Commit Graph

11 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Nicolas Lesser 4848f3bf2f [C++2a] P0634r3: Down with typename!
This patch implements P0634r3 that removes the need for 'typename' in certain contexts.

For example,

```
template <typename T>
using foo = T::type; // ok
```

This is also allowed in previous language versions as an extension, because I think it's pretty useful. :)

Reviewed By: #clang-language-wg, erichkeane

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D53847
2022-09-28 09:50:19 -07:00
Muhammad Usman Shahid 76476efd68 Rewording "static_assert" diagnostics
This patch rewords the static assert diagnostic output. Failing a
_Static_assert in C should not report that static_assert failed. This
changes the wording to be more like GCC and uses "static assertion"
when possible instead of hard coding the name. This also changes some
instances of 'static_assert' to instead be based on the token in the
source code.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D129048
2022-07-25 07:22:54 -04:00
Erich Keane 1da3119025 Revert "Rewording the "static_assert" to static assertion"
Looks like we again are going to have problems with libcxx tests that
are overly specific in their dependency on clang's diagnostics.

This reverts commit 6542cb55a3.
2022-07-21 06:40:14 -07:00
Muhammad Usman Shahid 6542cb55a3 Rewording the "static_assert" to static assertion
This patch is basically the rewording of the static assert statement's
output(error) on screen after failing. Failing a _Static_assert in C
should not report that static_assert failed. It’d probably be better to
reword the diagnostic to be more like GCC and say “static assertion”
failed in both C and C++.

consider a c file having code

_Static_assert(0, "oh no!");

In clang the output is like:

<source>:1:1: error: static_assert failed: oh no!
_Static_assert(0, "oh no!");
^              ~
1 error generated.
Compiler returned: 1

Thus here the "static_assert" is not much good, it will be better to
reword it to the "static assertion failed" to more generic. as the gcc
prints as:

<source>:1:1: error: static assertion failed: "oh no!"
    1 | _Static_assert(0, "oh no!");
          | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
          Compiler returned: 1

The above can also be seen here. This patch is about rewording
the static_assert to static assertion.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D129048
2022-07-21 06:34:14 -07:00
Mitch Phillips 041d4012e4 Revert "Rewording "static_assert" diagnostics"
This reverts commit b7e77ff25f.

Reason: Broke sanitizer builds bots + libcxx. 'static assertion
expression is not an integral constant expression'. More details
available in the Phabricator review: https://reviews.llvm.org/D129048
2022-07-14 10:59:20 -07:00
Muhammad Usman Shahid b7e77ff25f Rewording "static_assert" diagnostics
This patch rewords the static assert diagnostic output. Failing a
_Static_assert in C should not report that static_assert failed. This
changes the wording to be more like GCC and uses "static assertion"
when possible instead of hard coding the name. This also changes some
instances of 'static_assert' to instead be based on the token in the
source code.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D129048
2022-07-14 07:47:37 -04:00
Saar Raz 73eaf62463 [Concepts] Make constraint expressions unevaluated until satisfaction checking
As per P1980R0, constraint expressions are unevaluated operands, and their constituent atomic
constraints only become constant evaluated during satisfaction checking.

Change the evaluation context during parsing and instantiation of constraints to unevaluated.
2020-01-24 02:24:21 +02:00
Saar Raz 67c608a969 [Concepts] Deprecate -fconcepts-ts, enable Concepts under -std=c++2a
Now with concepts support merged and mostly complete, we do not need -fconcepts-ts
(which was also misleading as we were not implementing the TS) and can enable
concepts features under C++2a. A warning will be generated if users still attempt
to use -fconcepts-ts.
2020-01-24 00:48:59 +02:00
Saar Raz a0f50d7316 [Concepts] Requires Expressions
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
2020-01-19 00:23:26 +02:00
Saar Raz baa84d8cde Revert "[Concepts] Requires Expressions"
This reverts commit 0279318997.

There have been some failing tests on some platforms, reverting while investigating.
2020-01-18 14:58:01 +02:00
Saar Raz 0279318997 [Concepts] Requires Expressions
Implement support for C++2a requires-expressions.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D50360
2020-01-18 09:15:36 +02:00