Reapplication of 7339c0f782d5c70e0928f8991b0c05338a90c84c with a fix
for a crash involving arrays without a size expression.
Clang supports VLAs in C++ as an extension, but we currently only warn
on their use when you pass -Wvla, -Wvla-extension, or -pedantic.
However, VLAs as they're expressed in C have been considered by WG21
and rejected, are easy to use accidentally to the surprise of users
(e.g., https://ddanilov.me/default-non-standard-features/), and they
have potential security implications beyond constant-size arrays
(https://wiki.sei.cmu.edu/confluence/display/c/ARR32-C.+Ensure+size+arguments+for+variable+length+arrays+are+in+a+valid+range).
C++ users should strongly consider using other functionality such as
std::vector instead.
This seems like sufficiently compelling evidence to warn users about
VLA use by default in C++ modes. This patch enables the -Wvla-extension
diagnostic group in C++ language modes by default, and adds the warning
group to -Wall in GNU++ language modes. The warning is still opt-in in
C language modes, where support for VLAs is somewhat less surprising to
users.
RFC: https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-diagnosing-use-of-vlas-in-c/73109
Fixes https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/62836
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D156565
We have a new policy in place making links to private resources
something we try to avoid in source and test files. Normally, we'd
organically switch to the new policy rather than make a sweeping change
across a project. However, Clang is in a somewhat special circumstance
currently: recently, I've had several new contributors run into rdar
links around test code which their patch was changing the behavior of.
This turns out to be a surprisingly bad experience, especially for
newer folks, for a handful of reasons: not understanding what the link
is and feeling intimidated by it, wondering whether their changes are
actually breaking something important to a downstream in some way,
having to hunt down strangers not involved with the patch to impose on
them for help, accidental pressure from asking for potentially private
IP to be made public, etc. Because folks run into these links entirely
by chance (through fixing bugs or working on new features), there's not
really a set of problematic links to focus on -- all of the links have
basically the same potential for causing these problems. As a result,
this is an omnibus patch to remove all such links.
This was not a mechanical change; it was done by manually searching for
rdar, radar, radr, and other variants to find all the various
problematic links. From there, I tried to retain or reword the
surrounding comments so that we would lose as little context as
possible. However, because most links were just a plain link with no
supporting context, the majority of the changes are simple removals.
Differential Review: https://reviews.llvm.org/D158071
Based on post-commit review discussion on
2bd84938470bf2e337801faafb8a67710f46429d with Richard Smith.
Other uses of forcing HasEmptyPlaceHolder to false seem OK to me -
they're all around pointer/reference types where the pointer/reference
token will appear at the rightmost side of the left side of the type
name, so they make nested types (eg: the "int" in "int *") behave as
though there is a non-empty placeholder (because the "*" is essentially
the placeholder as far as the "int" is concerned).
This was originally committed in 277623f4d5a672d707390e2c3eaf30a9eb4b075c
Reverted in f9ad1d1c775a8e264bebc15d75e0c6e5c20eefc7 due to breakages
outside of clang - lldb seems to have some strange/strong dependence on
"char [N]" versus "char[N]" when printing strings (not due to that name
appearing in DWARF, but probably due to using clang to stringify type
names) that'll need to be addressed, plus a few other odds and ends in
other subprojects (clang-tools-extra, compiler-rt, etc).
Looks like lldb has some issues with this - somehow it causes lldb to
treat a "char[N]" type as an array of chars (prints them out
individually) but a "char [N]" is printed as a string. (even though the
DWARF doesn't have this string in it - it's something to do with the
string lldb generates for itself using clang)
This reverts commit 277623f4d5a672d707390e2c3eaf30a9eb4b075c.
Based on post-commit review discussion on
2bd84938470bf2e337801faafb8a67710f46429d with Richard Smith.
Other uses of forcing HasEmptyPlaceHolder to false seem OK to me -
they're all around pointer/reference types where the pointer/reference
token will appear at the rightmost side of the left side of the type
name, so they make nested types (eg: the "int" in "int *") behave as
though there is a non-empty placeholder (because the "*" is essentially
the placeholder as far as the "int" is concerned).
callee in constant evaluation.
We previously made a deep copy of function parameters of class type when
passing them, resulting in the destructor for the parameter applying to
the original argument value, ignoring any modifications made in the
function body. This also meant that the 'this' pointer of the function
parameter could be observed changing between the caller and the callee.
This change completely reimplements how we model function parameters
during constant evaluation. We now model them roughly as if they were
variables living in the caller, albeit with an artificially reduced
scope that covers only the duration of the function call, instead of
modeling them as temporaries in the caller that we partially "reparent"
into the callee at the point of the call. This brings some minor
diagnostic improvements, as well as significantly reduced stack usage
during constant evaluation.
callee in constant evaluation.
We previously made a deep copy of function parameters of class type when
passing them, resulting in the destructor for the parameter applying to
the original argument value, ignoring any modifications made in the
function body. This also meant that the 'this' pointer of the function
parameter could be observed changing between the caller and the callee.
This change completely reimplements how we model function parameters
during constant evaluation. We now model them roughly as if they were
variables living in the caller, albeit with an artificially reduced
scope that covers only the duration of the function call, instead of
modeling them as temporaries in the caller that we partially "reparent"
into the callee at the point of the call. This brings some minor
diagnostic improvements, as well as significantly reduced stack usage
during constant evaluation.
callee in constant evaluation.
We previously made a deep copy of function parameters of class type when
passing them, resulting in the destructor for the parameter applying to
the original argument value, ignoring any modifications made in the
function body. This also meant that the 'this' pointer of the function
parameter could be observed changing between the caller and the callee.
This change completely reimplements how we model function parameters
during constant evaluation. We now model them roughly as if they were
variables living in the caller, albeit with an artificially reduced
scope that covers only the duration of the function call, instead of
modeling them as temporaries in the caller that we partially "reparent"
into the callee at the point of the call. This brings some minor
diagnostic improvements, as well as significantly reduced stack usage
during constant evaluation.
In the following code:
struct A { static const int sz; };
template<class T> void f() { T arr[A::sz]; }
the array 'arr' is represented as a variable size array in the template.
If 'A::sz' gets value below in the translation unit, the array in
instantiation can turn into constant size array.
This change fixes PR18633.
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2688
llvm-svn: 200899
have a direct mismatch between some component of the template and some
component of the argument. The diagnostic now says what the mismatch was, but
doesn't yet say which part of the template doesn't match.
llvm-svn: 174039
GCC implements -Wvla as "warn on every VLA" (this is useful to find every VLA,
for example, if they are forbidden by coding guidelines). Currently Clang
implements -Wvla as "warn on VLA when it is an extension".
The attached patch makes our behavior match GCC. The existing vla extwarn is
moved under -Wvla-extension and is still included into -Wgnu.
This fixes PR5953.
llvm-svn: 173286
as constant size arrays. This has slightly different semantics in some insane cases, but allows
us to accept some constructs that GCC does. Continue to be pedantic in -std=c99 and other
modes. This addressed rdar://8733881 - error "variable-sized object may not be initialized"; g++ accepts same code
llvm-svn: 132983
expressions. Fixes PR8209 in the narrowest way possible. I'm still
considering whether I want to implement the extension that permits the
use of VLA types in a 'new' expression.
llvm-svn: 115790
VLA restrictions so that one can use VLAs in templates (even
accidentally), but not as part of a non-type template parameter (which
would be very bad).
llvm-svn: 104471
in several important ways:
- VLAs of non-POD types are not permitted.
- VLAs cannot be used in conjunction with C++ templates.
These restrictions are intended to keep VLAs out of the parts of the
C++ type system where they cause the most trouble. Fixes PR5678 and
<rdar://problem/8013618>.
llvm-svn: 104443
