6 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Fangrui Song
83ea47acd7 [test] Make tests pass regardless of gnu++14/gnu++17 default
GCC from 11 onwards defaults to -std=gnu++17 for C++ source files. We want to do the same
(https://discourse.llvm.org/t/c-objc-switch-to-gnu-17-as-the-default-dialect/64360).
Split RUN lines, adjust `-verify`, or add `__cplusplus < 201703L` or `-Wno-dynamic-exception-spec`,
so that tests will pass regardless of gnu++14/gnu++17 default.

We have a desire to mark a test compatible with multiple language standards.
There are ongoing discussions how to add markers in the long term:

* https://discourse.llvm.org/t/iterating-lit-run-lines/62596
* https://discourse.llvm.org/t/lit-run-a-run-line-multiple-times-with-different-replacements/64932

As a workaround in the short term, add lit substitutions `%std_cxx98-`,
`%std_cxx11-14`, etc. They can be used for tests which work across multiple
language standards. If a range has `n` standards, run lit multiple times, with
`LIT_CLANG_STD_GROUP=0`, `LIT_CLANG_STD_GROUP=1`, etc to cover all `n` standards.

Reviewed By: #clang-language-wg, aaron.ballman

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D131464
2022-09-04 05:29:32 +00:00
Richard Smith
e3ea001ec8 Don't diagnoes a mismatch between implicit and explicit exception
specifications under -fno-exceptions, just as we don't diagnose other exception
specification mismatch errors.

llvm-svn: 280289
2016-08-31 20:38:32 +00:00
John McCall
8feeb49662 Semantic checking for exception specifications should be triggered by
whether C++ exceptions are enabled, not exceptions in general.  PR9358.

llvm-svn: 126820
2011-03-02 02:04:40 +00:00
Douglas Gregor
d6bc5e6bbc When a declaration of a function is missing an exception specification
that was present in a prior declaration, emit a warning rather than a
hard error (which we did before, and still do with mismatched
exception specifications). Moreover, provide a fix-it hint with the
throw() clause that should be added, e.g.,

t.C:10:7: warning: 'operator new' is missing exception specification
      'throw(std::bad_alloc)'
void *operator new(unsigned long sz)
      ^
                                     throw(std::bad_alloc)

As part of this, disable the warning when we're missing an exception
specification on operator new, operator new[], operator delete, or
operator delete[] when exceptions are turned off (-fno-exceptions).

Fixes PR5957.

llvm-svn: 99388
2010-03-24 07:14:45 +00:00
Daniel Dunbar
8fbe78f6fc Update tests to use %clang_cc1 instead of 'clang-cc' or 'clang -cc1'.
- This is designed to make it obvious that %clang_cc1 is a "test variable"
   which is substituted. It is '%clang_cc1' instead of '%clang -cc1' because it
   can be useful to redefine what gets run as 'clang -cc1' (for example, to set
   a default target).

llvm-svn: 91446
2009-12-15 20:14:24 +00:00
Douglas Gregor
87f5406081 When implicitly declaring operators new, new[], delete, and delete[],
give them the appropriate exception specifications. This,
unfortunately, requires us to maintain and/or implicitly generate
handles to namespace "std" and the class "std::bad_alloc". However,
every other approach I've come up with was more hackish, and this
standard requirement itself is quite the hack.

Fixes PR4829.

llvm-svn: 81939
2009-09-15 22:30:29 +00:00