Const class members may be initialized with a defaulted default
constructor under the same conditions it would be allowed for a const
object elsewhere.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D126170
Before C++20, MSVC was supporting not mentioning the template argument of the base class when initializing a class inheriting a templated base class.
So the following code compiled correctly:
```
template <class T>
class Base {
};
template <class T>
class Derived : public Base<T> {
public:
Derived() : Base() {}
};
void test() {
Derived<int> d;
}
```
See https://godbolt.org/z/Pxxe7nccx for a conformance view.
This patch adds support for such construct when in MSVC compatibility mode.
Reviewed By: rnk
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D124666
HLSL doesn't support access specifiers. This change has two components:
1) Make default access for classes public
2) Diagnose the use of access specifiers as a clang HLSL extension
As long as the default behavior for access specifiers matches HLSL,
allowing them to be used doesn't cause sourece incompatability with
valid code. As such enabling them as a clang extension seems like a
reasonable approach.
Fixes#55124
Reviewed By: aaron.ballman
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D124487
This is the template version of https://reviews.llvm.org/D114251.
This patch introduces a new template name kind (UsingTemplateName). The
UsingTemplateName stores the found using-shadow decl (and underlying
template can be retrieved from the using-shadow decl). With the new
template name, we can be able to find the using decl that a template
typeloc (e.g. TemplateSpecializationTypeLoc) found its underlying template,
which is useful for tooling use cases (include cleaner etc).
This patch merely focuses on adding the node to the AST.
Next steps:
- support using-decl in qualified template name;
- update the clangd and other tools to use this new node;
- add ast matchers for matching different kinds of template names;
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D123127
We did not implement C99 6.7.5.3p15 fully in that we missed the rule
for compatible function types where a prior declaration has a prototype
and a subsequent definition (not just declaration) has an empty
identifier list or an identifier list with a mismatch in parameter
arity. This addresses that situation by issuing an error on code like:
void f(int);
void f() {} // type conflicts with previous declaration
(Note: we already diagnose the other type conflict situations
appropriately, this was the only situation we hadn't covered that I
could find.)
It breaks arm build, there is no free bit for the extra
UsingShadowDecl in TemplateName::StorageType.
Reverting it to build the buildbot back until we comeup with a fix.
This reverts commit 5a5be4044f0bceb71bb6a81f6955704691b389ed.
This is the template version of https://reviews.llvm.org/D114251.
This patch introduces a new template name kind (UsingTemplateName). The
UsingTemplateName stores the found using-shadow decl (and underlying
template can be retrieved from the using-shadow decl). With the new
template name, we can be able to find the using decl that a template
typeloc (e.g. TemplateSpecializationTypeLoc) found its underlying template,
which is useful for tooling use cases (include cleaner etc).
This patch merely focuses on adding the node to the AST.
Next steps:
- support using-decl in qualified template name;
- update the clangd and other tools to use this new node;
- add ast matchers for matching different kinds of template names;
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D123127
According to CWG 1394 and C++20 [dcl.fct.def.general]p2,
Clang should not diagnose incomplete types if function body is "= delete;".
For example:
```
struct Incomplete;
Incomplete f(Incomplete) = delete; // well-formed
```
Also close https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/52802
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D122981
Move the SourceRange from the old ParsedAttributesWithRange into
ParsedAttributesView, so we have source range information available
everywhere we use attributes.
This also removes ParsedAttributesWithRange (replaced by simply using
ParsedAttributes) and ParsedAttributesVieWithRange (replaced by using
ParsedAttributesView).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D121201
Allow goto, labelled statements as well as `static`, `thread_local`, and
non-literal variables in `constexpr` functions.
As specified. for all of the above (except labelled statements) constant
evaluation of the construct still fails.
For `constexpr` bodies, the proposal is implemented with diagnostics as
a language extension in older language modes. For determination of
whether a lambda body satisfies the requirements for a constexpr
function, the proposal is implemented only in C++2b mode to retain the
semantics of older modes for programs conforming to them.
Reviewed By: aaron.ballman, hubert.reinterpretcast, erichkeane
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111400
Implement P2128R6 in C++23 mode.
Unlike GCC's implementation, this doesn't try to recover when a user
meant to use a comma expression.
Because the syntax changes meaning in C++23, the patch is *NOT*
implemented as an extension. Instead, declaring an array with not
exactly 1 parameter is an error in older languages modes. There is an
off-by-default extension warning in C++23 mode.
Unlike the standard, we supports default arguments;
Ie, we assume, based on conversations in WG21, that the proposed
resolution to CWG2507 will be accepted.
We allow arrays OpenMP sections and C++23 multidimensional array to
coexist:
[a , b] multi dimensional array
[a : b] open mp section
[a, b: c] // error
The rest of the patch is relatively straight forward: we take care to
support an arbitrary number of arguments everywhere.
This fixes bug 47716.
According to [module.interface]p2, it is meaningless to export an entity
which is not in namespace scope.
The reason why the compiler crashes is that the compiler missed
ExportDecl when the compiler traverse the subclass of DeclContext. So
here is the crash.
Also, the patch implements [module.interface]p6 in
Sema::CheckRedeclaration* functions.
Reviewed By: aaron.ballman, urnathan
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D112903
Commit 5fbe21a7748f missed committing the correct checking of
out-of-class comparision operator argument types. These are they,
from the originally posted diff.
Reviewed By: mizvekov
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D115894
This implements p2085, allowing out-of-class defaulting of comparison
operators, primarily so they need not be inline, IIUC intent. this was
mostly straigh forward, but required reimplementing
Sema::CheckExplicitlyDefaultedComparison, as now there's a case where
we have no a priori clue as to what class a defaulted comparison may
be for. We have to inspect the parameter types to find out. Eg:
class X { ... };
bool operator==(X, X) = default;
Thus reimplemented the parameter type checking, and added 'is this a
friend' functionality for the above case.
Reviewed By: mizvekov
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104478
Previously we would create global module fragment for extern linkage
declaration which is alreday in global module fragment. However, it is
clearly redundant to do so. This patch would check if the extern linkage
declaration are already in GMF before we create a GMF for it.
According to [module.unit]p7.2.3, a declaration within a linkage-specification
should be attached to the global module.
This let user to forward declare types across modules.
Reviewed by: rsmith, aaron.ballman
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110215
This implements the following changes:
* AutoType retains sugared deduced-as-type.
* Template argument deduction machinery analyses the sugared type all the way
down. It would previously lose the sugar on first recursion.
* Undeduced AutoType will be properly canonicalized, including the constraint
template arguments.
* Remove the decltype node created from the decltype(auto) deduction.
As a result, we start seeing sugared types in a lot more test cases,
including some which showed very unfriendly `type-parameter-*-*` types.
Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com>
Reviewed By: rsmith, #libc, ldionne
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110216
This implements the following changes:
* AutoType retains sugared deduced-as-type.
* Template argument deduction machinery analyses the sugared type all the way
down. It would previously lose the sugar on first recursion.
* Undeduced AutoType will be properly canonicalized, including the constraint
template arguments.
* Remove the decltype node created from the decltype(auto) deduction.
As a result, we start seeing sugared types in a lot more test cases,
including some which showed very unfriendly `type-parameter-*-*` types.
Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com>
Reviewed By: rsmith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110216
This implements the following changes:
* AutoType retains sugared deduced-as-type.
* Template argument deduction machinery analyses the sugared type all the way
down. It would previously lose the sugar on first recursion.
* Undeduced AutoType will be properly canonicalized, including the constraint
template arguments.
* Remove the decltype node created from the decltype(auto) deduction.
As a result, we start seeing sugared types in a lot more test cases,
including some which showed very unfriendly `type-parameter-*-*` types.
Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com>
Reviewed By: rsmith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110216
There's a nuanced check about when to use suffixes on these integer
non-type-template-parameters, but when rebuilding names for
-gsimple-template-names there isn't enough data in the DWARF to
determine when to use suffixes or not. So turn on suffixes always to
make it easy to match up names in llvm-dwarfdump --verify.
I /think/ if we correctly modelled auto non-type-template parameters
maybe we could put suffixes only on those. But there's also some logic
in Clang that puts the suffixes on overloaded functions - at least
that's what the parameter says (see D77598 and printTemplateArguments
"TemplOverloaded" parameter) - but I think maybe it's for anything that
/can/ be overloaded, not necessarily only the things that are overloaded
(the argument value is hardcoded at the various callsites, doesn't seem
to depend on overload resolution/searching for overloaded functions). So
maybe with "auto" modeled more accurately, and differentiating between
function templates (always using type suffixes there) and class/variable
templates (only using the suffix for "auto" types) we could correctly
use integer type suffixes only in the minimal set of cases.
But that seems all too much fuss, so let's just put integer type
suffixes everywhere always in the debug info of integer non-type
template parameters in template names.
(more context:
* https://reviews.llvm.org/D77598#inline-1057607
* https://groups.google.com/g/llvm-dev/c/ekLMllbLIZg/m/-dhJ0hO1AAAJ )
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111477
It isn't really pulling its weight and I think splitting it out from
-Wweak-vtables was the wrong call: I think it was just a bug in the
original warning, which was trying to not diagnose template
instantiations, implicit or explicit.
usage of an abstract class type within itself.
We were missing handling for deduction guides (which would assert),
friend declarations, and variable templates. We were mishandling inline
variables and other variables defined inside the class definition.
These diagnostics should be downgraded to warnings, or perhaps removed
entirely, once we implement P0929R2.
Modify the IfStmt node to suppoort constant evaluated expressions.
Add a new ExpressionEvaluationContext::ImmediateFunctionContext to
keep track of immediate function contexts.
This proved easier/better/probably more efficient than walking the AST
backward as it allows diagnosing nested if consteval statements.
See PR51862.
The consumers of the Elidable flag in CXXConstructExpr assume that
an elidable construction just goes through a single copy/move construction,
so that the source object is immediately passed as an argument and is the same
type as the parameter itself.
With the implementation of P2266 and after some adjustments to the
implementation of P1825, we started (correctly, as per standard)
allowing more cases where the copy initialization goes through
user defined conversions.
With this patch we stop using this flag in NRVO contexts, to preserve code
that relies on that assumption.
This causes no known functional changes, we just stop firing some asserts
in a cople of included test cases.
Reviewed By: rsmith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D109800
Don't say we couldn't find an 'operator<=>' when we were actually
looking for an 'operator=='. Also fix a crash when attempting to
diagnose if we select a built-in 'operator!=' in this lookup.
Before this patch, CXXCtorInitializers that don't typecheck get discarded in
most cases. In particular:
- typos that can't be corrected don't turn into RecoveryExpr. The full expr
disappears instead, and without an init expr we discard the node.
- initializers that fail initialization (e.g. constructor overload resolution)
are discarded too.
This patch addresses both these issues (a bit clunkily and repetitively, for
member/base/delegating initializers)
It does not preserve any AST nodes when the member/base can't be resolved or
other problems of that nature. That breaks invariants of CXXCtorInitializer
itself, and we don't have a "weak" RecoveryCtorInitializer like we do for Expr.
I believe the changes to diagnostics in existing tests are improvements.
(We're able to do some analysis on the non-broken parts of the initializer)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D101641
See PR47174.
When canonicalizing nested name specifiers of the type kind,
the prefix for 'DependentTemplateSpecialization' types was being
dropped, leading to malformed types which would cause failures
when rebuilding template names.
Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com>
Reviewed By: rsmith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D107311
