Second Lit tests C++11 compatibility patch: using preprocessor to filter expected-error
Hi Clang developers, We here at Sony are continuing to update the Lit tests for C++ dialects compatibility. Attached is the second patch. (As a reference, here is the link to the discussion on the previous Lit patch. http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/cfe-commits/Week-of-Mon-20150727/134667.html) In this second patch, there is 1 complicated change and 3 simple changes. Here is the complicated change first. test/Sema/switch-1.c This test verifies the diagnostics for integer overflows. Due to C++11's more strict requirements on constant-expressions in 5.19p2 [expr.const], The diagnostics have changed from "overflow in expression" to "not a constant expression". Usually we would create a C++11 version of the switch-1.c file. But here we propose a novel approach to "#ifdef" the expected diagnostics. (We hope to use this approach for all similar cases in the future.) Normally '// expected-error' does not honor any '#ifdef'. But if we first preprocess the source into a temporary file, only the valid '#ifdef' sections remain. We then run the preprocessed file at the desired dialect. The main downside to this approach is If the test fails, the errors are reported on the temporary file, not on the original file, and the line numbers of these two files do not match Here are the simple changes. test/Analysis/temp-obj-dtors-cfg-output.cpp This test verifies CFG dump for temporary destructors C++11 no longer has the following implicit cast. (ImplicitCastExpr, NoOp, const struct D) We modified the test using the #ifdef approach to have the preprocessor generate the desired CHECK lines. test/CodeCompletion/ordinary-name.cpp This test verifies for code completion patterns. Since C++11 has more keywords than C++98, We made this test to be C++98 specific, and create a separate C++11 version. test/CodeCompletion/ordinary-name-cxx11.cpp This is the C++11 specific version of the code completion. This test added patterns for the following keywords: char16, char32, noexcept, nullptr, sizeof..., auto, decltype, char16_t, char32_t test/Sema/thread-specifier.c Tests for __thread specifier at various C++ dialects We made the default RUN line explicit to be at -std=c++98 If there is anything that seems confusing to you, please let me know. I would be more than happy to expand on the reasons for the these changes. Thanks, Charles lit_22.patch Description: lit_22.patch ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
RE: Second Lit tests C++11 compatibility patch: using preprocessor to filter expected-error
Hi Richard and Justin, > What's the upside to this approach? AFAICT it makes the test harder to read > and errors less informative due to pointing at the wrong lines, but (at least > in switch-1.c) it doesn't actually reduce any code duplication or anything > like that. What is this gaining us apart from not having to create one more > file? Thank you Justin. Our original intention was to get the Lit tests to run at any default C++ dialect. We first discovered that FileCheck does not respect #ifdef since it does not know about pre-defined macros. So we figured if we preprocess the source first, the preprocessor will filter the #ifdef sections and the output will feed nicely into FileCheck. The upside is the test can run at the default dialect in addition to explicitly specified dialect. The downside is, as you mentioned, the errors diagnostics would point to the wrong lines. > The only thing novel about this approach is using the preprocessor to achieve > it. -verify *does* respect #ifdef, and we have a lot of tests that rely on > that. Thank you Richard. We erroneously assumed that “// CHECK:” and “// expected-error” work the same way. But now we realized that assumption was wrong. In light this discussion, I have removed the preprocessing to temporary step for all tests. The attached patch (Lit_24.patch) revised 2 test fixes relative to the previous patch (Lit_22.patch) test/Analysis/temp-obj-dtors-cfg-output.cpp This test uses FileCheck to check for CFG dump. Instead of using #ifdef for the dialect specific “// CHECK:” lines, I have created 2 check-prefixes “CXX11” and “CXX98”. The pre-process step have been removed. test/Sema/switch-1.c This test uses –verify to check for integer overflows diagnostics. The pre-process step have been removed. The #ifdef is kept since it works with -verify. Please let me know how you feel about this patch. Sincerely, Charles From: meta...@gmail.com [mailto:meta...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Richard Smith Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 1:07 PM To: Li, Charles Cc: cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org Subject: Re: Second Lit tests C++11 compatibility patch: using preprocessor to filter expected-error On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 9:56 AM, Li, Charles via cfe-commits mailto:cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org>> wrote: Hi Clang developers, We here at Sony are continuing to update the Lit tests for C++ dialects compatibility. Attached is the second patch. (As a reference, here is the link to the discussion on the previous Lit patch. http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/cfe-commits/Week-of-Mon-20150727/134667.html) In this second patch, there is 1 complicated change and 3 simple changes. Here is the complicated change first. test/Sema/switch-1.c This test verifies the diagnostics for integer overflows. Due to C++11’s more strict requirements on constant-expressions in 5.19p2 [expr.const], The diagnostics have changed from “overflow in expression” to “not a constant expression”. Usually we would create a C++11 version of the switch-1.c file. But here we propose a novel approach to “#ifdef” the expected diagnostics. (We hope to use this approach for all similar cases in the future.) Normally ‘// expected-error’ does not honor any ‘#ifdef’. But if we first preprocess the source into a temporary file, only the valid ‘#ifdef’ sections remain. We then run the preprocessed file at the desired dialect. The main downside to this approach is If the test fails, the errors are reported on the temporary file, not on the original file, and the line numbers of these two files do not match The only thing novel about this approach is using the preprocessor to achieve it. -verify *does* respect #ifdef, and we have a lot of tests that rely on that. Here are the simple changes. test/Analysis/temp-obj-dtors-cfg-output.cpp This test verifies CFG dump for temporary destructors C++11 no longer has the following implicit cast. (ImplicitCastExpr, NoOp, const struct D) We modified the test using the #ifdef approach to have the preprocessor generate the desired CHECK lines. test/CodeCompletion/ordinary-name.cpp This test verifies for code completion patterns. Since C++11 has more keywords than C++98, We made this test to be C++98 specific, and create a separate C++11 version. test/CodeCompletion/ordinary-name-cxx11.cpp This is the C++11 specific version of the code completion. This test added patterns for the following keywords: char16, char32, noexcept, nullptr, sizeof..., auto, decltype, char16_t, char32_t test/Sema/thread-specifier.c Tests for __thread specifier at various C++ dialects We made the default RUN line explicit to be at –std=c++98 If there is anything that seems confusing to you, please let me know. I would be more than happy to expand on the reasons for the these changes. Thanks, Charles
RE: Second Lit tests C++11 compatibility patch: using preprocessor to filter expected-error
Hi Richard,
I have modified the “expected-“ lines as you requested.
Cheers,
Charles
From: meta...@gmail.com [mailto:meta...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Richard Smith
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 5:41 PM
To: Li, Charles
Cc: Justin Bogner; cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
Subject: Re: Second Lit tests C++11 compatibility patch: using preprocessor to
filter expected-error
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 5:15 PM, Li, Charles via cfe-commits
mailto:cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
Hi Richard and Justin,
> What's the upside to this approach? AFAICT it makes the test harder to read
> and errors less informative due to pointing at the wrong lines, but (at least
> in switch-1.c) it doesn't actually reduce any code duplication or anything
> like that. What is this gaining us apart from not having to create one more
> file?
Thank you Justin.
Our original intention was to get the Lit tests to run at any default C++
dialect.
We first discovered that FileCheck does not respect #ifdef since it does not
know about pre-defined macros.
So we figured if we preprocess the source first, the preprocessor will filter
the #ifdef sections and the output will feed nicely into FileCheck.
The upside is the test can run at the default dialect in addition to explicitly
specified dialect.
The downside is, as you mentioned, the errors diagnostics would point to the
wrong lines.
> The only thing novel about this approach is using the preprocessor to achieve
> it. -verify *does* respect #ifdef, and we have a lot of tests that rely on
> that.
Thank you Richard.
We erroneously assumed that “// CHECK:” and “// expected-error” work the same
way.
But now we realized that assumption was wrong.
In light this discussion, I have removed the preprocessing to temporary step
for all tests.
The attached patch (Lit_24.patch) revised 2 test fixes relative to the previous
patch (Lit_22.patch)
test/Analysis/temp-obj-dtors-cfg-output.cpp
This test uses FileCheck to check for CFG dump.
Instead of using #ifdef for the dialect specific “// CHECK:” lines,
I have created 2 check-prefixes “CXX11” and “CXX98”.
The pre-process step have been removed.
test/Sema/switch-1.c
This test uses –verify to check for integer overflows diagnostics.
The pre-process step have been removed.
The #ifdef is kept since it works with -verify.
Instead of duplicating the code, you can do this:
case blah:
#if __cplusplus >= 201103L
// expected-error@-2 {{error 2 lines above}}
#else
// expected-error@-4 {{error 4 lines above}}
#endif
Please let me know how you feel about this patch.
Sincerely,
Charles
From: meta...@gmail.com<mailto:meta...@gmail.com>
[mailto:meta...@gmail.com<mailto:meta...@gmail.com>] On Behalf Of Richard Smith
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 1:07 PM
To: Li, Charles
Cc: cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org<mailto:cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org>
Subject: Re: Second Lit tests C++11 compatibility patch: using preprocessor to
filter expected-error
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 9:56 AM, Li, Charles via cfe-commits
mailto:cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
Hi Clang developers,
We here at Sony are continuing to update the Lit tests for C++ dialects
compatibility.
Attached is the second patch. (As a reference, here is the link to the
discussion on the previous Lit patch.
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/cfe-commits/Week-of-Mon-20150727/134667.html)
In this second patch, there is 1 complicated change and 3 simple changes.
Here is the complicated change first.
test/Sema/switch-1.c
This test verifies the diagnostics for integer overflows.
Due to C++11’s more strict requirements on constant-expressions in 5.19p2
[expr.const],
The diagnostics have changed from “overflow in expression” to “not a constant
expression”.
Usually we would create a C++11 version of the switch-1.c file.
But here we propose a novel approach to “#ifdef” the expected diagnostics.
(We hope to use this approach for all similar cases in the future.)
Normally ‘// expected-error’ does not honor any ‘#ifdef’.
But if we first preprocess the source into a temporary file, only the valid
‘#ifdef’ sections remain.
We then run the preprocessed file at the desired dialect.
The main downside to this approach is If the test fails, the errors are
reported on the temporary file, not on the original file, and the line numbers
of these two files do not match
The only thing novel about this approach is using the preprocessor to achieve
it. -verify *does* respect #ifdef, and we have a lot of tests that rely on that.
Here are the simple changes.
test/Analysis/temp-obj-dtors-cfg-output.cpp
This test verifies CFG dump for temporary destructors
C++11 no longer has the following implicit cast.
(ImplicitCastExpr, NoOp, const struct D)
We modified the test using the #ifdef approach to have the preprocessor
generate the desired CHECK lines.
test/CodeCompletion/ordinary-name.cpp
This
RE: Second Lit tests C++11 compatibility patch: using preprocessor to filter expected-error
Hi Justin and Richard,
>> +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -E -C -P -triple x86_64-apple-darwin10 %s > %t1.c
>> +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify -triple
>> +x86_64-apple-darwin10 %t1.c
> I think you forgot to switch this one to stop preprocessing first.
Thank you for catching this. I have removed it for this patch.
> +#if (!defined(__cplusplus)) || (__cplusplus <= 199711L) // C or C++03 or
> earlier modes
> You can simplify that to:
> #if __cplusplus <= 199711L
> Otherwise, this LGTM.
Thank you, I have made the simplifications
> __cplusplus will expand to 0 inside a #if in C (as will any un#defined
> identifier).
As an aside, I did a "-E -dM" and __cplusplus is not in the macro dump.
Likewise, having __cplusplus stand alone inside a t.c file will not cause
preprocessor to replace it with 0.
It appears the macro replacement of __cplusplus is context sensitive.
Cheers,
Charles
-Original Message-
From: Justin Bogner [mailto:jus...@justinbogner.com] On Behalf Of Justin Bogner
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 9:28 PM
To: Li, Charles
Cc: Richard Smith; cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
Subject: Re: Second Lit tests C++11 compatibility patch: using preprocessor to
filter expected-error
"Li, Charles" writes:
> Hi Richard,
>
> I have modified the “expected-“ lines as you requested.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Charles
>
> From: meta...@gmail.com [mailto:meta...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
> Richard Smith
> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 5:41 PM
> To: Li, Charles
> Cc: Justin Bogner; cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
> Subject: Re: Second Lit tests C++11 compatibility patch: using
> preprocessor to filter expected-error
>
> On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 5:15 PM, Li, Charles via cfe-commits <
> cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Richard and Justin,
>
>> What's the upside to this approach? AFAICT it makes the test harder
>> to read
> and errors less informative due to pointing at the wrong lines, but
> (at least in switch-1.c) it doesn't actually reduce any code
> duplication or anything like that. What is this gaining us apart from
> not having to create one more file?
>
> Thank you Justin.
>
> Our original intention was to get the Lit tests to run at any default
> C++ dialect.
>
> We first discovered that FileCheck does not respect #ifdef since it
> does not know about pre-defined macros.
>
> So we figured if we preprocess the source first, the preprocessor will
> filter the #ifdef sections and the output will feed nicely into FileCheck.
>
> The upside is the test can run at the default dialect in addition to
> explicitly specified dialect.
>
> The downside is, as you mentioned, the errors diagnostics would point
> to the wrong lines.
>
>> The only thing novel about this approach is using the preprocessor to
> achieve it. -verify *does* respect #ifdef, and we have a lot of tests
> that rely on that.
>
> Thank you Richard.
>
> We erroneously assumed that “// CHECK:” and “// expected-error” work
> the same way.
>
> But now we realized that assumption was wrong.
>
> In light this discussion, I have removed the preprocessing to
> temporary step for all tests.
>
> The attached patch (Lit_24.patch) revised 2 test fixes relative to the
> previous patch (Lit_22.patch)
>
> test/Analysis/temp-obj-dtors-cfg-output.cpp
>
> This test uses FileCheck to check for CFG dump.
>
> Instead of using #ifdef for the dialect specific “// CHECK:”
> lines,
>
> I have created 2 check-prefixes “CXX11” and “CXX98”.
>
> The pre-process step have been removed.
>
> test/Sema/switch-1.c
>
> This test uses –verify to check for integer overflows diagnostics.
>
> The pre-process step have been removed.
>
> The #ifdef is kept since it works with -verify.
>
> Instead of duplicating the code, you can do this:
>
> case blah:
>
> #if __cplusplus >= 201103L
>
> // expected-error@-2 {{error 2 lines above}}
>
> #else
>
> // expected-error@-4 {{error 4 lines above}}
>
> #endif
>
> Please let me know how you feel about this patch.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Charles
>
> From: meta...@gmail.com [mailto:meta...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Richard
> Smith
> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 1:07 PM
> To: Li, Charles
> Cc: cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
> Subject: Re: Second Lit tests C++11 compatibility patch: using
> preprocessor to filter expected-error
>
> On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 9:56 AM, Li, Charles via cfe-commits <
> cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Clang developers,
>
> We here at Sony are continuing to update the Lit tests
[Tests] Making Lit Tests C++11 compatibile
Hello Clang developers,
I am back again with another patch to make Clang Lit tests C++11 compatible.
There are 26 tests in total.
These are mainly diagnostics verifications where C++98/03 and C++11 differ.
I tried to preserve as much coverage as possible.
Unless otherwise stated, these tests have their RUN line expanded to run at:
default C++ dialect, C++98 and C++11.
Here are the description of what I did with each in the order as they appear in
the patch.
test/CXX/class.access/class.friend/p2-cxx03.cpp
Only verify the following diagnostic on C++03 and earlier.
"non-class friend type 'T' is a C++11 extension"
test/CXX/dcl.dcl/dcl.spec/dcl.fct.spec/p6.cpp
Only verify the following diagnostic on C++03 and earlier.
"explicit conversion functions are a C++11 extension"
test/CXX/dcl.dcl/dcl.spec/dcl.type/dcl.type.elab/p3.cpp
Only verify the following diagnostic on C++03 and earlier.
"befriending enumeration type 'enum E' is a C++11 extension"
test/CXX/temp/temp.fct.spec/temp.arg.explicit/p3.cpp
Verify for different diagnostic between C++03 and earlier vs C++11 and later
C++03: conversion from string literal to 'char *' is deprecated
C++11: ISO C++11 does not allow conversion from string literal to 'char *'
test/CodeGen/ubsan-type-blacklist.cpp
Relaxed FileCheck string to accommodate changes in LLVM-IR on actual argument
type for "bar".
C++03: %class.Bar* @bar
C++11: { i8** }* @bar
test/FixIt/fixit-vexing-parse.cpp
Set this test to always run at C++98.
C++11 coverage is provided by fixit-vexing-parse-cxx0x.cpp.
test/SemaCXX/addr-of-overloaded-function.cpp
Only verify the following diagnostic on C++03 and earlier.
"default template arguments for a function template are a C++11 extension"
test/SemaCXX/const-cast.cpp
Only verify the following diagnostic on C++03 and earlier.
"rvalue references are a C++11 extension"
test/SemaCXX/convert-to-bool.cpp
Only verify the following diagnostic on C++03 and earlier.
"explicit conversion functions are a C++11 extension"
test/SemaCXX/copy-initialization.cpp
Only verify the following diagnostic on C++03 and earlier.
"rvalue references are a C++11 extension"
test/SemaCXX/cxx0x-return-init-list.cpp
Force this test to always run at C++03 (-std=c++98).
This test verifies for very basic initializer return support in C++98.
It checks for the following diagnostic at C++03
"generalized initializer lists are a C++11 extension"
test/SemaCXX/decltype-crash.cpp
Force this test to always run at C++03 (-std=c++98).
This test verifies against decltype crash back in 2009.
test/SemaCXX/gnu-flags.cpp
Only verify the following diagnostic on C++03 and earlier.
"in-class initializer for static data member is not a constant expression;
folding it to a constant is a GNU extension"
test/SemaCXX/invalid-member-expr.cpp
For code: pair z = minmax({});
Empty initializer list is valid in C++11, but since minmax is not defined
anywhere in the program, compiler issues an error.
Therefore, in C++03 and earlier, we check for diagnostic: "expected
expression"
In C++11 and later, we check for diagnostic: "use of undeclared identifier
'minmax'"
test/SemaCXX/member-expr.cpp
In C++11, "template" can be used outside of a template.
Only verify the following diagnostic on C++03 and earlier.
"'template' keyword outside of a template"
test/SemaCXX/member-pointer.cpp
Only verify the following diagnostic on C++03 and earlier.
"use of enumeration in a nested name specifier is a C++11 extension"
test/SemaCXX/new-array-size-conv.cpp
Only verify the following two diagnostic on C++03 and earlier.
"implicit conversion from array size expression of type 'ValueInt' to
integral type 'int' is a C++11 extension"
"implicit conversion from array size expression of type 'ValueEnum' to
enumeration type 'E' is a C++11 extension"
test/SemaCXX/offsetof.cpp
Force this test to be C++98 only. Test offsetof-0x.cpp exists to verify for
C++11 behavior
Diagnostic change
C++98: warning: offset of on non-POD type
C++11: warning: offset of on non-standard-layout type
test/SemaCXX/printf-block.cpp
This test verifies the diagnostic when trying to pass a non-POD struct then
access its string value.
C++11 allows passing non-POD objects via va_arg (5.2.2/7). But since the
object does not have a c_str() method. So the compiler will issue a warning on
that
Here are the different diagnostics we verify for.
C++03: cannot pass non-POD object of type 'HasNoCStr' to variadic block;
expected type from format string was 'char *'
C++11: format specifies type 'char *' but the argument has type 'HasNoCStr'
test/SemaCXX/undefined-internal.cpp
Verify for different diagnostics depending on the dialect.
C++03: "C++98 requires an accessible copy constructor"
C++03: "copying parameter of type 'PR9323::(anonymous namespace)::Uncopyable'
when binding a reference to a temporary would invoke an inaccessible
constructor in C++98"
Lit Test C++11 Compatibility Patch #7
Hi Everyone,
I am back again with another Lit test C++11 patch.
This is the 7th patch.
There are 13 tests in total.
CXX/class.access/class.access.dcl/p1.cpp
Access declarations are deprecated in C++11.
As a result, there are 4 types of diagnostics changes:
For simple access declarations, there is a change in diagnostics.
C++98: warning: access declarations are deprecated; use using declarations
instead
C++11: error: ISO C++11 does not allow access declarations; use using
declarations instead
For Self-referential access declarations, there is also an additional error
message.
C++98: warning: access declarations are deprecated; use using declarations
instead
C++11: error: ISO C++11 does not allow access declarations; use using
declarations instead
C++11: error: using declaration refers to its own class
For an access declaration of a non-base method, there is a different
additional error message.
C++98: warning: access declarations are deprecated; use using declarations
instead
C++11: error: ISO C++11 does not allow access declarations; use using
declarations instead
C++11: error: using declaration refers into 'Subclass::', which is not a
base class of 'C'
For self-referential access declaration with local declaration, there is the
additional error message but one less note message.
C++98: warning: access declarations are deprecated; use using declarations
instead [-Wdeprecated]
C++98: error: using declaration refers to its own class
C++98: note: target of using declaration
C++11: error: ISO C++11 does not allow access declarations; use using
declarations instead
C++11: error: using declaration refers to its own class
CXX/temp/temp.spec/temp.expl.spec/p2.cpp
Guard multiple instances of the following diagnostics to C++98.
C++98: warning: first declaration of function template specialization of
'f0' outside namespace 'N0' is a C++11 extension
C++98: note: explicitly specialized declaration is here
CXX/temp/temp.spec/temp.expl.spec/p3.cpp
Guard one instance of the following diagnostics to C++98.
C++98: warning: first declaration of class template specialization of 'X'
outside namespace 'N' is a C++11 extension
C++98: note: explicitly specialized declaration is here
CXX/temp/temp.spec/temp.explicit/p2.cpp
CXX/temp/temp.spec/temp.explicit/p5.cpp
In C++98 with -Wc++11-compat, Out-of-scope explicit instantiations of
template is a Warning.
In C++11, it is now an Error.
C++98: warning: explicit instantiation of 'N::f1' must occur in namespace
'N'
C++11: error: explicit instantiation of 'N::f1' must occur in namespace 'N'
CodeGenCXX/debug-info-static-member.cpp
In C++11, replace "const" with "constexpr" for in-class static initializer of
non-integral type.
Otherwise compiler would complain:
C++11: error: in-class initializer for static data member of type 'const
float' requires 'constexpr' specifier
SemaCXX/dcl_init_aggr.cpp
Diagnostic change due to initializer list
C++98: error: non-aggregate type 'NonAggregate' cannot be initialized with
an initializer list
C++11: error no matching constructor for initialization of 'NonAggregate'
note: candidate constructor (the implicit copy constructor) not
viable
note: candidate constructor (the implicit move constructor) not
viable
note: candidate constructor not viable
Diagnostic Change
C++98: conversion from string literal to 'char *' is deprecated
C++11: ISO C++11 does not allow conversion from string literal to 'char *'
Addition C++11 move constructor diagnostics
C++11: note: candidate constructor (the implicit move constructor) not
viable
The next 2 lines caused a lot of diff.
Source: TooFewError too_few_error = { 1 }
C++98: error: no matching constructor for initialization of
'NoDefaultConstructor'
note: candidate constructor not viable: requires 1 argument, but 0
were provided
note: candidate constructor (the implicit copy constructor) not
viable
note: in implicit initialization of field 'nodef' with omitted
initializer
error: implicit default constructor for 'TooFewError' must
explicitly initialize
the member 'nodef' which does not have a default constructor
note: member is declared here
note: 'NoDefaultConstructor' declared here
C++11: error: no matching constructor for initialization of
'NoDefaultConstructor'
note: candidate constructor not viable: requires 1 argument, but 0
were provided
note: candidate constructor (the implicit copy constructor) not
viable
note: candidate constructor (the implicit move constructor) not
viable
note: in implicit initialization of field 'nodef' with omitted
initializer
Source: TooFewError too_few_okay2[2] = { 1, 1 };
C++98: note: implicit default constructor for 'TooFewError' first
Lit test C++11 Compatibility Patch #4
Hi Everyone, Here is the forth Lit tests C++11 compatibility patch. This patch mainly added new diagnostics expected for C++11. There are 34 tests in total. They fall into 3 categories. [2 tests] New Warnings regarding storage class specifier "register"/"auto" being deprecated/not-allowed. [18 Tests] New Note "candidate constructor (the implicit move constructor) not viable" accompanying existing Error "no matching constructor" [14 Tests] New Note "candidate function (the implicit move assignment operator) not viable" accompanying existing Error "no viable overloaded '='" There is a walkthrough of each test CXX/basic/basic.lookup/basic.lookup.argdep/p4.cpp Added "move constructor" message CXX/basic/basic.lookup/basic.lookup.qual/namespace.qual/p2.cpp Added "move constructor" message Note: Also restricted expected Warning "inline namespaces are a C++11 feature" to C++98/03 and earlier CXX/basic/basic.scope/basic.scope.hiding/p2.cpp Added "move constructor" message CXX/dcl.dcl/basic.namespace/namespace.udecl/p1.cpp Added "move constructor" message CXX/dcl.dcl/dcl.spec/dcl.stc/p2.cpp Added "auto" and "register" message. The 2 messages are: 'auto' storage class specifier is not permitted in C++11, and will not be supported in future releases 'register' storage class specifier is deprecated Note: The original run line has option "-Wno-c++0x-compat" This is the default behavior in C++98/03, "-Wno-c++0x-compat" has no effect in C++11. To avoid confusion, I kept the original run line as is and added 3 more run lines which are default, C++98 and C++11 CXX/dcl.decl/dcl.init/dcl.init.ref/p5-var.cpp Added "move constructor" message CXX/temp/temp.decls/temp.class/temp.static/p1-inst.cpp Added "move constructor" message CXX/temp/temp.decls/temp.class/temp.static/p1.cpp Added "move constructor" message CXX/temp/temp.param/p3.cpp Added "move constructor" message CXX/temp/temp.spec/temp.explicit/p1.cpp Added "move constructor" message OpenMP/for_reduction_messages.cpp Added "move assignment operator" message OpenMP/for_simd_reduction_messages.cpp Added "move assignment operator" message OpenMP/parallel_for_reduction_messages.cpp Added "move assignment operator" message OpenMP/parallel_for_simd_reduction_messages.cpp Added "move assignment operator" message OpenMP/parallel_reduction_messages.cpp Added "move assignment operator" message OpenMP/parallel_sections_reduction_messages.cpp Added "move assignment operator" message OpenMP/sections_reduction_messages.cpp Added "move assignment operator" message OpenMP/simd_reduction_messages.cpp Added "move assignment operator" message OpenMP/teams_reduction_messages.cpp Added "move assignment operator" message SemaCXX/constructor-initializer.cpp Added "move constructor" message SemaCXX/converting-constructor.cpp Added "move constructor" message SemaCXX/crashes.cpp Added "move constructor" message SemaCXX/default1.cpp Added "move constructor" message SemaCXX/direct-initializer.cpp Added "move constructor" message SemaCXX/expressions.cpp Added "'register' storage class specifier is deprecated" message SemaCXX/namespace.cpp Added "move assignment operator" message SemaCXX/overload-call-copycon.cpp Added "move constructor" message SemaCXX/overloaded-builtin-operators.cpp Added "move assignment operator" message SemaCXX/vector.cpp Added "move assignment operator" message SemaTemplate/class-template-ctor-initializer.cpp Added "move assignment operator" message SemaTemplate/constructor-template.cpp Added "move constructor" message SemaTemplate/default-expr-arguments.cpp Added "move constructor" message SemaTemplate/fun-template-def.cpp Added "move constructor" message SemaTemplate/qualified-names-diag.cpp Added "move assignment operator" message All feed backs are welcome. Thank you. Charles Li 400.patch Description: 400.patch ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Lit Test C++11 compatibility patch #5
Hi Everyone,
I am continuing with updating Lit tests to be C++11 compatible.
Here is the fifth patch. This patch contains 20 tests.
These are mostly diagnostics changes due to new C++11 features and changes in
the standard.
Here are the explanations for each test in the order that they appear in the
patch.
CXX/class/class.nest/p1.cpp
Sizeof has been extended to apply to non-static data members without an
object [n2253].
Restrict the following to C++98/03.
error: invalid use of non-static data member 'x'
Parser/cxx-casting.cpp
Restrict Digraph errors to C++98/03.
C++98 error: found '<::' after a template name which forms the digraph '<:'
(aka '[') and a ':', did you mean '< ::'?
Parser/cxx-reference.cpp
rvalue references is now support
Restrict the following to C++98/03.
C++98 Warning rvalue references are a C++11 extension
Parser/cxx-template-argument.cpp
Consecutive right angle brackets is no longer a syntax error in C++11
Restrict the following to C++98/03
C++98: error: a space is required between consecutive right angle brackets
(use '> >')
Parser/cxx-typeof.cpp
Using __typeof to derive the type of a non-static data member was an Error in
C++98/03. It is now accepted in in C++11.
Note 1: I could not find GCC documentation on this change,
but given C++11 has decltype now works on non-static data members,
this appears logical.
Note 2: This test uses GNU extension "typeof".
Therefore the Runs line are expanded with -std=gnu++98 and
"-std=gnu++11"
instead of the usual "-std=c++98" and "-std=c++11"
Parser/objc-init.m
Added C++11 error and note diagnostics on narrowing conversion.
Error: non-constant-expression cannot be narrowed from type 'unsigned int' to
'int' in initializer list
Note: insert an explicit cast to silence this issue
*Please Note: Since this is an Objective-C test, the Run line has not been
changed.
Parser/objcxx-lambda-expressions-neg.mm
[]{}; is now an valid Lambda expression.
Restrict "warning: expected expression" to C++98/03.
SemaCXX/decl-expr-ambiguity.cpp
Change in ambiguity diagnostics due to introduction of initializer list.
C++11 has 1 extra Note following the pre-existing warning
warning: empty parentheses interpreted as a function declaration
[-Wvexing-parse]
note: replace parentheses with an initializer to declare a variable
*Note: The Run lines are left as-is because this test verifies for default
diagnostic for "typeof"
Diagnostics will change if I explicitly specify any dialect.
Default (no -std= flag): error: extension used
[-Werror,-Wlanguage-extension-token]
C++ (-std=c++ flag): error: expected '(' for function-style
cast or type construction
GNU++ (-std=gnu++ flag): No diagnostic.
SemaCXX/overload-call.cpp
This change has 3 separate issues. First two are overload resolutions. Last
one is C++98/03 specific diagnostic.
1. When the actual arg is a string literal and 2 candidate functions exist. One
with formal argument "char *", the other with "bool"
In C++98/03, Clang picks "char *" and issues a deprecated writable wring
diagnostics.
In C++11 , Clang uses picks the "bool" candidate and issues a return type
miss match diagnostics.
Default converstion from "const char *" to "bool" came from C++11
standard 4.12\1 [conv.bool]
Reference:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/26413951/overloaded-bool-string-ambiguity
The difference in diagnostics are as follows:
C++98 (argument type mismatch): conversion from string literal to 'char *'
is deprecated
C++11 (return type mismatch): cannot initialize a variable of type 'int
*' with an rvalue of type 'double *'
2. Similar to point 1. This time the 2 overloaded functions have formal args
"char *" and "void *".
In this case Clang picks "char *" but issues a slightly different error:
C++98 warning: conversion from string literal to 'char *' is deprecated
C++11 warning: ISO C++11 does not allow conversion from string literal to
'char *'
3. Restrict the following diagnostics to C++98/03
Warning: rvalue references are a C++11 extension
Warning: deleted function definitions are a C++11 extension
SemaCXX/pragma-init_seg.cpp
In C++11 Clang issues an additional note follow pre-existing error.
Add the following Note to C++11.
Error: initializer for thread-local variable must be a constant expression
Note: use 'thread_local' to allow this
SemaCXX/typo-correction-delayed.cpp
C++11 allows initializer list to be pass as actual arguments.
Restrict the following to C++98
error: expected expression
SemaCXX/unknown-type-name.cpp
Restrict the following to C++98
Warning: deleted function definitions are a C++11 extension
SemaCXX/writable-strings-deprecated.cpp
Writable strings generates different diagno
Lit C++11 Compatibility Patch #6
Hello Everyone, Here is the 6th Lit tests C++11 compatibility patch. It is super simple this time. 17 OpenMP tests have their expected diagnostics updated. The changes to each file are identical. C++11 has expanded diagnostics when an expression is not an integral constant expression. C++11 has different Error messages from C++98 (3 instances) C++98: error: expression is not an integral constant expression C++11: error: integral constant expression must have integral or unscoped enumeration type, not 'char *' C++11 has added the following note to pre-existing Error message (4 instances) Pre-existing: error: expression is not an integral constant expression C++11: note: non-constexpr function 'foobool' cannot be used in a constant expression C++11: note: declared here Here is a list of the 17 files in this patch. test/OpenMP/for_collapse_messages.cpp test/OpenMP/for_ordered_clause.cpp test/OpenMP/for_simd_collapse_messages.cpp test/OpenMP/for_simd_safelen_messages.cpp test/OpenMP/for_simd_simdlen_messages.cpp test/OpenMP/parallel_for_collapse_messages.cpp test/OpenMP/parallel_for_ordered_messages.cpp test/OpenMP/parallel_for_simd_collapse_messages.cpp test/OpenMP/parallel_for_simd_safelen_messages.cpp test/OpenMP/parallel_for_simd_simdlen_messages.cpp test/OpenMP/simd_collapse_messages.cpp test/OpenMP/simd_safelen_messages.cpp test/OpenMP/simd_simdlen_messages.cpp test/OpenMP/taskloop_collapse_messages.cpp test/OpenMP/taskloop_simd_collapse_messages.cpp test/OpenMP/taskloop_simd_safelen_messages.cpp test/OpenMP/taskloop_simd_simdlen_messages.cpp Cheers, Charles Li 600.patch Description: 600.patch ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
