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
Previously, we didin't build a DeclRefExpr which refers to an invalid declaration.
In this patch, we handle this case by building an empty RecoveryExpr,
which will preserve more broken code (AST parent nodes that contain the
RecoveryExpr is preserved in the AST).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D120812
constructor, but X is not a known typename, check whether the tokens could
possibly match the syntax of a declarator before concluding that it isn't
a constructor. If it's definitely ill-formed, assume it is a constructor.
Empirical evidence suggests that this pattern is much more often a
constructor with a typoed (or not-yet-declared) type name than any of the
other possibilities, so the extra cost of the check is not expected to be
problematic.
llvm-svn: 153488
int f(int x) {
if (int foo = f(bar)) {}
return 0;
}
Clang produces the following error messages:
paren_imbalance.cc:2:19: error: use of undeclared identifier 'bar'
if (int foo = f(bar)) {}
^
paren_imbalance.cc:2:26: error: expected ')'
if (int foo = f(bar)) {}
^
paren_imbalance.cc:2:6: note: to match this '('
if (int foo = f(bar)) {}
^
The second error is incorrect. This patch will stop Clang from producing an error on parenthesis imbalance during error recovery when there isn't one.
llvm-svn: 134258
destination type for initialization, assignment, parameter-passing,
etc. The main issue fixed here is that we used rather confusing
wording for diagnostics such as
t.c:2:9: warning: initializing 'char const [2]' discards qualifiers,
expected 'char *' [-pedantic]
char *name = __func__;
^ ~~~~~~~~
We're not initializing a 'char const [2]', we're initializing a 'char
*' with an expression of type 'char const [2]'. Similar problems
existed for other diagnostics in this area, so I've normalized them all
with more precise descriptive text to say what we're
initializing/converting/assigning/etc. from and to. The warning for
the code above is now:
t.c:2:9: warning: initializing 'char *' from an expression of type
'char const [2]' discards qualifiers [-pedantic]
char *name = __func__;
^ ~~~~~~~~
Fixes <rdar://problem/7447179>.
llvm-svn: 100832
therefore not creating ElaboratedTypes, which are still pretty-printed
with the written tag).
Most of these testcase changes were done by script, so don't feel too
sorry for my fingers.
llvm-svn: 98149
(necessarily simultaneous) changes:
- CXXBaseOrMemberInitializer now contains only a single initializer
rather than a set of initialiation arguments + a constructor. The
single initializer covers all aspects of initialization, including
constructor calls as necessary but also cleanup of temporaries
created by the initializer (which we never handled
before!).
- Rework + simplify code generation for CXXBaseOrMemberInitializers,
since we can now just emit the initializer as an initializer.
- Switched base and member initialization over to the new
initialization code (InitializationSequence), so that it
- Improved diagnostics for the new initialization code when
initializing bases and members, to match the diagnostics produced
by the previous (special-purpose) code.
- Simplify the representation of type-checked constructor initializers in
templates; instead of keeping the fully-type-checked AST, which is
rather hard to undo at template instantiation time, throw away the
type-checked AST and store the raw expressions in the AST. This
simplifies instantiation, but loses a little but of information in
the AST.
- When type-checking implicit base or member initializers within a
dependent context, don't add the generated initializers into the
AST, because they'll look like they were explicit.
- Record in CXXConstructExpr when the constructor call is to
initialize a base class, so that CodeGen does not have to infer it
from context. This ensures that we call the right kind of
constructor.
There are also a few "opportunity" fixes here that were needed to not
regress, for example:
- Diagnose default-initialization of a const-qualified class that
does not have a user-declared default constructor. We had this
diagnostic specifically for bases and members, but missed it for
variables. That's fixed now.
- When defining the implicit constructors, destructor, and
copy-assignment operator, set the CurContext to that constructor
when we're defining the body.
llvm-svn: 94952
- 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
overload candidates (but not the built-in ones). We still rely on the
underlying built-in semantic analysis to produce the initial
diagnostic, then print the candidates following that diagnostic.
One side advantage of this approach is that we can perform more validation
of C++'s operator overloading with built-in candidates vs. the
semantic analysis for those built-in operators: when there are no
viable candidates, we know to expect an error from the built-in
operator handling code. Otherwise, we are not modeling the built-in
semantics properly within operator overloading. This is checked as:
assert(Result.isInvalid() &&
"C++ binary operator overloading is missing
candidates!");
if (Result.isInvalid())
PrintOverloadCandidates(CandidateSet, /*OnlyViable=*/false);
The assert() catches cases where we're wrong in a +Asserts build. The
"if" makes sure that, if this happens in a production clang
(-Asserts), we still build the proper built-in operator and continue
on our merry way. This is effectively what happened before this
change, but we've added the assert() to catch more flies.
llvm-svn: 83175
