Revert "[clang] Implement ElaboratedType sugaring for types written bare"

This reverts commit 7c51f02effdbd0d5e12bfd26f9c3b2ab5687c93f because it
stills breaks the LLDB tests. This was re-landed wi

Revert "[clang] Implement ElaboratedType sugaring for types written bare"

This reverts commit 7c51f02effdbd0d5e12bfd26f9c3b2ab5687c93f because it
stills breaks the LLDB tests. This was re-landed without addressing the
issue or even agreement on how to address the issue. More details and
discussion in https://reviews.llvm.org/D112374.

show more ...

[clang] Implement ElaboratedType sugaring for types written bare

Without this patch, clang will not wrap in an ElaboratedType node types written
without a keyword and nested name qualifier, which go

[clang] Implement ElaboratedType sugaring for types written bare

Without this patch, clang will not wrap in an ElaboratedType node types written
without a keyword and nested name qualifier, which goes against the intent that
we should produce an AST which retains enough details to recover how things are
written.

The lack of this sugar is incompatible with the intent of the type printer
default policy, which is to print types as written, but to fall back and print
them fully qualified when they are desugared.

An ElaboratedTypeLoc without keyword / NNS uses no storage by itself, but still
requires pointer alignment due to pre-existing bug in the TypeLoc buffer
handling.

---

Troubleshooting list to deal with any breakage seen with this patch:

1) The most likely effect one would see by this patch is a change in how
a type is printed. The type printer will, by design and default,
print types as written. There are customization options there, but
not that many, and they mainly apply to how to print a type that we
somehow failed to track how it was written. This patch fixes a
problem where we failed to distinguish between a type
that was written without any elaborated-type qualifiers,
such as a 'struct'/'class' tags and name spacifiers such as 'std::',
and one that has been stripped of any 'metadata' that identifies such,
the so called canonical types.
Example:
```
namespace foo {
struct A {};
A a;
};
```
If one were to print the type of `foo::a`, prior to this patch, this
would result in `foo::A`. This is how the type printer would have,
by default, printed the canonical type of A as well.
As soon as you add any name qualifiers to A, the type printer would
suddenly start accurately printing the type as written. This patch
will make it print it accurately even when written without
qualifiers, so we will just print `A` for the initial example, as
the user did not really write that `foo::` namespace qualifier.

2) This patch could expose a bug in some AST matcher. Matching types
is harder to get right when there is sugar involved. For example,
if you want to match a type against being a pointer to some type A,
then you have to account for getting a type that is sugar for a
pointer to A, or being a pointer to sugar to A, or both! Usually
you would get the second part wrong, and this would work for a
very simple test where you don't use any name qualifiers, but
you would discover is broken when you do. The usual fix is to
either use the matcher which strips sugar, which is annoying
to use as for example if you match an N level pointer, you have
to put N+1 such matchers in there, beginning to end and between
all those levels. But in a lot of cases, if the property you want
to match is present in the canonical type, it's easier and faster
to just match on that... This goes with what is said in 1), if
you want to match against the name of a type, and you want
the name string to be something stable, perhaps matching on
the name of the canonical type is the better choice.

3) This patch could exposed a bug in how you get the source range of some
TypeLoc. For some reason, a lot of code is using getLocalSourceRange(),
which only looks at the given TypeLoc node. This patch introduces a new,
and more common TypeLoc node which contains no source locations on itself.
This is not an inovation here, and some other, more rare TypeLoc nodes could
also have this property, but if you use getLocalSourceRange on them, it's not
going to return any valid locations, because it doesn't have any. The right fix
here is to always use getSourceRange() or getBeginLoc/getEndLoc which will dive
into the inner TypeLoc to get the source range if it doesn't find it on the
top level one. You can use getLocalSourceRange if you are really into
micro-optimizations and you have some outside knowledge that the TypeLocs you are
dealing with will always include some source location.

4) Exposed a bug somewhere in the use of the normal clang type class API, where you
have some type, you want to see if that type is some particular kind, you try a
`dyn_cast` such as `dyn_cast<TypedefType>` and that fails because now you have an
ElaboratedType which has a TypeDefType inside of it, which is what you wanted to match.
Again, like 2), this would usually have been tested poorly with some simple tests with
no qualifications, and would have been broken had there been any other kind of type sugar,
be it an ElaboratedType or a TemplateSpecializationType or a SubstTemplateParmType.
The usual fix here is to use `getAs` instead of `dyn_cast`, which will look deeper
into the type. Or use `getAsAdjusted` when dealing with TypeLocs.
For some reason the API is inconsistent there and on TypeLocs getAs behaves like a dyn_cast.

5) It could be a bug in this patch perhaps.

Let me know if you need any help!

Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <[email protected]>

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D112374

show more ...

Revert "[clang] Implement ElaboratedType sugaring for types written bare"

This reverts commit bdc6974f92304f4ed542241b9b89ba58ba6b20aa because it
breaks all the LLDB tests that import the std module

Revert "[clang] Implement ElaboratedType sugaring for types written bare"

This reverts commit bdc6974f92304f4ed542241b9b89ba58ba6b20aa because it
breaks all the LLDB tests that import the std module.

import-std-module/array.TestArrayFromStdModule.py
import-std-module/deque-basic.TestDequeFromStdModule.py
import-std-module/deque-dbg-info-content.TestDbgInfoContentDequeFromStdModule.py
import-std-module/forward_list.TestForwardListFromStdModule.py
import-std-module/forward_list-dbg-info-content.TestDbgInfoContentForwardListFromStdModule.py
import-std-module/list.TestListFromStdModule.py
import-std-module/list-dbg-info-content.TestDbgInfoContentListFromStdModule.py
import-std-module/queue.TestQueueFromStdModule.py
import-std-module/stack.TestStackFromStdModule.py
import-std-module/vector.TestVectorFromStdModule.py
import-std-module/vector-bool.TestVectorBoolFromStdModule.py
import-std-module/vector-dbg-info-content.TestDbgInfoContentVectorFromStdModule.py
import-std-module/vector-of-vectors.TestVectorOfVectorsFromStdModule.py

https://green.lab.llvm.org/green/view/LLDB/job/lldb-cmake/45301/

show more ...

[clang] Implement ElaboratedType sugaring for types written bare

Without this patch, clang will not wrap in an ElaboratedType node types written
without a keyword and nested name qualifier, which go

[clang] Implement ElaboratedType sugaring for types written bare

Without this patch, clang will not wrap in an ElaboratedType node types written
without a keyword and nested name qualifier, which goes against the intent that
we should produce an AST which retains enough details to recover how things are
written.

The lack of this sugar is incompatible with the intent of the type printer
default policy, which is to print types as written, but to fall back and print
them fully qualified when they are desugared.

An ElaboratedTypeLoc without keyword / NNS uses no storage by itself, but still
requires pointer alignment due to pre-existing bug in the TypeLoc buffer
handling.

Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <[email protected]>

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D112374

show more ...

Remove warning "suggest braces" for aggregate initialization of an empty class with an aggregate base class.

I recently ran into issues with aggregates and inheritance, I'm using
it for creating a t

Remove warning "suggest braces" for aggregate initialization of an empty class with an aggregate base class.

I recently ran into issues with aggregates and inheritance, I'm using
it for creating a type-safe library where most of the types are build
over "tagged" std::array. After bit of cleaning and enabling -Wall
-Wextra -pedantic I noticed clang only in my pipeline gives me warning.
After a bit of focusing on it I found it's not helpful, and contemplate
disabling the warning all together. After a discussion with other
library authors I found it's bothering more people and decided to fix
it.

Removes this warning:

template<typename T, int N> struct StdArray {
T contents[N];
};

template<typename T, int N> struct AggregateAndEmpty : StdArray<T,N> { };

AggregateAndEmpty<int, 3> p = {1, 2, 3}; // <-- warning here about omitted braces

show more ...

[c++20] Implement semantic restrictions for C++20 designated
initializers.

This has some interesting interactions with our existing extensions to
support C99 designated initializers as an extension

[c++20] Implement semantic restrictions for C++20 designated
initializers.

This has some interesting interactions with our existing extensions to
support C99 designated initializers as an extension in C++. Those are
resolved as follows:

* We continue to permit the full breadth of C99 designated initializers
in C++, with the exception that we disallow a partial overwrite of an
initializer with a non-trivially-destructible type. (Full overwrite
is OK, because we won't run the first initializer at all.)

* The C99 extensions are disallowed in SFINAE contexts and during
overload resolution, where they could change the meaning of valid
programs.

* C++20 disallows reordering of initializers. We only check for that for
the simple cases that the C++20 rules permit (designators of the form
'.field_name =' and continue to allow reordering in other cases).
It would be nice to improve this behavior in future.

* All C99 designated initializer extensions produce a warning by
default in C++20 mode. People are going to learn the C++ rules based
on what Clang diagnoses, so it's important we diagnose these properly
by default.

* In C++ <= 17, we apply the C++20 rules rather than the C99 rules, and
so still diagnose C99 extensions as described above. We continue to
accept designated C++20-compatible initializers in C++ <= 17 silently
by default (but naturally still reject under -pedantic-errors).

This is not a complete implementation of P0329R4. In particular, that
paper introduces new non-C99-compatible syntax { .field { init } }, and
we do not support that yet.

This is based on a previous patch by Don Hinton, though I've made
substantial changes when addressing the above interactions.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59754

llvm-svn: 370544

show more ...

[Sema] Check that the destructor for each element of class type is
accessible from the context where aggregate initialization occurs.

rdar://problem/38168772

Differential Revision: https://reviews.

[Sema] Check that the destructor for each element of class type is
accessible from the context where aggregate initialization occurs.

rdar://problem/38168772

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45898

llvm-svn: 341629

show more ...

Use zeroinitializer for (trailing zero portion of) large array initializers
more reliably.

This re-commits r333044 with a fix for PR37560.

llvm-svn: 333141

Revert r333044 "Use zeroinitializer for (trailing zero portion of) large array initializers"

It caused asserts, see PR37560.

> Use zeroinitializer for (trailing zero portion of) large array initial

Revert r333044 "Use zeroinitializer for (trailing zero portion of) large array initializers"

It caused asserts, see PR37560.

> Use zeroinitializer for (trailing zero portion of) large array initializers
> more reliably.
>
> Clang has two different ways it emits array constants (from InitListExprs and
> from APValues), and both had some ability to emit zeroinitializer, but neither
> was able to catch all cases where we could use zeroinitializer reliably. In
> particular, emitting from an APValue would fail to notice if all the explicit
> array elements happened to be zero. In addition, for large arrays where only an
> initial portion has an explicit initializer, we would emit the complete
> initializer (which could be huge) rather than emitting only the non-zero
> portion. With this change, when the element would have a suffix of more than 8
> zero elements, we emit the array constant as a packed struct of its initial
> portion followed by a zeroinitializer constant for the trailing zero portion.
>
> In passing, I found a bug where SemaInit would sometimes walk the entire array
> when checking an initializer that only covers the first few elements; that's
> fixed here to unblock testing of the rest.
>
> Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D47166

llvm-svn: 333067

show more ...

Use zeroinitializer for (trailing zero portion of) large array initializers
more reliably.

Clang has two different ways it emits array constants (from InitListExprs and
from APValues), and both had

Use zeroinitializer for (trailing zero portion of) large array initializers
more reliably.

Clang has two different ways it emits array constants (from InitListExprs and
from APValues), and both had some ability to emit zeroinitializer, but neither
was able to catch all cases where we could use zeroinitializer reliably. In
particular, emitting from an APValue would fail to notice if all the explicit
array elements happened to be zero. In addition, for large arrays where only an
initial portion has an explicit initializer, we would emit the complete
initializer (which could be huge) rather than emitting only the non-zero
portion. With this change, when the element would have a suffix of more than 8
zero elements, we emit the array constant as a packed struct of its initial
portion followed by a zeroinitializer constant for the trailing zero portion.

In passing, I found a bug where SemaInit would sometimes walk the entire array
when checking an initializer that only covers the first few elements; that's
fixed here to unblock testing of the rest.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D47166

llvm-svn: 333044

show more ...

Suppress -Wmissing-braces warning when aggregate-initializing a struct with a single field that is itself an aggregate.

In C++, such initialization of std::array<T, N> types is guaranteed to work by

Suppress -Wmissing-braces warning when aggregate-initializing a struct with a single field that is itself an aggregate.

In C++, such initialization of std::array<T, N> types is guaranteed to work by
the standard, is completely idiomatic, and the "suggested" alternative from
Clang was technically invalid.

llvm-svn: 314838

show more ...

Fix defaulted-functions-in-C++98 extension to give the functions the same
effect they would have in C++11. In particular, they do not prevent
value-initialization from performing zero-initialization,

Fix defaulted-functions-in-C++98 extension to give the functions the same
effect they would have in C++11. In particular, they do not prevent
value-initialization from performing zero-initialization, nor do they prevent a
struct from being an aggregate.

llvm-svn: 290229

show more ...

[c++17] P0135R1: Guaranteed copy elision.

When an object of class type is initialized from a prvalue of the same type
(ignoring cv qualifications), use the prvalue to initialize the object directly

[c++17] P0135R1: Guaranteed copy elision.

When an object of class type is initialized from a prvalue of the same type
(ignoring cv qualifications), use the prvalue to initialize the object directly
instead of inserting a redundant elidable call to a copy constructor.

llvm-svn: 288866

show more ...

Fix crash in access check for aggregate initialization of base classes. It's
not obvious how to access-check these, so pick a conservative rule until we get
feedback from CWG.

llvm-svn: 262966

Implemented delayed processing of 'unavailable' checking, just like with 'deprecated'.

Fixes <rdar://problem/15584219> and <rdar://problem/12241361>.

This change looks large, but all it does is reu

Implemented delayed processing of 'unavailable' checking, just like with 'deprecated'.

Fixes <rdar://problem/15584219> and <rdar://problem/12241361>.

This change looks large, but all it does is reuse and consolidate
the delayed diagnostic logic for deprecation warnings with unavailability
warnings. By doing so, it showed various inconsistencies between the
diagnostics, which were close, but not consistent. It also revealed
some missing "note:"'s in the deprecated diagnostics that were showing
up in the unavailable diagnostics, etc.

This change also changes the wording of the core deprecation diagnostics.
Instead of saying "function has been explicitly marked deprecated"
we now saw "'X' has been been explicitly marked deprecated". It
turns out providing a bit more context is useful, and often we
got the actual term wrong or it was not very precise
(e.g., "function" instead of "destructor"). By just saying the name
of the thing that is deprecated/deleted/unavailable we define
this issue away. This diagnostic can likely be further wordsmithed
to be shorter.

llvm-svn: 197627

show more ...

List-initialization via constructor part 1. Still needs: pretty-printing, overloading, initializer_list.

llvm-svn: 147145

Update all tests other than Driver/std.cpp to use -std=c++11 rather than
-std=c++0x. Patch by Ahmed Charles!

llvm-svn: 141900

Implement the suggested resolution of WG21 N3307 issue 19: When determining whether a class is an aggregate in C++0x, treat all functions which are neither deleted nor defaulted as user-provided, not

Implement the suggested resolution of WG21 N3307 issue 19: When determining whether a class is an aggregate in C++0x, treat all functions which are neither deleted nor defaulted as user-provided, not just special member functions. The wording of the standard only defines the term "user-provided" for special member functions, but the intent seems to be that any function can be user-provided.

llvm-svn: 139111

show more ...

Revert 135177 to fix PR10363.

Revert "For C++11, do more checking of initializer lists up-front, enabling some subset of the final functionality. C just leaves the function early. C++98 runs through

Revert 135177 to fix PR10363.

Revert "For C++11, do more checking of initializer lists up-front, enabling some subset of the final functionality. C just leaves the function early. C++98 runs through the same code path, but has no changed functionality either."

This reverts commit ac420c5053d6aa41d59f782caad9e46e5baaf2c2.

llvm-svn: 135210

show more ...

For C++11, do more checking of initializer lists up-front, enabling some subset of the final functionality. C just leaves the function early. C++98 runs through the same code path, but has no changed

For C++11, do more checking of initializer lists up-front, enabling some subset of the final functionality. C just leaves the function early. C++98 runs through the same code path, but has no changed functionality either.
This is a first baby step towards supporting generalized initializer lists. This also removes an aggregate
test case that was just plain wrong, assuming that non-aggregates couldn't be initialized with initializer lists
in C++11 mode.

llvm-svn: 135177

show more ...

Clean up trivial default constructors now.

hasTrivialDefaultConstructor() really really means it now.

Also implement a fun standards bug regarding aggregates. Doug, if you'd
like, I can un-implemen

Clean up trivial default constructors now.

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

show more ...

Introduce Type::isStructureOrClassType(), which does the obvious
thing. Audit all uses of Type::isStructure(), changing those calls to
isStructureOrClassType() as needed (which is alsmost
everywhere)

Introduce Type::isStructureOrClassType(), which does the obvious
thing. Audit all uses of Type::isStructure(), changing those calls to
isStructureOrClassType() as needed (which is alsmost
everywhere). Fixes the remaining failure in Boost.Utility/Swap.

llvm-svn: 102386

show more ...

Improve our handling of user-defined conversions as part of overload
resolution. There are two sources of problems involving user-defined
conversions that this change eliminates, along with providing

Improve our handling of user-defined conversions as part of overload
resolution. There are two sources of problems involving user-defined
conversions that this change eliminates, along with providing simpler
interfaces for checking implicit conversions:

- It eliminates a case of infinite recursion found in Boost.

- It eliminates the search for the constructor needed to copy a temporary
generated by an implicit conversion from overload
resolution. Overload resolution assumes that, if it gets a value
of the parameter's class type (or a derived class thereof), there
is a way to copy if... even if there isn't. We now model this
properly.

llvm-svn: 101680

show more ...

When pretty-printing tag types, only print the tag if we're in C (and
therefore not creating ElaboratedTypes, which are still pretty-printed
with the written tag).

Most of these testcase changes wer

When pretty-printing tag types, only print the tag if we're in C (and
therefore not creating ElaboratedTypes, which are still pretty-printed
with the written tag).

Most of these testcase changes were done by script, so don't feel too
sorry for my fingers.

llvm-svn: 98149

show more ...

Use new initialization code when dealing with [dcl.init.aggr]p12. This fixes the bug where array elements and member initializers weren't copied correctly.

llvm-svn: 94340