danielmartin updated this revision to Diff 112855.
danielmartin added a comment.
Make comment fit in one line
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37192
Files:
lib/Format/UnwrappedLineParser.cpp
unittests/Format/FormatTestObjC.cpp
Index: unittests/Format/FormatTestObjC.cpp
==
lebedev.ri added a comment.
Ping
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D36836
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
djasper accepted this revision.
djasper added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
Yay for *removing* complexity for a change :).
Let me know how it goes in practice.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37142
___
cfe-commits mailing lis
NoQ accepted this revision.
NoQ added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
LGTM!
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37103
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commit
NoQ accepted this revision.
NoQ added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
LGTM!
I guess later it'd be great to comment on every `numTimesReached()` why is it
supposed to be reached exactly that many times, as it's often unclear,
especially with tricky control flow. Becau
ilya-biryukov added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D37101#853509, @rwols wrote:
> After digging into VSCode, I now think that presenting snippets is the wrong
> way forward, and I believe the right way is to implement the
> `signatureHelpProvider` protocol for method/function parameters
Author: xazax
Date: Mon Aug 28 01:44:43 2017
New Revision: 311877
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=311877&view=rev
Log:
[analyzer][GSoC] Re-implemente current virtual calls checker in a
path-sensitive way
Patch by: Xin Wang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34275
Mod
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rL311877: [analyzer][GSoC] Re-implemente current virtual calls
checker in a path… (authored by xazax).
Changed prior to commit:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D34275?vs=112196&id=112857#toc
Repository:
rL LL
NoQ added a comment.
LGTM, thanks! Minor nit included. I hope our matchers actually cover all the
cases (not a big deal if they don't though).
Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/LoopUnrolling.cpp:26
+#define MAXIMUM_STEP_UNROLLED 128
+
I'd prefer a (`static
ilya-biryukov added inline comments.
Comment at: clangd/ClangdUnit.cpp:321
+
+// Fill in the label, detail, documentation and insertText fields of the
+// CompletionItem.
rwols wrote:
> ilya-biryukov wrote:
> > Maybe split writes into `Item.label` and oth
mprobst updated this revision to Diff 112858.
mprobst added a comment.
- clang-format: [JS] wrap calls w/ literals in template strings.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37142
Files:
lib/Format/ContinuationIndenter.cpp
unittests/Format/FormatTestJS.cpp
Index: unittests/Format/FormatTestJS.cpp
yamaguchi created this revision.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D36782 broke lld buildbots, because I've changed
OptionInfo's type
from ArrayRef to std::vector, so it became a copy, not a reference.
In this patch, I changed Table to static, so that it won't be freed
after the return. However, I'm not s
arphaman added a comment.
Not at all, go ahead
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37104
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
ioeric accepted this revision.
ioeric added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
Thanks for the changes! Lgtm with a few nits.
Comment at: include/clang/Tooling/Refactoring/RefactoringActionRules.h:33
+///
+/// - requiredSelection: The refactoring functi
djasper added inline comments.
Comment at: lib/Format/ContinuationIndenter.cpp:1139
+
+ // On lines containing template strings, propagate NoLineBreak even for dict
+ // and array literals. This is to force wrapping an initial function call if
This is not the r
mprobst added inline comments.
Comment at: lib/Format/ContinuationIndenter.cpp:1139
+
+ // On lines containing template strings, propagate NoLineBreak even for dict
+ // and array literals. This is to force wrapping an initial function call if
djasper wrote:
>
szepet updated this revision to Diff 112866.
szepet marked an inline comment as done.
szepet added a comment.
Updated to use static int.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37181
Files:
include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Core/PathSensitive/LoopUnrolling.h
lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/ExprEngine.cpp
lib/Static
hamzasood updated this revision to Diff 112867.
hamzasood added a comment.
Hi Richard, thanks for your feedback. This update makes the changes that you
requested.
It turns out that the casting is no longer an issue since
`ParseTemplateParameters` has been refactored to use `NamedDecl`.
https:/
djasper added inline comments.
Comment at: lib/Format/ContinuationIndenter.cpp:1139
+
+ // On lines containing template strings, propagate NoLineBreak even for dict
+ // and array literals. This is to force wrapping an initial function call if
mprobst wrote:
>
mstorsjo created this revision.
This fixes cases where dynamic classes produced RTTI data with external
linkage, producing linker errors about duplicate symbols.
This touches code close to what was changed in SVN r244266, but this change
doesn't break the tests added in that revision.
I have t
Author: szepet
Date: Mon Aug 28 03:21:24 2017
New Revision: 311880
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=311880&view=rev
Log:
[StaticAnalyzer] LoopUnrolling fixes
1. The LoopUnrolling feature needs the LoopExit included in the CFG so added
this
dependency via the config options
2. The Loo
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rL311880: [StaticAnalyzer] LoopUnrolling fixes (authored by
szepet).
Changed prior to commit:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37103?vs=112824&id=112872#toc
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D3710
mstorsjo created this revision.
Herald added a subscriber: mgorny.
This is essential when building with -nodefaultlibs.
This is similar to what already is done in libcxxabi in SVN r302760.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37207
Files:
lib/CMakeLists.txt
Index: lib/CMakeLists.txt
=
arphaman added a comment.
FYI, I'd like to see this merged into LLVM5 if it's still possible, but it's
not super critical
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37104
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.ll
Author: szepet
Date: Mon Aug 28 03:34:50 2017
New Revision: 311881
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=311881&view=rev
Log:
[StaticAnalyzer] LoopUnrolling: Excluding loops which splits the state
Added check if the execution of the last step of the given unrolled loop has
generated more b
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rL311881: [StaticAnalyzer] LoopUnrolling: Excluding loops
which splits the state (authored by szepet).
Changed prior to commit:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D36962?vs=112710&id=112874#toc
Repository:
rL LL
arphaman added a comment.
Thanks,
I'll start working on the documentation patch and will split follow-up
`clang-refactor` patch into one or two parts today.
Comment at:
include/clang/Tooling/Refactoring/RefactoringActionRulesInternal.h:33
+public:
+ virtual Expected>
+ per
xazax.hun accepted this revision.
xazax.hun added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
Generally, it looks good to me. Though it looks like some of the cases covered
in the code do not have corresponding tests (e.g.: the parenexprs).
I think this approach is good in a sens
xazax.hun accepted this revision.
xazax.hun added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
LGTM!
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37025
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinf
arphaman added inline comments.
Comment at: lib/Tooling/ASTDiff/ASTDiff.cpp:658
+ SourceRange Range;
+ if (auto *Arg = N.ASTNode.get())
+Range = TemplateArgumentLocations.at(&N - &Nodes[0]);
You can drop the `auto *Arg` since Arg is unused.
==
Author: szepet
Date: Mon Aug 28 03:50:28 2017
New Revision: 311883
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=311883&view=rev
Log:
[StaticAnalyzer] LoopUnrolling: Keep track the maximum number of steps for each
loop
This way the unrolling can be restricted for loops which will take at most a
g
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rL311883: [StaticAnalyzer] LoopUnrolling: Keep track the
maximum number of steps for each… (authored by szepet).
Changed prior to commit:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37181?vs=112866&id=112877#toc
Repositor
arphaman added inline comments.
Comment at: include/clang/AST/LexicallyOrderedRecursiveASTVisitor.h:69
+ template
+ struct has_same_member_pointer_type
+ : std::true_type {};
Why exactly is this template struct needed?
Comment at: inclu
johannes added inline comments.
Comment at: include/clang/AST/LexicallyOrderedRecursiveASTVisitor.h:75
+ Derived &getDerived() { return *static_cast(this); }
+
arphaman wrote:
> I don't think you need this since `getDerived` in RecursiveASTVisitor is
> alread
NoQ added a comment.
Thank you for the review!
> Though it looks like some of the cases covered in the code do not have
> corresponding tests (e.g.: the parenexprs).
These are covered by tests in `inline-defensive-checks.c:150,156,169,179` (old
code had `IgnoreParenCasts`). This function is ac
Author: arphaman
Date: Mon Aug 28 04:12:05 2017
New Revision: 311884
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=311884&view=rev
Log:
[refactor] initial support for refactoring action rules
This patch implements the initial support for refactoring action rules. The
first rule that's supported is
arphaman added a comment.
Ah I see,
then you should something completely different (forget the header).
Please extract this code into a protected function in RecursiveASTVisitor:
for (Stmt *SubStmt : Children)
if (!TRAVERSE_STMT_BASE(Stmt, Stmt, SubStmt, Queue))
return false;
And re
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rL311884: [refactor] initial support for refactoring action
rules (authored by arphaman).
Changed prior to commit:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D36075?vs=112678&id=112879#toc
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://r
arphaman created this revision.
This patch adds a second kind of refactoring action rule that produces symbol
occurrences. It will be used by the updated `clang-refactor` patch at
https://reviews.llvm.org/D36574.
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37210
Files:
include/clang/To
alexshap added a comment.
updated the patch per suggestion by @NoQ
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37120
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
ilya-biryukov added inline comments.
Comment at: clangd/GlobalCompilationDatabase.cpp:29
+
+static cl::opt CompileCommands("compileCommands",
+ cl::desc("Start with absolute path to
compile_commands.json"));
Please place this fl
schroedersi added a comment.
Ping :)
https://reviews.llvm.org/D30946
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
aaron.ballman added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D33852#853410, @Prazek wrote:
> Sorry for so late fixes, but it would be good to put it in 5.0
I do not think this should be in 5.0, as I believe we're only accepting
regression fixes at this point.
Comment at: incl
johannes updated this revision to Diff 112885.
johannes added a comment.
use RecursiveASTVisitor::TraverseStmt
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37200
Files:
include/clang/AST/LexicallyOrderedRecursiveASTVisitor.h
unittests/Tooling/LexicallyOrderedRecursiveASTVisitorTest.cpp
Index: unittests/Tooli
Author: arphaman
Date: Mon Aug 28 05:03:08 2017
New Revision: 311886
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=311886&view=rev
Log:
Avoid missing std error code in RefactoringActionRulesTest.cpp
This should fix this bot:
http://bb.pgr.jp/builders/i686-mingw32-RA-on-linux
Modified:
cfe/tru
arphaman added a comment.
This works as well I think
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37200
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
arphaman added inline comments.
Comment at: include/clang/AST/LexicallyOrderedRecursiveASTVisitor.h:63
using BaseType = RecursiveASTVisitor;
+ using typename BaseType::DataRecursionQueue;
Do you still need the using here?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37200
xazax.hun added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D37023#853941, @NoQ wrote:
> Thank you for the review!
>
> > Though it looks like some of the cases covered in the code do not have
> > corresponding tests (e.g.: the parenexprs).
>
> These are covered by tests in `inline-defensive-checks.c:
eandrews added a comment.
*ping*
https://reviews.llvm.org/D36487
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
johannes updated this revision to Diff 112889.
johannes added a comment.
do call derived TraverseStmt for children of CXXOperatorCallExpr
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37200
Files:
include/clang/AST/LexicallyOrderedRecursiveASTVisitor.h
include/clang/AST/RecursiveASTVisitor.h
unittests/Toolin
johannes added a comment.
The previous version didn't call TraverseDecl of the derived class, this is
fixed now.
The public getDerived.TraverseStmt() does not accept a DataRecursionQueue, so
this also could not be used (I think)
I used the wrapper TraverseStmtBase, which should behave exactly a
arphaman added inline comments.
Comment at: include/clang/AST/LexicallyOrderedRecursiveASTVisitor.h:149
+ auto Offset = [&](Stmt *S) { return SM.getFileOffset(S->getLocStart());
};
+ Swap = Offset(Children[0]) > Offset(Children[1]);
+ break;
For `
johannes updated this revision to Diff 112894.
johannes added a comment.
detect prefix/postfix from number of arguments
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37200
Files:
include/clang/AST/LexicallyOrderedRecursiveASTVisitor.h
include/clang/AST/RecursiveASTVisitor.h
unittests/Tooling/LexicallyOrdered
arphaman added a comment.
The fact `TraverseCXXOperatorCallExpr` can't call its super
`TraverseCXXOperatorCallExpr` makes the current solution kind of broken. The
super implementation of `TraverseCXXOperatorCallExpr` is responsible for
dispatch to WalkUp##STMT functions which actually call
`Vi
NoQ accepted this revision.
NoQ added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
Thanks, LGTM!
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37120
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-
klimek added inline comments.
Comment at:
cfe/trunk/include/clang/Tooling/Refactoring/RefactoringActionRule.h:23-37
+/// A common refactoring action rule interface.
+class RefactoringActionRule {
+public:
+ enum RuleKind { SourceChangeRefactoringRuleKind };
+
+ RuleKind getRul
alexfh added a comment.
This could be done even more granularly, since clang-tidy only needs static
analyzer to run clang-analyzer-* checks. But that would involve some careful
#ifdef-ing of the parts of clang-tidy/ClangTidy.cpp, so I'll understand if you
say you have little interest in this.
arphaman added inline comments.
Comment at:
cfe/trunk/include/clang/Tooling/Refactoring/RefactoringActionRule.h:23-37
+/// A common refactoring action rule interface.
+class RefactoringActionRule {
+public:
+ enum RuleKind { SourceChangeRefactoringRuleKind };
+
+ RuleKind getR
alexfh added a comment.
IIUC, these are the only clang-tidy tests that need static analyzer:
clang/tools/extra/test/clang-tidy/nolint.cpp
clang/tools/extra/test/clang-tidy/static-analyzer.cpp
clang/tools/extra/test/clang-tidy/static-analyzer-config.cpp
clang/tools/extra/test/clang-tidy/temporarie
klimek added inline comments.
Comment at:
cfe/trunk/include/clang/Tooling/Refactoring/RefactoringActionRule.h:23-37
+/// A common refactoring action rule interface.
+class RefactoringActionRule {
+public:
+ enum RuleKind { SourceChangeRefactoringRuleKind };
+
+ RuleKind getRul
mprobst added inline comments.
Comment at: lib/Format/ContinuationIndenter.cpp:1139
+
+ // On lines containing template strings, propagate NoLineBreak even for dict
+ // and array literals. This is to force wrapping an initial function call if
djasper wrote:
>
mgorny added a comment.
I might be missing something but currently clang-tidy is not built at all when
static analyzer is disabled.
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37188
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http:
ruiu added a comment.
Technically, this patch fixes your issue, but I don't think this is a good way
of fixing it because `parse()` function now has an internal state which is not
obvious to the user of the function. Can you review
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37217? This is an alternative fix tha
Prazek added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D33852#853982, @aaron.ballman wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D33852#853410, @Prazek wrote:
>
> > Sorry for so late fixes, but it would be good to put it in 5.0
>
>
> I do not think this should be in 5.0, as I believe we're only accepting
beanz accepted this revision.
beanz added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
Since the dependent patch landed, this LGTM too.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D35133
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lis
b-sumner added inline comments.
Comment at: lib/Basic/Targets/AMDGPU.cpp:362
+Builder.defineMacro(Twine("__") + Twine(GPUName));
+Builder.defineMacro(Twine("__") + Twine(GPUName) + Twine("__"));
+ }
At the meeting we discussed defining every alias of the
aaron.ballman added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D33852#854176, @Prazek wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D33852#853982, @aaron.ballman wrote:
>
> > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D33852#853410, @Prazek wrote:
> >
> > > Sorry for so late fixes, but it would be good to put it in 5.0
> >
ddcc added inline comments.
Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/SValBuilder.cpp:364
if (symLHS && symRHS &&
- (symLHS->computeComplexity() + symRHS->computeComplexity()) < MaxComp)
+ (symLHS->computeComplexity() + symRHS->computeComplexity()) < MaxComp)
return
lhames added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D36806#848246, @hintonda wrote:
> It's just too bad llvm::cantFail() doesn't take an optional string.
> But the code is cleaner, so I won't comment further.
That's not a bad idea actually. Let me add an optional error message to
cantFail for
rnk added inline comments.
Comment at: include/clang/Basic/AllDiagnostics.h:37
+#define STRINGIFY_NAME(NAME) #NAME
+#define VALIDATE_DIAG_SIZE(NAME)
\
+ static_assert(
\
mclow.lists added inline comments.
Comment at:
test/libcxx/utilities/function.objects/func.require/incomplete_return_type.pass.cpp:1
+//===--===//
+//
Is this file in the right place?
If it's su
mclow.lists added inline comments.
Comment at:
test/libcxx/utilities/function.objects/func.require/incomplete_return_type.pass.cpp:1
+//===--===//
+//
mclow.lists wrote:
> Is this file in the ri
eugenis added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D26796#853446, @mgorny wrote:
> The problems:
>
> 1.
> http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/sanitizer-x86_64-linux-android/builds/2140/steps/annotate/logs/stdio
> -- purely this change,
This one still builds i686 libraries. Maybe it needs a cl
Author: hans
Date: Mon Aug 28 10:53:00 2017
New Revision: 311898
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=311898&view=rev
Log:
Revert r311857 "Emit static constexpr member as available_externally definition"
It caused PR759744.
> Emit static constexpr member as available_externally definitio
rsmith added inline comments.
Comment at:
test/libcxx/utilities/function.objects/func.require/incomplete_return_type.pass.cpp:17-19
+struct IncompleteReturnType {
+ std::function fn;
+};
Would it make sense to also check that this struct is copy-constructible?
Author: rnk
Date: Mon Aug 28 10:59:24 2017
New Revision: 311899
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=311899&view=rev
Log:
Fix inaccurate comment about -fdelayed-template-parsing and MSVC
Modified:
cfe/trunk/lib/Driver/ToolChains/Clang.cpp
Modified: cfe/trunk/lib/Driver/ToolChains/Cla
erichkeane updated this revision to Diff 112916.
erichkeane marked an inline comment as done.
erichkeane added a comment.
Moved static assert into a .cpp file, DiagnosticIDs.cpp seems like the one that
makes the most sense.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37122
Files:
include/clang/Basic/Diagnosti
ahatanak added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D36915#849622, @faisalv wrote:
> I don't think this approach is entirely correct for at least the following
> reasons:
>
> 1. in the lambda case the machinery that diagnoses capture failures should be
> the machinery erroring on the lambda (
morehouse updated this revision to Diff 112923.
morehouse added a comment.
Herald added a subscriber: kubamracek.
- Add weak definition of __sancov_lowest_stack to runtime.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37156
Files:
clang/lib/Driver/SanitizerArgs.cpp
compiler-rt/lib/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_c
kcc added a reviewer: george.karpenkov.
kcc added a comment.
+George, in case he knows about __attribute__((tls_model("initial-exec"))) on
Mac
Comment at:
compiler-rt/lib/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_coverage_libcdep_new.cc:218
+SANITIZER_INTERFACE_ATTRIBUTE SANITIZER_WEAK_ATTR
zaks.anna added a comment.
Is this blocked on the same reasons as what was raised in
https://reviews.llvm.org/D35109?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D35110
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/list
george.karpenkov added a comment.
I don't, but I can check whether tests pass.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37156
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
zaks.anna added a comment.
> But I've never used the taint tracking mode, so I don't know what would be a
> reasonable default for MaxComp.
that one is very experimental anyway. I'd just keep the functional changes to
tain out of this patch and use the current default that taint uses.
https:/
johannes updated this revision to Diff 112926.
johannes edited the summary of this revision.
johannes added a comment.
split to ASTDiff/ASTPatch
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37005
Files:
include/clang/Tooling/ASTDiff/ASTDiff.h
include/clang/Tooling/ASTDiff/ASTPatch.h
lib/Tooling/ASTDiff/ASTD
aprantl added inline comments.
Comment at: lib/CodeGen/CGVTables.cpp:157
+ if (DebugInfo)
+DebugInfo->replaceTemporaryNodes();
+
probinson wrote:
> aprantl wrote:
> > Have you looked at what it would take to only finalize the nodes reachable
> > via the fun
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rL311905: Change Diagnostic Category size error from runtime
to compiletime (authored by erichkeane).
Changed prior to commit:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37122?vs=112916&id=112931#toc
Repository:
rL LLV
Author: erichkeane
Date: Mon Aug 28 11:53:17 2017
New Revision: 311905
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=311905&view=rev
Log:
Change Diagnostic Category size error from runtime to compiletime
Diagnostic Categories are fairly annoying, and are only enforced
by a runtime-debug-only asser
rnk accepted this revision.
rnk added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
lgtm
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37122
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
mgorny added a comment.
@eugenis, thanks for the suggestion. I've found the problematic push (that
attempts to move the wrong file) and filed https://reviews.llvm.org/D37226 for
review.
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D26796
___
cf
Author: abataev
Date: Mon Aug 28 12:26:54 2017
New Revision: 311908
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=311908&view=rev
Log:
[OPENMP] Remove unused header files, NFC.
Modified:
cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaOpenMP.cpp
Modified: cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaOpenMP.cpp
URL:
http://llvm.org/viewvc
I reverted this in r311898 as it caused Chromium builds to fail with
an assertion; see PR34348.
On Sun, Aug 27, 2017 at 1:24 PM, Mehdi Amini via cfe-commits
wrote:
> Author: mehdi_amini
> Date: Sun Aug 27 13:24:09 2017
> New Revision: 311857
>
> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=311857
faisalv added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D36915#854317, @ahatanak wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D36915#849622, @faisalv wrote:
>
> > I don't think this approach is entirely correct for at least the following
> > reasons:
> >
> > 1. in the lambda case the machinery that diagnos
vsapsai added a comment.
It occurred to me that another approach for fixing the crash can be setting
`IsTypeSpecifier` to `true` while we ParseCastExpression. According to
cast-expression:
unary-expression
( type-id ) cast-expression
type-id:
type-specifier-seq abstract-declarato
george.karpenkov added a comment.
@kcc I've disabled the relevant test on Mac in r311916, please revert my change
once this CR goes through.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37156
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.o
lebedev.ri added a comment.
I did not test this yet, but looks better :)
Comment at: test/clang-tidy/hicpp-exception-baseclass.cpp:26
}
throw non_derived_exception(); // Bad
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: [[@LINE-1]]:9: warning: throwing an exception whose type
'non_derived_excep
johannes updated this revision to Diff 112951.
johannes added a comment.
use a specialized getStmtChildren to fix the order for CXXOperatorCallExpr
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37200
Files:
include/clang/AST/LexicallyOrderedRecursiveASTVisitor.h
include/clang/AST/RecursiveASTVisitor.h
unitte
Author: mgorny
Date: Mon Aug 28 13:29:52 2017
New Revision: 311923
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=311923&view=rev
Log:
Reland r311836 - [Driver] Use arch type to find compiler-rt libraries (on Linux)
Use llvm::Triple::getArchTypeName() when looking for compiler-rt
libraries, rather
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rL311923: Reland r311836 - [Driver] Use arch type to find
compiler-rt libraries (on Linux) (authored by mgorny).
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D26796
Files:
cfe/trunk/lib/Driver/ToolCha
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rL311924: Reland r311842 - [cmake] Remove i686 target that is
duplicate to i386 (authored by mgorny).
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D26764
Files:
compiler-rt/trunk/cmake/Modules/Compile
johannes added a comment.
Yeah, this seems to be the best solution for this. I think I ran into the same
issue when working on the StmtDataCollector - basically there can only be two
Traverse*, one in the Derived class and the other one needs to do all the magic
with walking the specialisation
1 - 100 of 152 matches
Mail list logo
