@@ -151,6 +164,11 @@ std::vector generateMissingIncludeDiagnostics(
if (!Replacement.has_value())
continue;
+if (Angled && Spelling.front() == '\"') {
kadircet wrote:
yikes, we also need to do this transformation in the other way as well :/
Mig
https://github.com/kadircet edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/140594
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/kadircet edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/140594
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/kadircet approved this pull request.
thanks, mostly LGTM, please wait on a final look from @HighCommander4 though,
he has more context about this feature overall, maybe the discrepancy on path
vs spelling based match has a story.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/140
https://github.com/kadircet closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141584
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/kadircet approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141584
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/kadircet closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/139463
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/kadircet closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141092
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/kadircet approved this pull request.
thanks a lot!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141092
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -141,16 +143,41 @@ std::vector generateMissingIncludeDiagnostics(
AST.getPreprocessor().getHeaderSearchInfo(), MainFile});
llvm::StringRef HeaderRef{Spelling};
-bool Angled = HeaderRef.starts_with("<");
+
+bool IsAngled = false;
kadirce
https://github.com/kadircet requested changes to this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/140594
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
kadircet wrote:
LGTM, but cc @llvm/clang-area-team, in case they have any concerns here
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/140870
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/kadircet approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/139463
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -43,10 +43,18 @@ internal::Matcher callToGet(const
internal::Matcher &OnClass) {
.bind("redundant_get");
}
-internal::Matcher knownSmartptr() {
+internal::Matcher knownSmartptrAny() {
return recordDecl(hasAnyName("::std::unique_ptr", "::std::shared_ptr"));
}
+i
https://github.com/kadircet approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141092
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/kadircet approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141410
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/kadircet requested changes to this pull request.
do we know why
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/clang/include/clang/Driver/Options.td#L5894-L5901
doesn't declare _EQ version for cc1?
i think instead of working around this in various places, we should unify the
https://github.com/kadircet requested changes to this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141410
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -32,6 +32,9 @@
# RUN: echo 'printf "End of search list.\r\n" >&2' >> %t.dir/bin/my_driver.sh
# RUN: chmod +x %t.dir/bin/my_driver.sh
+# Create fake clang-tidy config to ensure sandbox
+# RUN: echo 'InheritParentConfig: false' >> %t.dir/.clang-tidy
kadircet
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+InheritParentConfig: false
kadircet wrote:
are we running any tests in this directory? these inputs are usually copied to
temp test directories, since you're not copying this over in any of the tests,
is this really needed? (or do we have some te
https://github.com/kadircet edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141092
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/kadircet requested changes to this pull request.
thanks a lot for taking a lookg here!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141092
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/li
@@ -44,7 +44,10 @@ internal::Matcher callToGet(const
internal::Matcher &OnClass) {
}
internal::Matcher knownSmartptr() {
- return recordDecl(hasAnyName("::std::unique_ptr", "::std::shared_ptr"));
+ return recordDecl(
+ hasAnyName("::std::unique_ptr", "::std::shared_ptr
https://github.com/kadircet closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141216
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/kadircet approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141216
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ class UseNullptrCheck : public ClangTidyCheck {
bool isLanguageVersionSupported(const LangOptions &LangOpts) const override {
// FIXME this should be CPlusPlus11 but that causes test cases to
// erroneously fail.
-return LangOpts.CPlusPlus || Lan
https://github.com/kadircet approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141229
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
kadircet wrote:
just a high level question, I wasn't following the recent developments closely,
but we seem to have both an `AngledHeaders` and `QuotedHeaders` option. Why are
we only following one here?
I guess the signals for angled includes are much stricter (search paths need to
be marked
kadircet wrote:
unfortunately neither is used by include-cleaner. we only support mappings for
c++ STL, through
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/clang/lib/Tooling/Inclusions/Stdlib/StdSymbolMap.inc
and friends.
we didn't want to add any system specific libraries, especially base
https://github.com/kadircet approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/140233
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/kadircet commented:
LG for include-cleaner changes.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/140233
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/kadircet approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/140600
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
kadircet wrote:
I am afraid this doesn't address clangd/clangd#1104 to a useful extent :/.
Whenever a header `foo.h` changes, clangd will schedule indexing of only a
**single** translation unit that depends on it, not all of them. So if there
are other TUs that reference `foo`, they'll still s
kadircet wrote:
changes in include-cleaner LG, but I am not sure about the canonical way of
tracking this location in clang (i.e. if we're going to track an expression
within the attribute, do we still need to tract the underlying decl as well?
can't we just extract it from expr when needed?)
kadircet wrote:
> I think we need to understand what we want before we can make decisions on
> what needs changing, though. Are there invariants we want to introduce, like
> the source range for the AST node should encompass the source locations
> tracked within the AST node? Or are we fine wi
kadircet wrote:
> We're currently inconsistent regarding attributes; sometimes we include the
> attributes in the range, sometimes we don't. But declaration source ranges
> are tough to reason about in general because there's many different moving
> parts.
I totally agree. I was asking to cha
kadircet wrote:
I'd like to highlight that many tools still only care about declarations
themselves and not the attributes.
The ones that fiddle with attributes need to do it in a special and complicated
way already. Making this less complicated definitely creates some value. But I
think the
kadircet wrote:
I'd like to chime in for the issue with source locations and its implications.
Seems like it has been brought up already along the thread.
These might not be as crucial for diagnostic locations (or other clang
purposes) when they're slightly off, but they actually result in big
https://github.com/kadircet closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138669
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/kadircet approved this pull request.
thanks, sorry for missing this!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138669
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/kadircet approved this pull request.
thanks!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138799
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
kadircet wrote:
ping @AaronBallman @efriedma-quic if you don't have more concerns here, I'd
like to move forward with this patch
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137163
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.ll
@@ -9125,9 +9126,25 @@ bool
LValueExprEvaluator::VisitCompoundLiteralExpr(const CompoundLiteralExpr *E) {
assert((!Info.getLangOpts().CPlusPlus || E->isFileScope()) &&
"lvalue compound literal in c++?");
- // Defer visiting the literal until the lvalue-to-rvalue con
https://github.com/kadircet approved this pull request.
thanks, LGTM!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133681
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -158,6 +159,42 @@ TEST(StdLibTests, EndToEnd) {
UnorderedElementsAre(StdlibSymbol("list"), StdlibSymbol("vector")));
}
+TEST(StdLibTests, StdLibDocComments) {
+ Config Cfg;
+ Cfg.Index.StandardLibrary = true;
+ WithContextValue Enabled(Config::Key, std::move(Cfg));
@@ -158,6 +158,43 @@ TEST(StdLibTests, EndToEnd) {
UnorderedElementsAre(StdlibSymbol("list"), StdlibSymbol("vector")));
}
+TEST(StdLibTests, StdLibDocComments) {
+ Config Cfg;
+ Cfg.Index.StandardLibrary = true;
+ WithContextValue Enabled(Config::Key, std::move(Cfg));
https://github.com/kadircet edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133681
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -9125,9 +9126,25 @@ bool
LValueExprEvaluator::VisitCompoundLiteralExpr(const CompoundLiteralExpr *E) {
assert((!Info.getLangOpts().CPlusPlus || E->isFileScope()) &&
"lvalue compound literal in c++?");
- // Defer visiting the literal until the lvalue-to-rvalue con
https://github.com/kadircet updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137163
From 99fa9a1f5fb74401c790871e6eb1ce473d048d74 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Kadir Cetinkaya
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2025 11:12:00 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] [clang][CompundLiteralExpr] Don't defer evaluation for
CL
@@ -9125,9 +9126,25 @@ bool
LValueExprEvaluator::VisitCompoundLiteralExpr(const CompoundLiteralExpr *E) {
assert((!Info.getLangOpts().CPlusPlus || E->isFileScope()) &&
"lvalue compound literal in c++?");
- // Defer visiting the literal until the lvalue-to-rvalue con
@@ -4522,6 +4523,38 @@ static CompleteObject findCompleteObject(EvalInfo &Info,
const Expr *E,
BaseVal = MTE->getOrCreateValue(false);
assert(BaseVal && "got reference to unevaluated temporary");
+ } else if (const CompoundLiteralExpr *CLE =
+
@@ -4522,6 +4523,38 @@ static CompleteObject findCompleteObject(EvalInfo &Info,
const Expr *E,
BaseVal = MTE->getOrCreateValue(false);
assert(BaseVal && "got reference to unevaluated temporary");
+ } else if (const CompoundLiteralExpr *CLE =
+
kadircet wrote:
this didn't seem to restore the desired formatting, re-openning #135972 with
additional context
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136073
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mai
@@ -158,6 +158,43 @@ TEST(StdLibTests, EndToEnd) {
UnorderedElementsAre(StdlibSymbol("list"), StdlibSymbol("vector")));
}
+TEST(StdLibTests, StdLibDocComments) {
+ Config Cfg;
+ Cfg.Index.StandardLibrary = true;
+ WithContextValue Enabled(Config::Key, std::move(Cfg));
https://github.com/kadircet requested changes to this pull request.
thanks a lot, implementation LG, just a small hurdle with the test (sorry for
not checking that out earlier)
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133681
___
cfe-commits mailing l
https://github.com/kadircet edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133681
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -223,33 +226,26 @@ SymbolSlab indexStandardLibrary(llvm::StringRef
HeaderSources,
return Symbols;
}
- SymbolCollector::Options IndexOpts;
- IndexOpts.Origin = SymbolOrigin::StdLib;
- IndexOpts.CollectMainFileSymbols = false;
- IndexOpts.CollectMainFileRefs = fals
@@ -9125,9 +9126,25 @@ bool
LValueExprEvaluator::VisitCompoundLiteralExpr(const CompoundLiteralExpr *E) {
assert((!Info.getLangOpts().CPlusPlus || E->isFileScope()) &&
"lvalue compound literal in c++?");
- // Defer visiting the literal until the lvalue-to-rvalue con
@@ -4622,7 +4618,12 @@ handleLValueToRValueConversion(EvalInfo &Info, const
Expr *Conv, QualType Type,
}
}
- CompleteObject LitObj(LVal.Base, &Lit, Base->getType());
+ APValue *Lit =
+ CLE->hasStaticStorage()
+ ? &CLE->getStaticVa
@@ -3489,6 +3489,11 @@ class CompoundLiteralExpr : public Expr {
/// The int part of the pair stores whether this expr is file scope.
llvm::PointerIntPair TInfoAndScope;
Stmt *Init;
+
+ /// Value of constant literals with static storage duration. Used only for
+ /// con
https://github.com/kadircet updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137163
From 99fa9a1f5fb74401c790871e6eb1ce473d048d74 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Kadir Cetinkaya
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2025 11:12:00 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [clang][CompundLiteralExpr] Don't defer evaluation for
CL
@@ -216,7 +216,7 @@ enum OpenCLTypeKind : uint8_t {
///
class TargetInfo : public TransferrableTargetInfo,
public RefCountedBase {
- std::shared_ptr TargetOpts;
+ TargetOptions *TargetOpts;
kadircet wrote:
sorry for delay here.
i'd still
https://github.com/kadircet updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/118480
From 9a3ddb6ca0805f238042f0b795de93066f386e08 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Kadir Cetinkaya
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2024 11:21:44 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] [clang] Fix a use-after-free in expression evaluation
followin
https://github.com/kadircet closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/118480
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
kadircet wrote:
Followup for https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/118480
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137163
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/kadircet created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137163
Previously we would defer evaluation of CLEs until LValue to RValue
conversions, which would result in creating values within wrong scope
and triggering use-after-frees.
This patch instead eagerly evaluates CLE
kadircet wrote:
Put together a new fix based on the discussions here in
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137163, PTAL.
@AaronBallman I am afraid this might no longer fix the crashes you're seeing
internally though, as the new fix is focused on handling of
`CompoundLiteralExpr`s, wher
https://github.com/kadircet updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137163
From 99fa9a1f5fb74401c790871e6eb1ce473d048d74 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Kadir Cetinkaya
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2025 11:12:00 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] [clang][CompundLiteralExpr] Don't defer evaluation for CLEs
P
https://github.com/kadircet edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137163
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
kadircet wrote:
> 1. we no longer use SymbolOrigin::StdLib for collected symbols
thanks for catching that, I think that's OK to pass in an extra `SymbolOrigin`
flag here.
> 2. we run the symbol collector with CollectMainFileSymbols = true
I think this is WAI. Firstly we shouldn't have (m)any
https://github.com/kadircet approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136109
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
kadircet wrote:
hi @AaronBallman, no unfortunately we didn't make any progress here, and I just
verified that reproducer from
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/118480#issuecomment-2538988006 is
still triggering the issue (with -std=c++20).
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/11
kadircet wrote:
> The described options seem a bit more involved than necessary to fix this
> bug, given that it's just the value of the `StoreAllDocumentation` flag
> that's a problem.
Maybe I miscommunicated something, but I was talking about a change like
https://github.com/kadircet/llvm-p
https://github.com/kadircet closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/135921
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
kadircet wrote:
btw do you have commit access or should I merge ?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/135921
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -341,6 +341,14 @@ struct Fragment {
/// Delimiters: empty pair of delimiters "()" or "<>"
/// FullPlaceholders: full name of both type and parameter
std::optional> ArgumentLists;
+/// Add #include directives when accepting code completions. Config
+//
@@ -341,6 +341,14 @@ struct Fragment {
/// Delimiters: empty pair of delimiters "()" or "<>"
/// FullPlaceholders: full name of both type and parameter
std::optional> ArgumentLists;
+/// Add #include directives when accepting code completions. Config
+//
https://github.com/kadircet requested changes to this pull request.
(sorry for the late reply, we were both OOO :()
thanks a lot for great analysis in https://github.com/clangd/clangd/issues/2344!
IIUC, the root cause is we're putting stdlib-index slabs into dynamic-index,
but we're building t
https://github.com/kadircet commented:
> Are you able to test this PR and confirm it fixes the regressions you
> encountered?
hi @carlosgalvezp , yes this fixes the particular issues we had, thanks!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132725
__
https://github.com/kadircet approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/131591
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -94,8 +94,6 @@ Improvements to clang-tidy
- :program:`clang-tidy` no longer processes declarations from system headers
by default, greatly improving performance. This behavior is disabled if the
`SystemHeaders` option is enabled.
- Note: this may lead to false negatives
https://github.com/kadircet edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132725
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -94,8 +94,6 @@ Improvements to clang-tidy
- :program:`clang-tidy` no longer processes declarations from system headers
by default, greatly improving performance. This behavior is disabled if the
`SystemHeaders` option is enabled.
- Note: this may lead to false negatives
kadircet wrote:
Hi folks, we're seeing some regressions on our internal tidy checks after this
patch.
The regression is similar to what @haoNoQ raised in
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/128150#issuecomment-2705425193, the
blast radius a little bit wider than checks that build and in
kadircet wrote:
> we've had users for whom the BuiltinHeaders: QueryDriver behaviour worked
> better and want to switch back to it (examples here, here, here, here).
I'd argue that the fix isn't as simple as using builtin headers from a
different toolchain for those users. Because clang itself
https://github.com/kadircet created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/130077
We started seeing some use-after-frees starting with
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125433.
This patch ensures we explicitly block for the async task, if there's one,
before destructing `std::future
https://github.com/kadircet approved this pull request.
sorry for the delayed turn around, lgtm!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125988
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cf
@@ -380,30 +381,114 @@ llvm::SmallVector
getAllRequiredModules(ProjectModules &MDB,
return ModuleNames;
}
+class CachingProjectModules : public ProjectModules {
+public:
+ CachingProjectModules(const GlobalCompilationDatabase &CDB) : CDB(CDB) {}
+
+ std::vector getRequire
https://github.com/kadircet edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125988
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -2625,14 +2636,10 @@ void clang::sema::AnalysisBasedWarnings::IssueWarnings(
// More analysis ...
};
+
// Emit per-function analysis-based warnings that require the whole-TU
- // reasoning. Check if any of them is enabled at all before scanning the AST:
- if (!Di
https://github.com/kadircet approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/128603
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
kadircet wrote:
> In my case I am using my build system (bazel) to generate the
> compile_commands.json file as part of the build. At this point given bazel's
> sandboxing / hermiticity model, the user's checkout PWD is unknown. This file
> is then copied somewhere and used by clangd. Today to
@@ -411,6 +411,58 @@ TEST(LocateSymbol, FindOverrides) {
sym("foo", Code.range("2"), std::nullopt)));
}
+TEST(LocateSymbol, FindOverridesObjC) {
+ auto Code = Annotations(R"objc(
+@protocol Fooey
+- (void)foo;
+@end
+@interfa
kadircet wrote:
> Could you say more about this? What happened to ClangdModules?
Sorry, apparently I even forgot its proper name, i meant
`clangd::FeatureModule`. Nothing bad happened, we built this infra but didn't
get a chance to polish and use it afterwards.
We wanted to migrate any non-cor
https://github.com/kadircet approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/127757
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
kadircet wrote:
> We could cut the memory usage overhead of the patch in half by only having it
> in one of them. (@kadircet would that change your analysis of the tradeoffs
> at all?)
I think that'd still be too much considering the functionality we'll get in the
end. Others might not share
@@ -1438,6 +1461,15 @@ ReferencesResult findReferences(ParsedAST &AST, Position
Pos, uint32_t Limit,
getOverriddenMethods(CMD, OverriddenMethods);
}
}
+// Special case: Objective-C methods can override a parent class or
+// protoco
kadircet wrote:
> My main motivation is to get DefineOutline
I think if we're solely aiming for improvements to DefineOutline, I'd say the
resource trade-off here isn't worth it.
> I don't see how bracket matching can help us get from the name of the
> function to the actual start of the decl
@@ -430,6 +430,18 @@ locateASTReferent(SourceLocation CurLoc, const
syntax::Token *TouchedIdentifier,
continue;
}
}
+// Special case: an Objective-C method can override a parent class or
+// protocol.
kadircet wrote:
> I was thinking
@@ -430,6 +439,22 @@ locateASTReferent(SourceLocation CurLoc, const
syntax::Token *TouchedIdentifier,
continue;
}
}
+// Special case: - (void)^method; should jump to all overrides. Note that
an
+// Objective-C method can override a parent class or pr
1 - 100 of 935 matches
Mail list logo
