When two modules contain interfaces with the same name, check the
definitions are equivalent and diagnose if they are not.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D140073
When two modules contain struct/union with the same name, check the
definitions are equivalent and diagnose if they are not. This is similar
to `CXXRecordDecl` where we already discover and diagnose mismatches.
rdar://problem/56764293
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D71734
Close https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/59719.
The root cause of the problem is that we forgot to serialize a new
introduced bit to FunctionDeclBits. Maybe we need to find some methods
to work for detecting this.
This reverts commit b8064374b217db061213c561ec8f3376681ff9c8.
Based on the report here:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/59271
this produces a significant increase in memory use of the compiler and a
large compile-time regression. This patch reverts this so that we don't
branch for release with that issue.
Different versions of a lambda will in general refer to different
enclosing variable declarations, because we do not merge most
block-scope declarations, such as local variables. Keep track of all the
declarations that correspond to a lambda's capture fields so that we can
rewrite the name of any of those variables to the lambda capture,
regardless of which copy of the body of `operator()` we look at.
This patch teaches clang to parse statements on the global scope to allow:
```
./bin/clang-repl
clang-repl> int i = 12;
clang-repl> ++i;
clang-repl> extern "C" int printf(const char*,...);
clang-repl> printf("%d\n", i);
13
clang-repl> %quit
```
Generally, disambiguating between statements and declarations is a non-trivial
task for a C++ parser. The challenge is to allow both standard C++ to be
translated as if this patch does not exist and in the cases where the user typed
a statement to be executed as if it were in a function body.
Clang's Parser does pretty well in disambiguating between declarations and
expressions. We have added DisambiguatingWithExpression flag which allows us to
preserve the existing and optimized behavior where needed and implement the
extra rules for disambiguating. Only few cases require additional attention:
* Constructors/destructors -- Parser::isConstructorDeclarator was used in to
disambiguate between ctor-looking declarations and statements on the global
scope(eg. `Ns::f()`).
* The template keyword -- the template keyword can appear in both declarations
and statements. This patch considers the template keyword to be a declaration
starter which breaks a few cases in incremental mode which will be tackled
later.
* The inline (and similar) keyword -- looking at the first token in many cases
allows us to classify what is a declaration.
* Other language keywords and specifiers -- ObjC/ObjC++/OpenCL/OpenMP rely on
pragmas or special tokens which will be handled in subsequent patches.
The patch conceptually models a "top-level" statement into a TopLevelStmtDecl.
The TopLevelStmtDecl is lowered into a void function with no arguments.
We attach this function to the global initializer list to execute the statement
blocks in the correct order.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D127284
Adds support for NamespaceDecl to inform if its part of a nested namespace.
This flag only corresponds to the inner namespaces in a nested namespace declaration.
In this example:
namespace <X>::<Y>::<Z> {}
Only <Y> and <Z> will be classified as nested.
This flag isn't meant for assisting in building the AST, more for static analysis and refactorings.
Reviewed By: aaron.ballman
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D90568
Since we don't unique specializations for concepts, we can just instantiate
them with the sugared template arguments, at negligible cost.
If we don't track their specializations, we can't resugar them later
anyway, and that would be more expensive than just instantiating them
sugared in the first place since it would require an additional pass.
Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com>
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D136566
Since we don't unique specializations for concepts, we can just instantiate
them with the sugared template arguments, at negligible cost.
If we don't track their specializations, we can't resugar them later
anyway, and that would be more expensive than just instantiating them
sugared in the first place since it would require an additional pass.
Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com>
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D136566
This reverts commit cecc9a92cfca71c1b6c2a35c5e302ab649496d11.
The problem ended up being how we were handling the lambda-context in
code generation: we were assuming any decl context here would be a
named-decl, but that isn't the case. Instead, we just replace it with
the concept's owning context.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D136451
This reverts commit b876f6e2f28779211a829d7d4e841fe68885ae20.
Still getting build failures on PPC AIX that aren't obvious what is causing
them, so reverting while I try to figure this out.
This reverts commit b7c922607c5ba93db8b893d4ba461052af8317b5.
This seems to cause some problems with some modules related things,
which makes me think I should have updated the version-major in
ast-bit-codes? Going to revert to confirm this was a problem, then
change that and re-try a commit.
As that bug reports, the problem here is that the lambda's
'context-decl' was not set to the concept, and the lambda picked up
template arguments from the concept. SO, we failed to get the correct
template arguments in SemaTemplateInstantiate.
However, a Concept Specialization is NOT a decl, its an expression, so
we weren't able to put the concept in the decl tree like we needed.
This patch introduces a ConceptSpecializationDecl, which is the smallest
type possible to use for this purpose, containing only the template
arguments.
The net memory impliciation of this is turning a
trailing-objects into a pointer to a type with trailing-objects, so it
should be minor.
As future work, we may consider giving this type more responsibility, or
figuring out how to better merge duplicates, but as this is just a
template-argument collection at the moment, there isn't much value to
it.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D136451
This is a change to how we represent type subsitution in the AST.
Instead of only storing the replaced type, we track the templated
entity we are substituting, plus an index.
We modify MLTAL to track the templated entity at each level.
Otherwise, it's much more expensive to go from the template parameter back
to the templated entity, and not possible to do in some cases, as when
we instantiate outer templates, parameters might still reference the
original entity.
This also allows us to very cheaply lookup the templated entity we saw in
the naming context and find the corresponding argument it was replaced
from, such as for implementing template specialization resugaring.
Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com>
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D131858
- store NestedNameSpecifier & Loc for the qualifiers
This information was entirely missing from the AST.
- expose the location information for qualifier/identifier/typedefs as typeloc
This allows many traversals/astmatchers etc to handle these generically along
with other references. The decl vs type split can help preserve typedef
sugar when https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/57659 is resolved.
- fix the SourceRange of UsingEnumDecl to include 'using'.
Fixes https://github.com/clangd/clangd/issues/1283
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D134303
Adds a fix to the diagnostic of replacing the `= default` to `= delete`
Reviewed By: aaron.ballman
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D134549
This reverts commit 95d94a67755620c0a2871ac6f056ca8e9731d5e9.
This implements the deferred concepts instantiation, which should allow
the libstdc++ ranges to properly compile, and for the CRTP to work for
constrained functions.
Since the last attempt, this has fixed the issues from @wlei and
@mordante.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D126907
This is first part for support cbuffer/tbuffer.
The format for cbuffer/tbuffer is
BufferType [Name] [: register(b#)] { VariableDeclaration [: packoffset(c#.xyzw)]; ... };
More details at https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/direct3dhlsl/dx-graphics-hlsl-constants
New keyword 'cbuffer' and 'tbuffer' are added.
New AST node HLSLBufferDecl is added.
Build AST for simple cbuffer/tbuffer without attribute support.
The special thing is variables declared inside cbuffer is exposed into global scope.
So isTransparentContext should return true for HLSLBuffer.
Reviewed By: aaron.ballman
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D129883
In preparation for allowing the prefer_type list in the append_args clause,
use the OMPInteropInfo in the attribute for 'declare variant'.
This requires adding a new Argument kind to the attribute code. This change
adds a specific attribute to pass an array of OMPInteropInfo. It implements
new tablegen needed to handle the interop-type part of the structure. When
prefer_type is added, more work will be needed to dump, instantiate, and
serialize the PreferTypes field in OMPInteropInfo.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D132270
Currently, the use of preferred_name would block implementing std
modules in libcxx. See https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/56490
for example.
The problem is pretty hard and it looks like we couldn't solve it in a
short time. So we sent this patch as a workaround to avoid blocking us
to modularize STL. This is intended to be fixed properly in the future.
Reviewed By: erichkeane, aaron.ballman, tahonermann
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D130331
In cases where a non-template function is defined inside a function
template, we don't have information about the original uninstantiated
version. In the case of concepts instantiation, we will need the
ability to get back to the original template. This patch splits a piece
of the deferred concepts instantaition patch off to accomplish the
storage of this, with minor runtime overhead, and zero additional
storage.
This reverts commit befa8cf087dbb8159a4d9dc8fa4d6748d6d5049a.
Apparently this breaks some libc++ builds with an apparent assertion,
so I'm looking into that .
This reverts commit d4d47e574ecae562ab32f8ac7fa3f4d424bb6574.
This fixes the lldb crash that was observed by ensuring that our
friend-'template contains reference to' TreeTransform properly handles a
TemplateDecl.
This reverts commit 2f207439521d62d9551b2884158368e8b34084e5 because it
triggers an assertion when building an LLDB test program:
Assertion failed: (InstantiatingSpecializations.empty() && "failed to
clean up an InstantiatingTemplate?"), function ~Sema, file
/Users/buildslave/jenkins/workspace/lldb-cmake/llvm-project/clang/lib/Sema/Sema.cpp,
line 458.
More details in https://reviews.llvm.org/D126907.
Currently we do not in general merge attributes when importing decls from modules. This patch handles availability, but long term we need to properly handle all attributes.
I tried to use Sema::mergeDeclAttributes, but it caused test crashes as I don't think it expects to be called in this context. We really shouldn't have duplicate code for merging attributes long term, but for now this fixes availability. There's already a TODO for this in the declaration of ASTDeclReader::mergeInheritableAttributes.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D127182
rdar://85820301
This reverts commit a425cac31e2e4cee8e14b7b9a99c8ba17c1ebb52.
There is another libc++ test, that this time causes us to hit an
assertion. Reverting, likely for a while this time.
This includes a fix for the libc++ issue I ran across with friend
declarations not properly being identified as overloads.
This reverts commit 45c07db31cc76802a1a2e41bed1ce9c1b8198181.
This reverts commit a97899108e495147985e5e9492e742d51d5cc97a.
The patch caused some problems with the libc++ `__range_adaptor_closure`
that I haven't been able to figure out the cause of, so I am reverting
while I figure out whether this is a solvable problem/issue with the
CFE, or libc++ depending on an older 'incorrect' behavior.
This reverts commit 0c31da48389754822dc3eecc4723160c295b9ab2.
I've solved the issue with the PointerUnion by making the
`FunctionTemplateDecl` pointer be a NamedDecl, that could be a
`FunctionDecl` or `FunctionTemplateDecl` depending. This is enforced
with an assert.
This reverts commit 4b6c2cd647e9e5a147954886338f97ffb6a1bcfb.
The patch caused numerous ARM 32 bit build failures, since we added a
5th item to the PointerUnion, and went over the 2-bits available in the
32 bit pointers.
As reported here: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/44178
Concepts are not supposed to be instantiated until they are checked, so
this patch implements that and goes through significant amounts of work
to make sure we properly re-instantiate the concepts correctly.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D119544
Emitting metadata for the same ivar multiple times can lead to
miscompilations. Objective-C runtime adds offsets to calculate ivar
position in memory and presence of duplicate offsets causes wrong final
position thus overwriting unrelated memory.
Such a situation is impossible with modules disabled as clang diagnoses
ivar redeclarations during sema checks after parsing
(`Sema::ActOnFields`). Fix the case with modules enabled by checking
during deserialization if ivar is already declared. We also support
a use case where the same category ends up in multiple modules. We
don't want to treat this case as ivar redeclaration and instead merge
corresponding ivars.
rdar://83468070
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D121177
Without the fix ivars with anonymous types can trigger errors like
> error: 'TestClass::structIvar' from module 'Target' is not present in definition of 'TestClass' provided earlier
> [...]
> note: declaration of 'structIvar' does not match
It happens because types of ivars from different modules are considered
to be different. And it is caused by not merging anonymous `TagDecl`
from different modules.
To fix that I've changed `serialization::needsAnonymousDeclarationNumber`
to handle anonymous `TagDecl` inside `ObjCInterfaceDecl`. But that's not
sufficient as C code inside `ObjCInterfaceDecl` doesn't use interface
decl as a decl context but switches to its parent (TranslationUnit in
most cases). I'm changing that to make `ObjCContainerDecl` the lexical
decl context but keeping the semantic decl context intact.
Test "check-dup-decls-inside-objc.m" doesn't reflect a change in
functionality but captures the existing behavior to prevent regressions.
rdar://85563013
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D118525
This builtin returns the address of a global instance of the
`std::source_location::__impl` type, which must be defined (with an
appropriate shape) before calling the builtin.
It will be used to implement std::source_location in libc++ in a
future change. The builtin is compatible with GCC's implementation,
and libstdc++'s usage. An intentional divergence is that GCC declares
the builtin's return type to be `const void*` (for
ease-of-implementation reasons), while Clang uses the actual type,
`const std::source_location::__impl*`.
In order to support this new functionality, I've also added a new
'UnnamedGlobalConstantDecl'. This artificial Decl is modeled after
MSGuidDecl, and is used to represent a generic concept of an lvalue
constant with global scope, deduplicated by its value. It's possible
that MSGuidDecl itself, or some of the other similar sorts of things
in Clang might be able to be refactored onto this more-generic
concept, but there's enough special-case weirdness in MSGuidDecl that
I gave up attempting to share code there, at least for now.
Finally, for compatibility with libstdc++'s <source_location> header,
I've added a second exception to the "cannot cast from void* to T* in
constant evaluation" rule. This seems a bit distasteful, but feels
like the best available option.
Reviewers: aaron.ballman, erichkeane
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D120159
Allocate on ASTContext, rather than just on heap, so that template
parameter lists are freed up.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D120081
For redeclaration chains we maintain an invariant of having only a
single definition in the chain. In a single translation unit we make
sure not to create duplicates. But modules are separate translation
units and they can contain definitions for the same symbol
independently. When we load such modules together, we need to demote
duplicate definitions to keep the AST invariants.
Some AST clients are interested in distinguishing
declaration-that-was-demoted-from-definition and
declaration-that-was-never-a-definition. For that purpose introducing
`IsThisDeclarationADemotedDefinition`. No functional change intended.
rdar://84677782
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D118855
Currently we are trying to implement the semantics of C++ Modules. A big
challenge would be the ODR checking. Previously we did this in
ASTReader, it would handle the cases like:
```
module;
export module a_module;
import another_module; // check the ODR consistency here
```
or
```
export module m;
import a_module;
import another_module; // check the ODR consistency here
```
However, it wouldn't handle the case:
```
import another_module; // When we check ODR here, everything looks fine.
```
In the case, the read process is ended. But we need to check the ODR
still. To reuse the facility we do in ASTReader, this patch moves the
corresponding codes into ASTContext. This should be good since there
were facilities like `hasSameTemplateName` and `hasSameType`.
Although the patch is a little bit big, all of the change should be
trivial.
Reviewed By: erichkeane
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D118223
The compiler would judge two concepts is same by their addresses.
However, when we use modules, the addresses wouldn't be the same all the
time since one is parsed in their TU and another is imported in another
TU.
This patch fixes this by using isSameEntity to judge the two concepts.
Reviewed By: rsmith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D114769
