[Driver] Flip the CC1 default of -fdiagnostics-show-optionThe driver enables -fdiagnostics-show-option by default, so flip the CC1default to reduce the lengths of common CC1 command lines.This c
[Driver] Flip the CC1 default of -fdiagnostics-show-optionThe driver enables -fdiagnostics-show-option by default, so flip the CC1default to reduce the lengths of common CC1 command lines.This change also makes ParseDiagnosticArgs() consistently enable-fdiagnostics-show-option by default.
show more ...
Lit C++11 Compatibility Patch #824 tests have been updated for C++11 compatibility.llvm-svn: 266387
Prior to adding the new "expected-no-diagnostics" directive to VerifyDiagnosticConsumer, make the necessary adjustment to 580 test-cases which will henceforth require this new directive.llvm-svn: 1
Prior to adding the new "expected-no-diagnostics" directive to VerifyDiagnosticConsumer, make the necessary adjustment to 580 test-cases which will henceforth require this new directive.llvm-svn: 166280
We don't need a lengthy quote from the wrong standard.llvm-svn: 155942
Add test cases for r155935.llvm-svn: 155940
When determining whether an identifier followed by a '<' in a memberaccess expression is the start of a template-id, ignore functiontemplates found in the context of the entire postfix-expression.
When determining whether an identifier followed by a '<' in a memberaccess expression is the start of a template-id, ignore functiontemplates found in the context of the entire postfix-expression. FixesPR11856.llvm-svn: 152520
Modify how the -verify flag works. Currently, the verification string anddiagnostic message are compared. If either is a substring of the other, thenno error is given. This gives rise to an unex
Modify how the -verify flag works. Currently, the verification string anddiagnostic message are compared. If either is a substring of the other, thenno error is given. This gives rise to an unexpected case: // expect-error{{candidate function has different number of parameters}}will match the following error messages from Clang: candidate function has different number of parameters (expected 1 but has 2) candidate function has different number of parametersIt will also match these other error messages: candidate function function has different number of parameters number of parametersThis patch will change so that the verification string must be a substring ofthe diagnostic message before accepting. Also, all the failing tests from thischange have been corrected. Some stats from this cleanup:87 - removed extra spaces around verification strings70 - wording updates to diagnostics40 - extra leading or trailing characters (typos, unmatched parens or quotes)35 - diagnostic level was included (error:, warning:, or note:)18 - flag name put in the warning (-Wprotocol)llvm-svn: 146619
De-Unicode-ify.llvm-svn: 137430
When performing the lookup in the current scope for a member access toa member template, e.g., x.f<int>if we have found a template in the type of x, but the lookup in thecurrent scope is ambig
When performing the lookup in the current scope for a member access toa member template, e.g., x.f<int>if we have found a template in the type of x, but the lookup in thecurrent scope is ambiguous, just ignore the lookup in the currentscope. Fixes <rdar://problem/9915664>.llvm-svn: 137255
Add an extension to avoid an error when a global template has the same name asa member template, and you try to call the member template with an explicittemplate argument. See PR7247 For example
Add an extension to avoid an error when a global template has the same name asa member template, and you try to call the member template with an explicittemplate argument. See PR7247 For example, this downgrades the error to a warning in:template<typename T> struct set{};struct Value { template<typename T> void set(T value) { }};void foo() { Value v; v.set<double>(3.2); // Warning here.}llvm-svn: 105518
Implement crazy destructor name lookup semantics differently inC++98/03 and C++0x, since the '0x semantics break valid C++98/03code. This new mess is tracked by core issue 399, which is stillunres
Implement crazy destructor name lookup semantics differently inC++98/03 and C++0x, since the '0x semantics break valid C++98/03code. This new mess is tracked by core issue 399, which is stillunresolved.Fixes PR6358 and PR6359.llvm-svn: 96836