This is a cleanup and normalization patch that also enables reuse with
Flang later on. A follow up will clean up and move the directive ->
clauses mapping.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D77112
Summary:
Added basic representation and parsing/sema handling of array-shaping
operations. Array shaping expression is an expression of form ([s0]..[sn])base,
where s0, ..., sn must be a positive integer, base - a pointer. This
expression is a kind of cast operation that converts pointer expression
into an array-like kind of expression.
Reviewers: rjmccall, rsmith, jdoerfert
Subscribers: guansong, arphaman, cfe-commits, caomhin, kkwli0
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D74144
Normally clang avoids creating expressions when it encounters semantic
errors, even if the parser knows which expression to produce.
This works well for the compiler. However, this is not ideal for
source-level tools that have to deal with broken code, e.g. clangd is
not able to provide navigation features even for names that compiler
knows how to resolve.
The new RecoveryExpr aims to capture the minimal set of information
useful for the tools that need to deal with incorrect code:
source range of the expression being dropped,
subexpressions of the expression.
We aim to make constructing RecoveryExprs as simple as possible to
ensure writing code to avoid dropping expressions is easy.
Producing RecoveryExprs can result in new code paths being taken in the
frontend. In particular, clang can produce some new diagnostics now and
we aim to suppress bogus ones based on Expr::containsErrors.
We deliberately produce RecoveryExprs only in the parser for now to
minimize the code affected by this patch. Producing RecoveryExprs in
Sema potentially allows to preserve more information (e.g. type of an
expression), but also results in more code being affected. E.g.
SFINAE checks will have to take presence of RecoveryExprs into account.
Initial implementation only works in C++ mode, as it relies on compiler
postponing diagnostics on dependent expressions. C and ObjC often do not
do this, so they require more work to make sure we do not produce too
many bogus diagnostics on the new expressions.
See documentation of RecoveryExpr for more details.
original patch from Ilya
This change is based on https://reviews.llvm.org/D61722
Reviewers: sammccall, rsmith
Reviewed By: sammccall, rsmith
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69330
Implement support for C++2a requires-expressions.
Re-commit after compilation failure on some platforms due to alignment issues with PointerIntPair.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D50360
ConceptSpecializationExprs (CSEs) were being created with nullptr
TemplateArgsAsWritten during TemplateTemplateParmDecl canonicalization, and
we were relying on them during profiling which caused sporadic crashes
in test/CXX/.../temp.arg.template/p3-2a.cpp introduced in D44352.
Change profiling of CSEs to instead rely on the actual converted template
arguments and concept named.
Summary:
Basic codegen for the declarations marked as nontemporal. Also, if the
base declaration in the member expression is marked as nontemporal,
lvalue for member decl access inherits nonteporal flag from the base
lvalue.
Reviewers: rjmccall, hfinkel, jdoerfert
Subscribers: guansong, arphaman, caomhin, kkwli0, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D71708
The AssociationIteratorTy type will be copied in a range-based for loop.
Make the copy explicit to avoid the -Wrange-loop-analysis warning.
This avoids new warnings due to D68912 adds -Wrange-loop-analysis to -Wall.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D70045
The expression of the priority clause must be captured in the combined
task-based directives, like 'parallel master taskloop' directive.
llvm-svn: 375026
Part of C++20 Concepts implementation effort. Added Concept Specialization Expressions that are created when a concept is refe$
D41217 on Phabricator.
(recommit after fixing failing Parser test on windows)
llvm-svn: 374903
Part of C++20 Concepts implementation effort. Added Concept Specialization Expressions that are created when a concept is referenced with arguments, and tests thereof.
llvm-svn: 374882
The expression of the num_tasks clause must be captured in the combined
task-based directives, like 'parallel master taskloop' directive.
llvm-svn: 374819
The expression of the grainsize clause must be captured in the combined
task-based directives, like 'parallel master taskloop' directive.
llvm-svn: 374810
Added parsing/sema/codegen support for 'parallel master taskloop'
constructs. Some of the clauses, like 'grainsize', 'num_tasks', 'final'
and 'priority' are not supported in full, only constant expressions can
be used currently in these clauses.
llvm-svn: 374791
This commit adds a new builtin, __builtin_bit_cast(T, v), which performs a
bit_cast from a value v to a type T. This expression can be evaluated at
compile time under specific circumstances.
The compile time evaluation currently doesn't support bit-fields, but I'm
planning on fixing this in a follow up (some of the logic for figuring this out
is in CodeGen). I'm also planning follow-ups for supporting some more esoteric
types that the constexpr evaluator supports, as well as extending
__builtin_memcpy constexpr evaluation to use the same infrastructure.
rdar://44987528
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D62825
llvm-svn: 364954
Syntax:
asm [volatile] goto ( AssemblerTemplate
:
: InputOperands
: Clobbers
: GotoLabels)
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Extended-Asm.html
New llvm IR is "callbr" for inline asm goto instead "call" for inline asm
For:
asm goto("testl %0, %0; jne %l1;" :: "r"(cond)::label_true, loop);
IR:
callbr void asm sideeffect "testl $0, $0; jne ${1:l};", "r,X,X,~{dirflag},~{fpsr},~{flags}"(i32 %0, i8* blockaddress(@foo, %label_true), i8* blockaddress(@foo, %loop)) #1
to label %asm.fallthrough [label %label_true, label %loop], !srcloc !3
asm.fallthrough:
Compiler need to generate:
1> a dummy constarint 'X' for each label.
2> an unique fallthrough label for each asm goto stmt " asm.fallthrough%number".
Diagnostic
1> duplicate asm operand name are used in output, input and label.
2> goto out of scope.
llvm-svn: 362045
Summary:
This patch implements the source location builtins `__builtin_LINE(), `__builtin_FUNCTION()`, `__builtin_FILE()` and `__builtin_COLUMN()`. These builtins are needed to implement [`std::experimental::source_location`](https://rawgit.com/cplusplus/fundamentals-ts/v2/main.html#reflection.src_loc.creation).
With the exception of `__builtin_COLUMN`, GCC also implements these builtins, and Clangs behavior is intended to match as closely as possible.
Reviewers: rsmith, joerg, aaron.ballman, bogner, majnemer, shafik, martong
Reviewed By: rsmith
Subscribers: rnkovacs, loskutov, riccibruno, mgorny, kunitoki, alexr, majnemer, hfinkel, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37035
llvm-svn: 360937
Summary:
This reverts rL352390 / D57280.
As discussed in https://reviews.llvm.org/D57112#inline-506781,
'flush' clause does not exist in the OpenMP spec, it can not be
specified, and `OMPFlushClause` class is just a helper class.
Now, here's the caveat. I have read @ABataev's
> Well, I think it would be good to filter out OMPC_flush somehow
> because there is no such clause actually, it is a pseudo clause
> for better handling of the flush directive.
as if that clause is pseudo clause that only exists for the sole
purpose of simplifying the parser. As in, it never reaches AST.
I did not however try to verify that. Too bad, i was wrong.
It absolutely *does* reach AST. Therefore my understanding/justification
for the change was flawed, which makes the patch a regression which **must** be reverted.
@gribozavr has brought that up again in https://reviews.llvm.org/D57112#inline-521238
> > ...
> Sorry to be late for this discussion, but I don't think this conclusion
> follows. ASTMatchers are supposed to match the AST as it is.
> Even if OMPC_flush is synthetic, it exists in the AST, and users might
> want to match it. I think users would find anything else (trying to filter
> out AST nodes that are not in the source code) to be surprising. For example,
> there's a matcher materializeTemporaryExpr even though this AST node is a
> Clang invention and is not a part of the C++ spec.
>
> Matching only constructs that appear in the source code is not feasible with
> ASTMatchers, because they are based on Clang's AST that exposes tons of semantic
> information, and its design is dictated by the structure of the semantic information.
> See "RFC: Tree-based refactorings with Clang" in cfe-dev for a library that will
> focus on representing source code as faithfully as possible.
>
> Not to even mention that this code is in ASTTypeTraits, a general library for
> handling AST nodes, not specifically for AST Matchers...
Reviewers: gribozavr, ABataev, rjmccall, aaron.ballman
Reviewed By: gribozavr, ABataev
Subscribers: dylanmckay, guansong, arphaman, jdoerfert, cfe-commits, gribozavr, ABataev
Tags: #clang, #openmp
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D58979
llvm-svn: 355486
Alexey Bataev