much earlier and deduplicates the checks in
CodeGen/CGExprAgg.cpp and AST/ExprConstant.cpp
Also now diagnose `union initializer_list` (Fixes#95495), bit-field for
the size (Fixes a crash that would happen during codegen if it were
unnamed), base classes (that wouldn't be initialized) and polymorphic
classes (whose vtable pointer wouldn't be initialized).
The issue with the previous implementation bc31be7 was that
getApproximateType could potentially return a null QualType for a
dereferencing operator, which is not what its caller wants.
From two aspects:
- For function templates, emit additional template argument
placeholders in the context where it can't be a call in order
to specify an instantiation explicitly.
- Consider expressions with base type specifier such as
'Derived().Base::foo^' a function call.
Reviewed By: nridge
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D156605
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
Tests where the RUN-lines/CHECK-ed output refer to line numbers in the test
file are a maintenance burden, as inserting text in the appropriate place
invalidates all the subsequent line numbers.
Lit supports %(line+n) for this, and FileCheck supports [[@LINE+N]].
But many existing tests don't make use of it and still need to be modified.
This commit adds a script that can find line numbers in tests according to a
regex and replace them with the appropriate relative-line reference.
It contains some options to avoid inappropriately rewriting tests where absolute
numbers are appropriate: a "nearby" threshold and a refusal by default to
replace only some matched line numbers.
I've applied it to CodeComplete tests, this proves the concept but also are the
single worst group of tests I've seen in this respect.
These changes are likely to hit merge conflicts, but can be regenerated with:
```
find ../clang/test/CodeCompletion/ -type f | grep -v /Inputs/ | xargs ../llvm/utils/relative_lines.py --verbose --near=20 --pattern='-code-completion-at[ =]%s:(\\d+):' --pattern='requires fix-it: {(\d+):\d+-(\d+):\d+}'
````
As requested in https://reviews.llvm.org/D140044
Fixes https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/59553
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D140217
These were inconsistent (one `touch` line listed all the files in a
single `touch` invocation, but the other listed them as separate
commands with `&&`) and incorrect (one `&&` was missing, causing `touch`
to try to touch a file called `touch` in the cwd, which might not be
accessible/relevant to test execution)
So make them consistent and simpler by using the "list all the files on
a line in a single `touch` invocation" reducing the visual
noise/clutter/etc.
When the initializer of an `auto` variable is dependent, clang doesn't give the
DeclRefExpr a useful dependent type that we can apply heuristics to.
However we can dig one up by looking at the initializer.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D140044
Although using-enum's grammar is 'using elaborated-enum-specifier',
the lookup for the enum is ordinary lookup (and not the tagged-type
lookup that normally occurs wth an tagged-type specifier). Thus (a)
we can find typedefs and (b) do not find enum tags hidden by a non-tag
name (the struct stat thing).
This reimplements that part of using-enum handling, to address DR2621,
where clang's behaviour does not match std intent (and other
compilers).
Reviewed By: aaron.ballman
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D134283
A significant number of our tests in C accidentally use functions
without prototypes. This patch converts the function signatures to have
a prototype for the situations where the test is not specific to K&R C
declarations. e.g.,
void func();
becomes
void func(void);
This is the fifth batch of tests being updated (there are a significant
number of other tests left to be updated).
Note, the behavior of -ast-print is broken. It prints functions with a
prototype (void) as if they have no prototype () in C. Some tests need
to disable strict prototype checking when recompiling the results of an
-ast-print invocation.
Underscore-uglified identifiers are used in standard library implementations to
guard against collisions with macros, and they hurt readability considerably.
(Consider `push_back(Tp_ &&__value)` vs `push_back(Tp value)`.
When we're describing an interface, the exact names of parameters are not
critical so we can drop these prefixes.
This patch adds a new PrintingPolicy flag that can applies this stripping
when recursively printing pieces of AST.
We set it in code completion/signature help, and in clangd's hover display.
All three features also do a bit of manual poking at names, so fix up those too.
Fixes https://github.com/clangd/clangd/issues/736
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D116387
C++ member function bodies (including ctor initializers) are first captured
into a buffer and then parsed after the class is complete. (This allows
members to be referenced even if declared later).
When the boundary of the function body cannot be established, its buffer is
discarded and late-parsing never happens (it would surely fail).
For code completion this is the wrong tradeoff: the point of the parse is to
generate completions as a side-effect.
Today, when the ctor body wasn't typed yet there are no init list completions.
With this patch we parse such an init-list if it contains the completion point.
There's one caveat: the parser has to decide where to resume parsing members
after a broken init list. Often the first clear recovery point is *after* the
next member, so that member is missing from completion/signature help etc. e.g.
struct S {
S() m //<- completion here
int maaa;
int mbbb;
}
Here "int maaa;" is treated as part of the init list, so "maaa" is not available
as a completion. Maybe in future indentation can be used to recognize that
this is a separate member, not part of the init list.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D116294
The "parameter list" is the list of fields which should be initialized.
We introduce a new OverloadCandidate kind for this.
It starts to become harder for CC consumers to handle all the cases for
params, so I added some extra APIs on OverloadCandidate to abstract them.
Includes some basic support for designated initializers.
The same aggregate signature is shown, the current arg jumps after the
one you just initialized. This follows C99 semantics for mixed
designated/positional initializers (which clang supports in C++ as an extension)
and is also a useful prompt for C++ as C++ designated initializers must be
in order.
Related bugs:
- https://github.com/clangd/clangd/issues/965
- https://github.com/clangd/clangd/issues/306
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D116326
Implementation is based on the "expected type" as used for
designated-initializers in braced init lists. This means it can deduce the type
in some cases where it's not written:
void foo(Widget);
foo({ /*help here*/ });
Only basic constructor calls are in scope of this patch, excluded are:
- aggregate initialization (no help is offered for aggregates)
- initializer_list initialization (no help is offered for these constructors)
Fixes https://github.com/clangd/clangd/issues/306
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D116317
Provide signature while typing template arguments: Foo< ^here >
Here the parameters are e.g. "typename x", and the result type is e.g.
"struct" (class template) or "int" (variable template) or "bool (std::string)"
(function template).
Multiple overloads are possible when a template name is used for several
overloaded function templates.
Fixes https://github.com/clangd/clangd/issues/299
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D116352
This covers both C-style variadic functions and template variadic w/
parameter packs.
Previously we would return no signatures when working with template
variadic functions once activeParameter reached the position of the
parameter pack (except when it was the only param, then we'd still
show it when no arguments were given). With this commit, we now show
signathure help correctly.
Additionally, this commit fixes the activeParameter value in LSP output
of clangd in the presence of variadic functions (both kinds). LSP does
not allow the activeParamter to be higher than the number of parameters
in the active signature. With "..." or parameter pack being just one
argument, for all but first argument passed to "..." we'd report
incorrect activeParameter value. Clients such as VSCode would then treat
it as 0, as suggested in the spec) and highlight the wrong parameter.
In the future, we should add support for per-signature activeParamter
value, which exists in LSP since 3.16.0. This is not part of this
commit.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111318
Real-world use case: The Qt framework's headers have the same name
as the respective class defined in them, and Qt's traditional qmake
build tool uses -I (rather than -isystem) to pull them in.
Reviewed By: sammccall
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D112996
(This relands 59337263ab45d7657e and makes sure comma operator
diagnostics are suppressed in a SFINAE context.)
While at it, add the diagnosis message "left operand of comma operator has no effect" (used by GCC) for comma operator.
This also makes Clang diagnose in the constant evaluation context which aligns with GCC/MSVC behavior. (https://godbolt.org/z/7zxb8Tx96)
Reviewed By: aaron.ballman
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103938
While at it, add the diagnosis message "left operand of comma operator has no effect" (used by GCC) for comma operator.
This also makes Clang diagnose in the constant evaluation context which aligns with GCC/MSVC behavior. (https://godbolt.org/z/7zxb8Tx96)
Reviewed By: aaron.ballman
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103938
While at it, add the diagnosis message "left operand of comma operator has no effect" (used by GCC) for comma operator.
This also makes Clang diagnose in the constant evaluation context which aligns with GCC/MSVC behavior. (https://godbolt.org/z/7zxb8Tx96)
Reviewed By: aaron.ballman
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103938
Completion now looks more like function/member completion:
used
alias(Aliasee)
abi_tag(Tags...)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D108109
