that looks like it might be an explicit specialization, don't recover as an
explicit specialization (bypassing the check that would reject that).
llvm-svn: 206444
Warn on std::abs() with unsigned argument.
Suggest std::abs as replacement for the C absolute value functions.
Suggest C++ headers if the specific std::abs overload is not found.
llvm-svn: 206340
Parse of nested name spacifier is modified so that it properly recovers
if colon is mistyped as double colon in case statement.
This patch fixes PR15133.
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2870
llvm-svn: 206135
If the C-style type cast is applied to the overloaded
function and the destination type is function type,
then Clang will crash with assertion failure. For example,
void foo(int);
void foo(int, int);
void bar() {
typedef void (ft)(int);
ft p = (ft)foo;
}
In this case, the overloaded function foo will be cast to
a function type, which should be considered as an error.
But, unfortunately, since the function resolution is using
canonical type, the matched function will be returned, and
result in SEGV.
This patch fixes this issue by removing the assertion and
add some error diagnostics as the one in static_cast.
llvm-svn: 206133
declaration is not visible. Previously we didn't find hidden friend names in
this redeclaration lookup, because we forgot to treat it as a redeclaration
lookup. Conversely, we did find some local extern names, but those don't
actually conflict with a namespace-scope using declaration, because the only
conflicts we can get are scope conflicts, not conflicts due to the entities
being members of the same namespace.
llvm-svn: 206011
This patch adds support for the msvc pragmas section, bss_seg, code_seg,
const_seg and data_seg as well as support for __declspec(allocate()).
Additionally it corrects semantics and adds diagnostics for
__attribute__((section())) and the interaction between the attribute
and the msvc pragmas and declspec. In general conflicts should now be
well diganosed within and among these features.
In supporting the pragmas new machinery for uniform lexing for
msvc pragmas was introduced. The new machinery always lexes the
entire pragma and stores it on an annotation token. The parser
is responsible for parsing the pragma when the handling the
annotation token.
There is a known outstanding bug in this implementation in C mode.
Because these attributes and pragmas apply _only_ to definitions, we
process them at the time we detect a definition. Due to tentative
definitions in C, we end up processing the definition late. This means
that in C mode, everything that ends up in a BSS section will end up in
the _last_ BSS section rather than the one that was live at the time of
tentative definition, even if that turns out to be the point of actual
definition. This issue is not known to impact anything as of yet
because we are not aware of a clear use or use case for #pragma bss_seg
but should be fixed at some point.
Differential Revision=http://reviews.llvm.org/D3065#inline-16241
llvm-svn: 205810
It is very similar to GCC's __PRETTY_FUNCTION__, except it prints the
calling convention.
Reviewers: majnemer
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D3311
llvm-svn: 205780
which warns on compound conditionals that always evaluate to the same value.
For instance, (x > 5 && x < 3) will always be false since no value for x can
satisfy both conditions.
This patch also changes the CFG to use these tautological values for better
branch analysis. The test for -Wunreachable-code shows how this change catches
additional dead code.
Patch by Anders Rönnholm.
llvm-svn: 205665
obviously won't work. Specifically, don't suggest methods (static or
not) from unrelated classes when the expression is a method call
through a specific object.
llvm-svn: 205653
better. This warning will now trigger on the following conditionals:
bool b;
int i;
if (b > 1) {} // always false
if (0 <= (i > 5)) {} // always true
if (-1 > b) {} // always false
Patch by Per Viberg.
llvm-svn: 205608
No functionality change.
When determining the pattern for instantiating a generic lambda call operator specialization - we must not go drilling down for the 'prototype' (i.e. as written) pattern - rather we must use our partially transformed pattern (whose DeclRefExprs are wired correctly to any enclosing lambda's decls that should be mapped correctly in a local instantiation scope) that is the templated pattern of the specialization's primary template (even though the primary template might be instantiated from a 'prototype' member-template). Previously, the drilling down was haltted by marking the instantiated-from primary template as a member-specialization (incorrectly).
This prompted Richard to remark (http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D1784?id=4687#inline-10272)
"It's a bit nasty to (essentially) set this bit incorrectly. Can you put the check into getTemplateInstantiationPattern instead?"
In my reckless youth, I chose to ignore that comment. With the passage of time, I have come to learn the value of bowing to the will of the angry Gods ;)
llvm-svn: 205543
meaningful to odr-use the VarDecl inside a variable template. (Separately, it'd
be nice to track referenced-ness for templates, and warn on unused ones, but
that's really a distinct issue...)
Move a test that generates and tests a warning-suppressing error out to its own
test file, so it doesn't have weird effects on the other tests in the same file.
llvm-svn: 205448
For namespaces, this is consistent with mangling and GCC's debug info
behavior. For structs, GCC uses <anonymous struct> but we prefer
consistency between all anonymous entities but don't want to confuse
them with template arguments, etc, so we'll just go with parens in all
cases.
llvm-svn: 205398
A redeclaration may not add dllimport or dllexport attributes. dllexport is
sticky and can be omitted on redeclarations while dllimport cannot.
llvm-svn: 205197
Summary:
Declaring a function as inline after it has been defined is in violation
of [dcl.fct.spec]p4. The program would get a strong definition instead
of getting a function with linkonce_odr linkage.
Reviewers: rsmith
CC: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D3220
llvm-svn: 205129
This adds Clang support for the ARM64 backend. There are definitely
still some rough edges, so please bring up any issues you see with
this patch.
As with the LLVM commit though, we think it'll be more useful for
merging with AArch64 from within the tree.
llvm-svn: 205100
Taking a hint from -Wparentheses, use an extra '()' as a sigil that
a dead condition is intentionally dead. For example:
if ((0)) { dead }
When this sigil is found, do not emit a dead code warning. When the
analysis sees:
if (0)
it suggests inserting '()' as a Fix-It.
llvm-svn: 205069
The main difference between __va_start and __builtin_va_start is that
the address of the va_list has already been taken, and the va_list is
always a char*.
__va_end and __va_arg are not needed.
llvm-svn: 204821
specialization from a module. (This can also happen for function template
specializations in PCHs if they're instantiated eagerly, because they're
constexpr or have a deduced return type.)
llvm-svn: 204547
The exception is return statements that include control-flow,
which are clearly doing something "interesting".
99% of the cases I examined for -Wunreachable-code that fired
on return statements were not interesting enough to warrant
being in -Wunreachable-code by default. Thus the move to
include them in -Wunreachable-code-return.
This simplifies a bunch of logic, including removing the ad hoc
logic to look for std::string literals.
llvm-svn: 204307
"No need to issue deprecated warning if deprecated method
in class extension is being implemented in primary class implementation
(no overriding is involved).
// rdar://16249335". No functionality change.
llvm-svn: 204159
warnings (warning or lack there of) as well since
blocks are another pattern for envoking other
designated initializers. // rdar://16323233
llvm-svn: 204081
Also relax unreachable 'break' and 'return' to not check for being
preceded by a call to 'noreturn'. That turns out to not be so
interesting in practice.
llvm-svn: 204000
Recent work on -Wunreachable-code has focused on suppressing uninteresting
unreachable code that center around "configuration values", but
there are still some set of cases that are sometimes interesting
or uninteresting depending on the codebase. For example, a dead
"break" statement may not be interesting for a particular codebase,
potentially because it is auto-generated or simply because code
is written defensively.
To address these workflow differences, -Wunreachable-code is now
broken into several diagnostic groups:
-Wunreachable-code: intended to be a reasonable "default" for
most users.
and then other groups that turn on more aggressive checking:
-Wunreachable-code-break: warn about dead break statements
-Wunreachable-code-trivial-return: warn about dead return statements
that return "trivial" values (e.g., return 0). Other return
statements that return non-trivial values are still reported
under -Wunreachable-code (this is an area subject to more refinement).
-Wunreachable-code-aggressive: supergroup that enables all these
groups.
The goal is to eventually make -Wunreachable-code good enough to
either be in -Wall or on-by-default, thus finessing these warnings
into different groups helps achieve maximum signal for more users.
TODO: the tests need to be updated to reflect this extra control
via diagnostic flags.
llvm-svn: 203994
'init' methods which are unavailable. Subclasses of NSObject
have to implement such methods as a common pattern to prevent
user's own implementation. // rdar://16305460
llvm-svn: 203984
complete. We hook into this check from a couple of other places (modules,
debug info) so it's not OK to elide the check if the type was already
complete.
llvm-svn: 203978
(for an integer too large for any signed type) from Warning to ExtWarn -- it's
ill-formed in C++11 and C99 onwards, and UB during translation in C89 and
C++98. Add diagnostic groups for two relevant diagnostics.
llvm-svn: 203974
'init' methods which are unavailable. Subclasses of NSObject
have to implement such methods as a common pattern to prevent
user's own implementation. // rdar://16305460
llvm-svn: 203966
This patch factors the bodies of 9 constructors out into a single initialization
method.
Reviewed By: rsmith
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D3059
llvm-svn: 203846
Apparently the FIXME was overlooked when the source location information was
made available to the function.
Reviewed By: rsmith
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D3058
llvm-svn: 203845
Drive-by fixing some incorrect types where a for loop would be improperly using ObjCInterfaceDecl::protocol_iterator. No functional changes in these cases.
llvm-svn: 203842
const-qualified parameter type and the defined with a non-const-qualified
parameter type, the parameter is not const inside its body. Ensure that
the type we use when instantiating the body is the right one. Patch by
suyog sarda!
This is still rather unsatisfactory; it seems like it might be better to
instantiate at least the function parameters, and maybe the complete function
declaration, when we instantiate the definition for such a member function
(instead of reusing the declaration from inside the instantiated class
definition).
llvm-svn: 203741
that implicitly converts to 'bool' (such as pointers, and the first operand of
?:). Clean up issues found by this. Patch by Stephan Tolksdorf!
llvm-svn: 203735
Someone could write:
if (0) {
__c11_atomic_load(ptr, memory_order_release);
}
or the equivalent, which is perfectly valid, so we shouldn't outright reject
invalid orderings on purely static grounds.
rdar://problem/16242991
llvm-svn: 203564
This is a conservative check, because it's valid for the expression to be
non-constant, and in cases like that we just don't know whether it's valid.
rdar://problem/16242991
llvm-svn: 203561
if the type's declaration was previously instantiated in an unimported module.
(For an imported type definition, this already worked, because the source
location is set to the location of the definition, but for locally-instantiated
type definitions, it did not.)
llvm-svn: 203425
Clang might crash while reading the precompiled headers if
we don't initialize the AttrEnumOperandLoc properly.
This commit fixes the combination of string attribute
operand and enum operand. Besides, this commit also adds
several assertions to avoid unexpected operand kind.
llvm-svn: 203416
This is a reapplication of r203236 with modifications to the definition of attrs() and following the new style guidelines on auto usage.
llvm-svn: 203362
getTypeSize (which rounds up sizes) in order to issue diagnostics
when casting to mismatched vector sizes; instead of crashing in IRGen.
// rdar:// 16196902. Reviewed offline by John McCall.
llvm-svn: 203175
Note that for backwards compatibility, an unnamed capability will default to being a "mutex." This allows the deprecated lockable attribute to continue to function.
llvm-svn: 203012
Summary:
The MSVC ABI appears to mangle the lexical scope into the names of
statics. Specifically, a counter is incremented whenever a scope is
entered where things can be declared in such a way that an ambiguity can
arise. For example, a class scope inside of a class scope doesn't do
anything interesting because the nested class cannot collide with
another nested class.
There are problems with this scheme:
- It is unreliable. The counter is only incremented when a previously
never encountered scope is entered. There are cases where this will
cause ambiguity amongst declarations that have the same name where one
was introduced in a deep scope while the other was introduced right
after in the previous lexical scope.
- It is wasteful. Statements like: {{{{{{{ static int foo = a; }}}}}}}
will make the mangling of "foo" larger than it need be because the
scope counter has been incremented many times.
Because of these problems, and practical implementation concerns. We
choose not to implement this scheme if the local static or local type
isn't visible. The mangling of these declarations will look very
similar but the numbering will make far more sense, this scheme is
lifted from the Itanium ABI implementation.
Reviewers: rsmith, doug.gregor, rnk, eli.friedman, cdavis5x
Reviewed By: rnk
CC: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2953
llvm-svn: 202951
Per more discussion, 'objc_protocol_requires_explicit_implementation' is
refinement that it mainly adds that requirement that a protocol must be
explicitly satisfied at the moment the first class in the class hierarchy
conforms to it. Any subclasses that also conform to that protocol,
either directly or via conforming to a protocol that inherits that protocol,
do not need to re-implement that protocol.
Doing this requires first doing a pass on the super class hierarchy,
gathering the set of protocols conformed to by the super classes,
and then culling those out when determining conformance. This
two-pass algorithm could be generalized for all protocol checking,
and could possibly be a performance win in some cases. For now
we restrict this change to protocols with this attribute to isolate
the change in logic (especially as the design continues to evolve).
This change needs to be adjusted for properties as well; this
only impacts methods right now.
llvm-svn: 202948
const char *format = "%s";
std::experimental::string_view view = "foo";
printf(format, view);
In this case, not only warn about a class type being used here, but also suggest that calling c_str() might be a good idea.
llvm-svn: 202461
or virtual functions, but permit that error to be downgraded to
a warning (with -Wno-error=incompatible-ms-struct), and officially
support this kind of dual, ABI-mixing layout.
The basic problem here is that projects which use ms_struct are often
not very circumspect about what types they annotate; for example,
some projects enable the pragma in a prefix header and then only
selectively disable it around system header inclusions. They may
only care about binary compatibility with MSVC for a subset of
those structs, but that doesn't mean they have no binary
compatibility concerns at all for the rest; thus we are essentially
forced into supporting this hybrid ABI. But it's reasonable for
us to at least point out the places where we're not making
any guarantees.
The original diagnostic was for dynamic classes, i.e. those with
virtual functions or virtual bases; I've extended it to include
all classes with bases, because we are not actually making any
attempt to duplicate MSVC's base subobject layout in ms_struct
(and it is indeed quite different from Itanium, even for
non-virtual bases).
rdar://16178895
llvm-svn: 202427
Fariborz Jahanian