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 ...

clang: Fix minor grammar-o in diag added in c354b2e3b

[Clang] Add note for bad conversion when expression is pointer to forward-declared type

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D85390

Test what happens when tag lookup and redeclaration lookup disagree

Clang has a diagnostic for the what happens when an elaborated type
implicitly creates a tag declaration and the initial tag looku

Test what happens when tag lookup and redeclaration lookup disagree

Clang has a diagnostic for the what happens when an elaborated type
implicitly creates a tag declaration and the initial tag lookup fails,
but the redeclaration lookup succeeds and finds a non-tag type. However,
it wasn't tested, and looked like dead code. After much staring, we
discovered how to exercise it, and are now committing the test for
posterity.

In this example, the tag lookup will not find A, but then when we go to
insert a declaration of A at global scope, we discover the template
friend, which is not a tag type.

struct C {
template <typename> friend struct A;
};
struct B {
struct A *p;
};

llvm-svn: 283235

show more ...

When we generate a redeclaration for an
elaborated-type-specifier, place it in the correct
context.

llvm-svn: 208799

Allow CorrectTypo to add/modify nested name qualifiers to typos that
are otherwise too short to try to correct.

The TODOs added to two of the tests are for existing deficiencies in the
typo correcti

Allow CorrectTypo to add/modify nested name qualifiers to typos that
are otherwise too short to try to correct.

The TODOs added to two of the tests are for existing deficiencies in the
typo correction code that could be exposed by using longer identifiers.

llvm-svn: 158109

show more ...

When we run into an error parsing or type-checking the left-hand side
of a binary expression, continue on and parse the right-hand side of
the binary expression anyway, but don't call the semantic ac

When we run into an error parsing or type-checking the left-hand side
of a binary expression, continue on and parse the right-hand side of
the binary expression anyway, but don't call the semantic actions to
type-check. Previously, we would see the error and then, effectively,
skip tokens until the end of the statement.

The result should be more useful recovery, both in the normal case
(we'll actually see errors beyond the first one in a statement), but
it also helps code completion do a much better job, because we do
"real" code completion on the right-hand side of an invalid binary
expression rather than completing with the recovery completion. For
example, given

x = p->y

if there is no variable named "x", we can still complete after the p->
as a member expression. Along the recovery path, we would have
completed after the "->" as if we were in an expression context, which
is mostly useless.

llvm-svn: 114225

show more ...

Whenever we complain about a failed initialization of a function or
method parameter, provide a note pointing at the parameter itself so
the user does not have to manually look for the function/metho

Whenever we complain about a failed initialization of a function or
method parameter, provide a note pointing at the parameter itself so
the user does not have to manually look for the function/method being
called and match up parameters to arguments. For example, we now get:

t.c:4:5: warning: incompatible pointer types passing 'long *' to
parameter of
type 'int *' [-pedantic]
f(long_ptr);
^~~~~~~~
t.c:1:13: note: passing argument to parameter 'x' here
void f(int *x);
^

llvm-svn: 102038

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 ...

Switch initialization of parameters in a call over to
InitializationSequence (when a FunctionDecl is present). This required
a few small fixes to initialization sequences:

- Make sure to use the a

Switch initialization of parameters in a call over to
InitializationSequence (when a FunctionDecl is present). This required
a few small fixes to initialization sequences:

- Make sure to use the adjusted parameter type for initialization of
function parameters.
- Implement transparent union calling semantics in C

llvm-svn: 91902

show more ...

Update tests to use %clang_cc1 instead of 'clang-cc' or 'clang -cc1'.
- This is designed to make it obvious that %clang_cc1 is a "test variable"
which is substituted. It is '%clang_cc1' instead o

Update tests to use %clang_cc1 instead of 'clang-cc' or 'clang -cc1'.
- This is designed to make it obvious that %clang_cc1 is a "test variable"
which is substituted. It is '%clang_cc1' instead of '%clang -cc1' because it
can be useful to redefine what gets run as 'clang -cc1' (for example, to set
a default target).

llvm-svn: 91446

show more ...

Implement support for comparing pointers with <, >, <=, >=, ==, and !=
in C++, taking into account conversions to the "composite pointer
type" so that we can compare, e.g., a pointer to a derived cla

Implement support for comparing pointers with <, >, <=, >=, ==, and !=
in C++, taking into account conversions to the "composite pointer
type" so that we can compare, e.g., a pointer to a derived class to a
pointer to a base class.

Also, upgrade the "comparing distinct pointer types" from a warning to
an error for C++, since this is clearly an error. Turns out that we
hadn't gone through and audited this code for C++, ever.

Fixes <rdar://problem/6816420>.

llvm-svn: 70829

show more ...

Rename clang to clang-cc.

Tests and drivers updated, still need to shuffle dirs.

llvm-svn: 67602

Print the context of tag types as part of pretty-printing, e.g.,

struct N::M::foo

llvm-svn: 67284

When we see a reference to a struct, class, or union like "struct X"
that is neither a definition nor a forward declaration and where X has
not yet been declared as a tag, introduce a declaration
int

When we see a reference to a struct, class, or union like "struct X"
that is neither a definition nor a forward declaration and where X has
not yet been declared as a tag, introduce a declaration
into the appropriate scope (which is likely *not* to be the current
scope). The rules for the placement of the declaration differ slightly
in C and C++, so we implement both and test the various corner
cases. This implementation isn't 100% correct due to some lingering
issues with the function prototype scope (for a function parameter
list) not being the same scope as the scope of the function
definition. Testcase is FIXME'd; this probably isn't an important issue.

Addresses <rdar://problem/6484805>.

llvm-svn: 62014

show more ...