0f1c1be196
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
108 lines
3.6 KiB
C++
108 lines
3.6 KiB
C++
// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++11 -fsyntax-only -verify %s
|
|
|
|
struct S0 {
|
|
int x;
|
|
static const int test0 = __alignof__(x); // expected-error {{invalid application of 'alignof' to a field of a class still being defined}}
|
|
static const int test1 = __alignof__(S0::x); // expected-error {{invalid application of 'alignof' to a field of a class still being defined}}
|
|
auto test2() -> char(&)[__alignof__(x)]; // expected-error {{invalid application of 'alignof' to a field of a class still being defined}}
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
struct S1; // expected-note 6 {{forward declaration}}
|
|
extern S1 s1;
|
|
const int test3 = __alignof__(s1); // expected-error {{invalid application of '__alignof' to an incomplete type 'S1'}}
|
|
|
|
struct S2 {
|
|
S2();
|
|
S1 &s;
|
|
int x;
|
|
|
|
int test4 = __alignof__(x); // ok
|
|
int test5 = __alignof__(s); // expected-error {{invalid application of '__alignof' to an incomplete type 'S1'}}
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
const int test6 = __alignof__(S2::x);
|
|
const int test7 = __alignof__(S2::s); // expected-error {{invalid application of '__alignof' to an incomplete type 'S1'}}
|
|
|
|
// Arguably, these should fail like the S1 cases do: the alignment of
|
|
// 's2.x' should depend on the alignment of both x-within-S2 and
|
|
// s2-within-S3 and thus require 'S3' to be complete. If we start
|
|
// doing the appropriate recursive walk to do that, we should make
|
|
// sure that these cases don't explode.
|
|
struct S3 {
|
|
S2 s2;
|
|
|
|
static const int test8 = __alignof__(s2.x);
|
|
static const int test9 = __alignof__(s2.s); // expected-error {{invalid application of '__alignof' to an incomplete type 'S1'}}
|
|
auto test10() -> char(&)[__alignof__(s2.x)];
|
|
static const int test11 = __alignof__(S3::s2.x);
|
|
static const int test12 = __alignof__(S3::s2.s); // expected-error {{invalid application of '__alignof' to an incomplete type 'S1'}}
|
|
auto test13() -> char(&)[__alignof__(s2.x)];
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
// Same reasoning as S3.
|
|
struct S4 {
|
|
union {
|
|
int x;
|
|
};
|
|
static const int test0 = __alignof__(x);
|
|
static const int test1 = __alignof__(S0::x);
|
|
auto test2() -> char(&)[__alignof__(x)];
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
// Regression test for asking for the alignment of a field within an invalid
|
|
// record.
|
|
struct S5 {
|
|
S1 s; // expected-error {{incomplete type}}
|
|
int x;
|
|
};
|
|
const int test8 = __alignof__(S5::x);
|
|
|
|
int test14[2];
|
|
|
|
static_assert(alignof(test14) == 4, "foo"); // expected-warning {{'alignof' applied to an expression is a GNU extension}}
|
|
|
|
// PR19992
|
|
static_assert(alignof(int[]) == alignof(int), ""); // ok
|
|
|
|
namespace alignof_array_expr {
|
|
alignas(32) extern int n[];
|
|
static_assert(alignof(n) == 32, ""); // expected-warning {{GNU extension}}
|
|
|
|
template<int> struct S {
|
|
static int a[];
|
|
};
|
|
template<int N> int S<N>::a[N];
|
|
// ok, does not complete type of S<-1>::a
|
|
static_assert(alignof(S<-1>::a) == alignof(int), ""); // expected-warning {{GNU extension}}
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
template <typename T> void n(T) {
|
|
alignas(T) int T1;
|
|
char k[__alignof__(T1)];
|
|
static_assert(sizeof(k) == alignof(long long), "");
|
|
}
|
|
template void n(long long);
|
|
|
|
namespace PR22042 {
|
|
template <typename T>
|
|
void Fun(T A) {
|
|
typedef int __attribute__((__aligned__(A))) T1; // expected-error {{requested alignment is dependent but declaration is not dependent}}
|
|
int k1[__alignof__(T1)];
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
template <int N>
|
|
struct S {
|
|
typedef __attribute__((aligned(N))) int Field[sizeof(N)]; // expected-error {{requested alignment is dependent but declaration is not dependent}}
|
|
};
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
typedef int __attribute__((aligned(16))) aligned_int;
|
|
template <typename>
|
|
using template_alias = aligned_int;
|
|
static_assert(alignof(template_alias<void>) == 16, "Expected alignment of 16" );
|
|
|
|
struct PR47138 {
|
|
invalid_type a; // expected-error {{unknown type}}
|
|
};
|
|
static_assert(__alignof__(PR47138) == 1, ""); // Don't crash.
|