aaron.ballman added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/tools/libclang/CXType.cpp:132
+ if (!(TU->ParsingOptions & CXTranslationUnit_IncludeAttributedTypes) &&
+ ATT->getAttrKind() != attr::AddressSpace) {
return MakeCXType(ATT->getModifiedType(), TU);
----------------
leonardchan wrote:
> aaron.ballman wrote:
> > leonardchan wrote:
> > > aaron.ballman wrote:
> > > > leonardchan wrote:
> > > > > aaron.ballman wrote:
> > > > > > This change seems surprising -- if the parsing options say the
> > > > > > caller does not want attributed types, why are we returning one
> > > > > > anyway for address space?
> > > > > This has to do with ensuring `clang_getAddressSpace` still returns
> > > > > the proper address_space. It does this by essentially checking the
> > > > > qualifiers of the type, which we now attach to the `AttributedType`
> > > > > whereas before it was attached to the modified type.
> > > > >
> > > > > This extra condition is necessary for ensuring that calling
> > > > > `clang_getAddressSpace` points to the qualified AttributedType
> > > > > instead of the unqualified modified type.
> > > > My fear is that this will be breaking assumptions in third-party code.
> > > > If someone disables `CXTranslationUnit_IncludeAttributedTypes`, they
> > > > are unlikely to expect to receive an `AttributedType` and may react
> > > > poorly to it.
> > > Instead check if the type is address_space attributed and apply the
> > > qualifiers the modified type.
> > Sure, they can always modify their code to handle it gracefully, but it's a
> > silent, breaking change to a somewhat stable API which is why I was
> > prodding about it.
> >
> > After talking with @rsmith, we're thinking the correct change here is to
> > return the attributed type when the user asks for it, but return the
> > equivalent type rather than the modified type if the user doesn't want
> > attribute sugar (for all attributes, not just address spaces). This way,
> > when a user asks for CXType for one of these, they always get a correct
> > type but sometimes it has attribute type sugar and sometimes it doesn't,
> > depending on the parsing options.
> >
> > This is still a silent, breaking change in behavior, which is unfortunate.
> > It should probably come with a mention in the release notes about the
> > change to the API and some unit tests as well.
> Ok. In the case of qualifiers then, should the equivalent type still contain
> the address_space qualifiers when creating the AttributedType?
I believe so, yes -- that would ensure it's the minimally desugared type which
the type is canonically equivalent to.
Repository:
rC Clang
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D55447/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D55447
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
