3 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Krystian Stasiowski
9a88aa0e2b
[Clang][Sema] Diagnose variable template explicit specializations with storage-class-specifiers (#93873)
According to [temp.expl.spec] p2:
> The declaration in an _explicit-specialization_ shall not be an
_export-declaration_. An explicit specialization shall not use a
_storage-class-specifier_ other than `thread_local`.

Clang partially implements this, but a number of issues exist:
1. We don't diagnose class scope explicit specializations of variable
templates with _storage-class-specifiers_, e.g.
    ```
    struct A
    {
        template<typename T>
        static constexpr int x = 0;

        template<>
static constexpr int x<void> = 1; // ill-formed, but clang accepts
    };
    ````
2. We incorrectly reject class scope explicit specializations of
variable templates when `static` is not used, e.g.
    ```
    struct A
    {
        template<typename T>
        static constexpr int x = 0;

        template<>
constexpr int x<void> = 1; // error: non-static data member cannot be
constexpr; did you intend to make it static?
    };
    ````
3. We don't diagnose dependent class scope explicit specializations of
function templates with storage class specifiers, e.g.
    ```
    template<typename T>
    struct A
    {
        template<typename U>
        static void f();

        template<>
        static void f<int>(); // ill-formed, but clang accepts
    };
    ````

This patch addresses these issues as follows:
- # 1 is fixed by issuing a diagnostic when an explicit
specialization of a variable template has storage class specifier
- # 2 is fixed by considering any non-function declaration with any
template parameter lists at class scope to be a static data member. This
also allows for better error recovery (it's more likely the user
intended to declare a variable template than a "field template").
- # 3 is fixed by checking whether a function template explicit
specialization has a storage class specifier even when the primary
template is not yet known.

One thing to note is that it would be far simpler to diagnose this when
parsing the _decl-specifier-seq_, but such an implementation would
necessitate a refactor of `ParsedTemplateInfo` which I believe to be
outside the scope of this patch.
2024-06-18 13:40:31 -04:00
Richard Smith
47972afd10 [modules] Simplify -cc1 interface for enabling implicit module maps.
We used to have a flag to enable module maps, and two more flags to enable
implicit module maps. This is all redundant; we don't need any flag for
enabling module maps in the abstract, and we don't usually have -fno- flags for
-cc1. We now have just a single flag, -fimplicit-module-maps, that enables
implicitly searching the file system for module map files and loading them.

The driver interface is unchanged for now. We should probably rename
-fmodule-maps to -fimplicit-module-maps at some point.

llvm-svn: 239789
2015-06-16 00:08:24 +00:00
Richard Smith
e3536dda40 [modules] Ensure we've imported all declarations of a template before
attempting to lazily deserialize its specializations; otherwise, there might be
pending specializations that we don't know about yet.

llvm-svn: 230301
2015-02-24 02:44:23 +00:00