ABataev added inline comments.
================
Comment at: include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td:7787-7789
@@ -7786,5 +7786,5 @@
"bit fields cannot be used to specify storage in a map clause">;
-def err_omp_array_section_in_rightmost_expression : Error<
- "array section can only be associated with the rightmost variable in a map
clause expression">;
+def err_cannot_prove_omp_array_section_specifies_contiguous_storage : Error<
+ "can't prove employed array section specifies contiguous storage">;
def err_omp_union_type_not_allowed : Error<
"mapped storage cannot be derived from a union">;
----------------
'can't prove' again is not good for an error. Still think this must be a
warning or you don't need to diagnose anything if you can't make a decision. In
this case, you must consider specified array section as a contiguous.
================
Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaOpenMP.cpp:9016-9023
@@ +9015,10 @@
+
+ // If this is an array subscript, it refers to the whole size if the size of
+ // the dimension is constant and equals 1. Also, an array section assumes the
+ // format of an array subscript if no colon is used.
+ if (isa<ArraySubscriptExpr>(E) || (OASE && OASE->getColonLoc().isInvalid()))
{
+ if (auto *ATy = dyn_cast<ConstantArrayType>(BaseQTy.getTypePtr()))
+ return ATy->getSize().getSExtValue() == 1;
+ return false;
+ }
+
----------------
I agree with all your examples except for this one
```
#pragma omp target map(a[:][arg:])
```
For me, this is valid if you can't prove it is non-contiguous. You should
consider this as a possibly contiguous. If it is not contiguous, it is user's
problem. But if he needs to use such form of expression, I don't see why we
should not allow him to do this.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D17547
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
