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
552c6c2 removed support for promoting VLAs to constant arrays when the bounds
isn't an ICE, since this can result in miscompiling a conforming program that
assumes that the array is a VLA. Promoting VLAs for fields is still supported,
since clang doesn't support VLAs in fields, so no conforming program could have
a field VLA.
This change is really disruptive, so this commit carves out two more cases
where we promote VLAs which can't miscompile a conforming program:
- When the VLA appears in an ivar -- this seems like a corollary to the field thing
- When the VLA has an initializer -- VLAs can't have an initializer
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D90871
A [*] is only allowed in a declaration for a function, not in its
definition. We didn't correctly recurse on reference types while
looking for it, causing us to crash in CodeGen instead of rejecting it.
llvm-svn: 234528
