placement allocation or deallocation functions. These functions cannot be
replaced by the user and are exempt from the normal requirements on
allocation functions (e.g. that they must return unaliased memory).
llvm-svn: 131386
that the destructor body is trivial and that all member variables also have either
trivial destructors or trivial destructor bodies, we don't need to initialize the
vtable pointers since no virtual member functions will be called on the destructor.
Fixes PR9181.
llvm-svn: 131368
Go through and expand the members of bases into the encoding string (and encode the VTable as well).
Unlike gcc which expands virtual bases as many times as they appear in the
hierarchy, clang will only expand them once at the end, to reflect the actual layout.
Note that there doesn't seem to be a way to indicate in the encoding that
packing/alignment of members is different that normal, in which case
the encoding will be out-of-sync with the real layout.
If the runtime switches to just consider the size of types without
taking into account alignment, we could easily make padding explicit in the
encoding (e.g. using arrays of chars). The encoding strings would be
longer then though.
Also encode a flexible array member as array of 0 size, like gcc, not as a pointer.
llvm-svn: 131365
This introduces a generic base class for the expression evaluator
classes, which handles a few common expression types which were
previously handled separately in each class. Also, the expression
evaluator now uses ConstStmtVisitor.
llvm-svn: 131281
hasTrivialDefaultConstructor() really really means it now.
Also implement a fun standards bug regarding aggregates. Doug, if you'd
like, I can un-implement that bug if you think it is truly a defect.
The bug is that non-special-member constructors are never considered
user-provided, so the following is an aggregate:
struct foo {
foo(int);
};
It's kind of bad, but the solution isn't obvious - should
struct foo {
foo (int) = delete;
};
be an aggregate or not?
Lastly, add a missing initialization to FunctionDecl.
llvm-svn: 131101
- New isDefined() function checks for deletedness
- isThisDeclarationADefinition checks for deletedness
- New doesThisDeclarationHaveABody() does what
isThisDeclarationADefinition() used to do
- The IsDeleted bit is not propagated across redeclarations
- isDeleted() now checks the canoncial declaration
- New isDeletedAsWritten() does what it says on the tin.
- isUserProvided() now correct (thanks Richard!)
This fixes the bug that we weren't catching
void foo() = delete;
void foo() {}
as being a redefinition.
llvm-svn: 131013
sense). Fixes <rdar://problem/9366066> by eliminating an inconsistency
between C++ overloading (which handled scoped enumerations correctly)
and C binary operator type-checking (which didn't).
llvm-svn: 130924
Adjacent bit fields are packed into the same 1-, 2-, or
4-byte allocation unit if the integral types are the same
size. // rdar://8823265.
llvm-svn: 130851
Like in r126648, provide (empty) default implementation for pure virtual getMemoryBufferSizes(). Not all use cases have meaningful implementations.
llvm-svn: 130838
if they match that production, i.e. if they're template type parameters
or decltypes (or, as an obvious case not yet described in the ABI document,
if they're template template parameters applied to template arguments).
llvm-svn: 130824
Decl actually found via name lookup & overload resolution when that Decl
is different from the ValueDecl which is actually referenced by the
expression.
This can be used by AST consumers to correctly attribute references to
the spelling location of a using declaration, and otherwise gain insight
into the name resolution performed by Clang.
The public interface to DRE is kept as narrow as possible: we provide
a getFoundDecl() which always returns a NamedDecl, either the ValueDecl
referenced or the new, more precise NamedDecl if present. This way AST
clients can code against getFoundDecl without know when exactly the AST
has a split representation.
For an example of the data this provides consider:
% cat x.cc
namespace N1 {
struct S {};
void f(const S&);
}
void test(N1::S s) {
f(s);
using N1::f;
f(s);
}
% ./bin/clang -fsyntax-only -Xclang -ast-dump x.cc
[...]
void test(N1::S s) (CompoundStmt 0x5b02010 <x.cc:5:20, line:9:1>
(CallExpr 0x5b01df0 <line:6:3, col:6> 'void'
(ImplicitCastExpr 0x5b01dd8 <col:3> 'void (*)(const struct N1::S &)' <FunctionToPointerDecay>
(DeclRefExpr 0x5b01d80 <col:3> 'void (const struct N1::S &)' lvalue Function 0x5b01a20 'f' 'void (const struct N1::S &)'))
(ImplicitCastExpr 0x5b01e20 <col:5> 'const struct N1::S' lvalue <NoOp>
(DeclRefExpr 0x5b01d58 <col:5> 'N1::S':'struct N1::S' lvalue ParmVar 0x5b01b60 's' 'N1::S':'struct N1::S')))
(DeclStmt 0x5b01ee0 <line:7:3, col:14>
0x5b01e40 "UsingN1::;")
(CallExpr 0x5b01fc8 <line:8:3, col:6> 'void'
(ImplicitCastExpr 0x5b01fb0 <col:3> 'void (*)(const struct N1::S &)' <FunctionToPointerDecay>
(DeclRefExpr 0x5b01f80 <col:3> 'void (const struct N1::S &)' lvalue Function 0x5b01a20 'f' 'void (const struct N1::S &)' (UsingShadow 0x5b01ea0 'f')))
(ImplicitCastExpr 0x5b01ff8 <col:5> 'const struct N1::S' lvalue <NoOp>
(DeclRefExpr 0x5b01f58 <col:5> 'N1::S':'struct N1::S' lvalue ParmVar 0x5b01b60 's' 'N1::S':'struct N1::S'))))
Now we can tell that the second call is 'using' (no pun intended) the using
declaration, and *which* using declaration it sees. Without this, we can
mistake calls that go through using declarations for ADL calls, and have no way
to attribute names looked up with using declarations to the appropriate
UsingDecl.
llvm-svn: 130670
parameter node and use this to correctly mangle parameter
references in function template signatures.
A follow-up patch will improve the storage usage of these
fields; here I've just done the lazy thing.
llvm-svn: 130669
NestedNameSpecifierLoc. It predates when we had such an object.
Reference the NNSLoc directly in DREs, and embed it directly into the
MemberNameQualifier struct.
llvm-svn: 130668
Mostly trailing whitespace so that me editor nuking it doesn't muddy the
waters of subsequent commits that do change functionality.
Also nukes a stray statement that was harmless but redundant that
I introduced in r130666.
llvm-svn: 130667
a bitfield in the base class. DREs weren't using any bits here past the
normal Expr bits, so we have plenty of room. This makes the common case
of getting a Decl out of a DRE no longer need to do any masking etc.
Also, while here, clean up code to use the accessor methods rather than
directly poking these bits, and provide a nice comment for DREs that
includes the information previously attached to the bits going into the
pointer union.
No functionality changed here, but DREs should be a tad faster now.
llvm-svn: 130666
As might be surmised from their names, these aren't type traits, they're
expression traits. Amazingly enough, they're expression traits that we
have, and fully implement. These "type" traits are even parsed from the
same tokens as the expression traits. Luckily, the parser only tried the
expression trait parsing for these tokens, so this was all just a pile
of dead code.
llvm-svn: 130643
SubstTemplateTypeParmType to be 'getIdentifier' instead of 'getName' as
it returns an identifier. This makes them more consistent with the
NamedDecl interface.
Also, switch back to using this interface to acquire the indentifier in
TypePrinter.cpp. I missed this in r130628.
llvm-svn: 130629
accompanying fixes to make it work today.
The core of this patch is to provide a link from a TemplateTypeParmType
back to the TemplateTypeParmDecl node which declared it. This in turn
provides much more precise information about the type, where it came
from, and how it functions for AST consumers.
To make the patch work almost a year after its first attempt, it needed
serialization support, and it now retains the old getName() interface.
Finally, it requires us to not attempt to instantiate the type in an
unsupported friend decl -- specifically those coming from template
friend decls but which refer to a specific type through a dependent
name.
A cleaner representation of the last item would be to build
FriendTemplateDecl nodes for these, storing their template parameters
etc, and to perform proper instantation of them like any other template
declaration. They can still be flagged as unsupported for the purpose of
access checking, etc.
This passed an asserts-enabled bootstrap for me, and the reduced test
case mentioned in the original review thread no longer causes issues,
likely fixed at somewhere amidst the 24k revisions that have elapsed.
llvm-svn: 130628
Argyrios Kyrtzidis