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 b

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

show more ...

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

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 6542cb55a3eb115b1c3592514590a19987ffc498.

show more ...

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 n

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

show more ...

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 "Rewording "static_assert" diagnostics"

This reverts commit b7e77ff25fb2412f6ab6d6cc756666b0e2f97bd3.

Reason: Broke sanitizer builds bots + libcxx. 'static assertion
expression is not an int

Revert "Rewording "static_assert" diagnostics"

This reverts commit b7e77ff25fb2412f6ab6d6cc756666b0e2f97bd3.

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

show more ...

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 b

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

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 a constant evaluator crash on a NULL-type expr.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D124384

[clang] retain type sugar in auto / template argument deduction

This implements the following changes:
* AutoType retains sugared deduced-as-type.
* Template argument deduction machinery analyses th

[clang] retain type sugar in auto / template argument deduction

This implements the following changes:
* AutoType retains sugared deduced-as-type.
* Template argument deduction machinery analyses the sugared type all the way
down. It would previously lose the sugar on first recursion.
* Undeduced AutoType will be properly canonicalized, including the constraint
template arguments.
* Remove the decltype node created from the decltype(auto) deduction.

As a result, we start seeing sugared types in a lot more test cases,
including some which showed very unfriendly `type-parameter-*-*` types.

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

Reviewed By: rsmith, #libc, ldionne

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110216

show more ...

Revert "[clang] retain type sugar in auto / template argument deduction"

This reverts commit 4d8fff477e024698facd89741cc6cf996708d598.

[clang] retain type sugar in auto / template argument deduction

This implements the following changes:
* AutoType retains sugared deduced-as-type.
* Template argument deduction machinery analyses th

[clang] retain type sugar in auto / template argument deduction

This implements the following changes:
* AutoType retains sugared deduced-as-type.
* Template argument deduction machinery analyses the sugared type all the way
down. It would previously lose the sugar on first recursion.
* Undeduced AutoType will be properly canonicalized, including the constraint
template arguments.
* Remove the decltype node created from the decltype(auto) deduction.

As a result, we start seeing sugared types in a lot more test cases,
including some which showed very unfriendly `type-parameter-*-*` types.

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

Reviewed By: rsmith

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110216

show more ...

Revert "[clang] retain type sugar in auto / template argument deduction"

This reverts commit 9b6036deedf28e10d797fc4ca734d57680d18053.
Breaks two libc++ tests.

[clang] retain type sugar in auto / template argument deduction

This implements the following changes:
* AutoType retains sugared deduced-as-type.
* Template argument deduction machinery analyses th

[clang] retain type sugar in auto / template argument deduction

This implements the following changes:
* AutoType retains sugared deduced-as-type.
* Template argument deduction machinery analyses the sugared type all the way
down. It would previously lose the sugar on first recursion.
* Undeduced AutoType will be properly canonicalized, including the constraint
template arguments.
* Remove the decltype node created from the decltype(auto) deduction.

As a result, we start seeing sugared types in a lot more test cases,
including some which showed very unfriendly `type-parameter-*-*` types.

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

Reviewed By: rsmith

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110216

show more ...

[Sema] Avoid crash in CheckEnumConstant with contains-error expressions

Fixes https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=51554

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D108451

[clang] NFC: include non friendly types and missing sugar in test expectations

The dump of all diagnostics of all tests under `clang/test/{CXX,SemaCXX,SemaTemplate}` was analyzed , and all the cases

[clang] NFC: include non friendly types and missing sugar in test expectations

The dump of all diagnostics of all tests under `clang/test/{CXX,SemaCXX,SemaTemplate}` was analyzed , and all the cases where there were obviously bad canonical types being printed, like `type-parameter-*-*` and `<overloaded function type>` were identified. Also a small amount of cases of missing sugar were analyzed.

This patch then spells those explicitly in the test expectations, as preparatory work for future fixes for these problems.

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

Reviewed By: rsmith

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110210

show more ...

[clang] Fix CallExpr dependence bit may not respect all its arguments.

Before this patch, the dependence of CallExpr was only computed in the
constructor, the dependence bits might not reflect truth

[clang] Fix CallExpr dependence bit may not respect all its arguments.

Before this patch, the dependence of CallExpr was only computed in the
constructor, the dependence bits might not reflect truth -- some arguments might
be not set (nullptr) during this time, e.g. CXXDefaultArgExpr will be set via
the setArg method in the later parsing stage, so we need to recompute the
dependence bits.

show more ...

[clang] Do not crash when ArgTy is null in CheckArgAlignment

This can happen around RecoveryExpr.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103825

[clang] Fix assert() crash when checking undeduced arg alignment

There already was a check for undeduced and incomplete types, but it
failed to trigger when outer type (SubstTemplateTypeParm in test

[clang] Fix assert() crash when checking undeduced arg alignment

There already was a check for undeduced and incomplete types, but it
failed to trigger when outer type (SubstTemplateTypeParm in test) looked
fine, but inner type was not.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D100667

show more ...

Fix assertion failure due to incorrect dependence bits on a DeclRefExpr
that can only be set correctly after instantiating the initializer for a
variable.

[AST] Enhance the const expression evaluator to support error-dependent exprs.

Fix a crash when evaluating a constexpr function which contains
recovery-exprs. https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4

[AST] Enhance the const expression evaluator to support error-dependent exprs.

Fix a crash when evaluating a constexpr function which contains
recovery-exprs. https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46837

Would be nice to have constant expression evaluator support general template
value-dependent expressions, but it requires more work.

This patch is a good start I think, to handle the error-only
value-dependent expressions.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D84637

show more ...

Consistent spelling in diagnostics: {l,r}value instead of {l,r}-value

As Richard Smith pointed out in the review of D90123, both the C and C++
standard call it lvalue and rvalue, so let's stick to t

Consistent spelling in diagnostics: {l,r}value instead of {l,r}-value

As Richard Smith pointed out in the review of D90123, both the C and C++
standard call it lvalue and rvalue, so let's stick to the same spelling
in Clang.

show more ...

[AST][RecoveryExpr] Fix a crash on undeduced type.

We should not capture the type if the function return type is undeduced.

Reviewed By: adamcz

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D873

[AST][RecoveryExpr] Fix a crash on undeduced type.

We should not capture the type if the function return type is undeduced.

Reviewed By: adamcz

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D87350

show more ...

[AST][RecoveryAST] Preserve the type by default for recovery expression.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D82657