https://github.com/shafik commented:
Please add a detailed summary for this PR. The summary is what usually goes
into the git log and it is important that the git log is useful for quick
understanding of changes without having to dig into the details.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pul
https://github.com/shafik edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/76825
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
shafik wrote:
I think I would like some more eyes on this, I don't know if it is obvious to
me what it means to reallocate a volatile object.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/77092
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http
https://github.com/shafik commented:
This should have a release note and I think this is a potentially breaking
change since folks using `Wextra` may get this diagnostic now.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/77178
___
cfe-commits mailing list
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Can we add a few tests for this change?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/77326
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Thank you for the fix, can you add more details to your summary. The summary is
what usually goes into the git log. We would like those to be as descriptive as
possible to avoid having to do extra digging to understand the change at a high
level.
https://
https://github.com/shafik commented:
This makes sense to me but I would like @cor3ntin to review as well.
This needs a release note.
I see that there was two test cases. Do you think it is worth it to add the
second test case as well?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/77434
__
shafik wrote:
> ping @shafik @cor3ntin @ChuanqiXu9, how can we make progress here?
Please add a release note and address my previous comment:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/69076#issuecomment-1780327252
CC @cor3ntin
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/69076
_
@@ -18931,7 +18931,7 @@ void Sema::MarkFunctionReferenced(SourceLocation Loc,
FunctionDecl *Func,
// constant evaluated
bool NeededForConstantEvaluation =
isPotentiallyConstantEvaluatedContext(*this) &&
- isImplicitlyDefinableConstexprFunction(Func);
+ is
Author: Shafik Yaghmour
Date: 2022-07-27T14:59:35-07:00
New Revision: a3710589f285de0bb22ff92b1fc24df9411e986f
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/a3710589f285de0bb22ff92b1fc24df9411e986f
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/a3710589f285de0bb22ff92b1fc24df9411e986f.dif
Author: Shafik Yaghmour
Date: 2022-07-27T15:31:41-07:00
New Revision: 28cd7f86ed0e94ea3ae56a49ba85f0ccb7b51dd4
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/28cd7f86ed0e94ea3ae56a49ba85f0ccb7b51dd4
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/28cd7f86ed0e94ea3ae56a49ba85f0ccb7b51dd4.dif
Author: Shafik Yaghmour
Date: 2022-07-29T19:17:42-07:00
New Revision: a0d61051628825e2f394240dc442ad5d81fa78bc
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/a0d61051628825e2f394240dc442ad5d81fa78bc
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/a0d61051628825e2f394240dc442ad5d81fa78bc.dif
Author: Shafik Yaghmour
Date: 2022-08-08T16:23:07-07:00
New Revision: cc104113ddecbdcec2cca848adbb6afa1214e9de
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/cc104113ddecbdcec2cca848adbb6afa1214e9de
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/cc104113ddecbdcec2cca848adbb6afa1214e9de.dif
Author: Shafik Yaghmour
Date: 2022-08-10T11:12:01-07:00
New Revision: 4e458765aaef7988e687e190d865f331727825c0
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/4e458765aaef7988e687e190d865f331727825c0
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/4e458765aaef7988e687e190d865f331727825c0.dif
Author: Shafik Yaghmour
Date: 2022-04-21T14:58:50-07:00
New Revision: 5ff992bca208a0e37ca6338fc735aec6aa848b72
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/5ff992bca208a0e37ca6338fc735aec6aa848b72
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/5ff992bca208a0e37ca6338fc735aec6aa848b72.dif
Author: Shafik Yaghmour
Date: 2022-02-17T11:14:14-08:00
New Revision: f56cb520d8554ca42a215e82ecfa58d0b6c178e4
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/f56cb520d8554ca42a215e82ecfa58d0b6c178e4
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/f56cb520d8554ca42a215e82ecfa58d0b6c178e4.dif
Author: Shafik Yaghmour
Date: 2022-07-14T16:09:52-07:00
New Revision: 80dec2ecfffe30f86ecfeec8f553b16bb992c48b
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/80dec2ecfffe30f86ecfeec8f553b16bb992c48b
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/80dec2ecfffe30f86ecfeec8f553b16bb992c48b.dif
Author: Shafik Yaghmour
Date: 2022-07-25T16:01:01-07:00
New Revision: aea82d4551139ded0290afab739f0b367d055628
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/aea82d4551139ded0290afab739f0b367d055628
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/aea82d4551139ded0290afab739f0b367d055628.dif
https://github.com/shafik edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84983
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -4181,6 +4185,127 @@ class FunctionNoProtoType : public FunctionType, public
llvm::FoldingSetNode {
}
};
+class FunctionEffect;
+class FunctionEffectSet;
+
+// It is the user's responsibility to keep this in set form: elements are
+// ordered and unique.
+// We could hid
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Quick drive by comment
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84983
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -4181,6 +4185,127 @@ class FunctionNoProtoType : public FunctionType, public
llvm::FoldingSetNode {
}
};
+class FunctionEffect;
+class FunctionEffectSet;
+
+// It is the user's responsibility to keep this in set form: elements are
+// ordered and unique.
+// We could hid
https://github.com/shafik commented:
I believe this should have a release note.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/85494
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
This is not really an NFC change so you should have waited for an approval.
This LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/85534
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/c
https://github.com/shafik commented:
LGTM, I will let @ilya-biryukov approve
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/85405
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++20 -verify %s
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++20 -ferror-limit 0 -verify %s
shafik wrote:
Why the `ferror-limit 0`?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/86794
___
cfe-commit
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/85413
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
LGTM, interesting it looks like we don't do this check in `fromContraintExpr`
either.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/86869
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https:/
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
Thank you for the test! LGTM.
Do we also have a test that `sizeof([=]{ return i + j;})` should fail as well?
Tangentially related to this DR but if we don't we should cover that in our
tests someplace.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/
shafik wrote:
It looks like we do have a test and it looks like the restriction was lifted in
C++20.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/87274
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinf
@@ -3899,6 +3899,9 @@ static QualType
GetDeclSpecTypeForDeclarator(TypeProcessingState &state,
SemaRef.Diag(OwnedTagDecl->getLocation(), DiagID)
<< SemaRef.Context.getTypeDeclType(OwnedTagDecl);
D.setInvalidType(true);
+ OwnedTagDecl->setCompleteDefi
@@ -3899,6 +3899,9 @@ static QualType
GetDeclSpecTypeForDeclarator(TypeProcessingState &state,
SemaRef.Diag(OwnedTagDecl->getLocation(), DiagID)
<< SemaRef.Context.getTypeDeclType(OwnedTagDecl);
D.setInvalidType(true);
+ OwnedTagDecl->setCompleteDefi
https://github.com/shafik commented:
LGTM after addressing Aaron's comments.
Can you elaborate more on the details of the bug in the summary. This goes into
the git log and we want folks to be able to understand the problem well from
the summary w/o having to do additional checks.
Thank you
https://github.com/shafik commented:
LGTM but I want @fahadnayyar to verify this addresses his concerns.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/87132
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/list
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Thank you the PR.
Your summary is blank but should describe the problem you are trying to solve,
how the PR solves it and should at the end link to any llvm issues this relates
to.
Having solid summaries is critical since this is normally what one sees whe
@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++14 -verify -fcxx-exceptions
-Werror=c++14-extensions -Werror=c++20-extensions %s
+
+template struct C {
+union {
+ int i;
+};
+constexpr C() {} // expected-error {{constexpr union constructor that does
not initialize
@@ -224,6 +224,9 @@ struct TemplateInit {
};
// FIXME: This is ill-formed (no diagnostic required). We should diagnose it.
constexpr TemplateInit() {} // desired-error {{must initialize all members}}
+#ifndef CXX2A
shafik wrote:
We normally do this using
https://github.com/shafik commented:
I think this makes sense but I would like @cor3ntin to approve.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/80656
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo
https://github.com/shafik edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/80656
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -168,3 +168,30 @@ auto lambda4 = [] requires(sizeof(char) == 1){}; //
expected-error {{expected bo
#if __cplusplus <= 202002L
// expected-warning@-2{{lambda without a parameter clause is a C++23
extension}}
#endif
+
+namespace GH78524 {
+
+template T Foo;
+
+template aut
@@ -1385,6 +1385,11 @@ ExprResult Parser::ParseLambdaExpressionAfterIntroducer(
Diag(RAngleLoc,
diag::err_lambda_template_parameter_list_empty);
} else {
+ // We increase the template depth before recursing into a
requires-clause.
+ // The abbrev
shafik wrote:
@AaronBallman since this involves compound literals a C-ism, I would like you
to review this as well.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/80519
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/
https://github.com/shafik edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/78060
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Just a quick question
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/78060
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -1600,12 +1600,25 @@ Sema::BuildCXXTypeConstructExpr(TypeSourceInfo *TInfo,
return ExprError(Diag(TyBeginLoc, diag::err_init_for_function_type)
<< Ty << FullRange);
- // C++17 [expr.type.conv]p2:
- // If the type is cv void and the initializer
@@ -39,7 +39,43 @@ namespace addressof {
struct U { int n : 5; } u;
int *pbf = __builtin_addressof(u.n); // expected-error {{address of
bit-field requested}}
- S *ptmp = __builtin_addressof(S{}); // expected-error {{taking the address
of a temporary}} expected-warning {
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Nit
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/75937
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/75937
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -183,7 +184,7 @@ class ResultBuilder {
/// Overloaded C++ member functions found by SemaLookup.
/// Used to determine when one overload is dominated by another.
- llvm::DenseMap, ShadowMapEntry>
+ llvm::DenseMap, ShadowMapEntry>
shafik wrote:
```sugg
https://github.com/shafik commented:
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/81658
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Late review but LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/83715
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -0,0 +1,54 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify -I%S/Inputs -std=c++20 %s
+
+// expected-no-diagnostics
+
+#include "std-coroutine.h"
+
+using size_t = decltype(sizeof(0));
+
+struct Generator {
+ struct promise_type {
+int _val{};
+
+Generator get_return_objec
@@ -1434,13 +1434,18 @@ ExprResult Sema::ActOnCXXThis(SourceLocation Loc) {
return Diag(Loc, diag::err_invalid_this_use) << 0;
}
- return BuildCXXThisExpr(Loc, ThisTy, /*IsImplicit=*/false);
+ return BuildCXXThisExpr(Loc, ThisTy, /*IsImplicit=*/false,
+
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Should we verify that we diagnose the case where the definition includes a
comma?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84169
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-b
@@ -0,0 +1,67 @@
+//===- SemaOpenACC.h - Semantic Analysis for OpenACC constructs
---===//
+//
+// Part of the LLVM Project, under the Apache License v2.0 with LLVM
Exceptions.
+// See https://llvm.org/LICENSE.txt for license information.
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: Apa
https://github.com/shafik commented:
I think this makes sense.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84184
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84184
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Should we also have a C++ test for this fix?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84068
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
shafik wrote:
Can we please get more descriptive summaries in the future. We should at a
minimum state 1) what the underlying problem is 2) what the approach for fixing
the problem is.
In this case the title describes the problem but it would be nice to have a
summary of the fix as well. So f
shafik wrote:
> So I believe:
>
> ```
> typedef enum EnumA {
> A
> } EnumA;
>
> enum EnumB {
> B,
> B1 = 1,
> B2 = A == B1
> };
> ```
>
> is not an enum compare warning in C++ because `B1` doesn't have an
> enumeration type due to the enumeration not being fully-defined, and is not
>
@@ -6,7 +6,9 @@ typedef enum EnumA {
} EnumA;
enum EnumB {
- B
+ B,
shafik wrote:
I think what I was asking, was do we have an equivalent C++ test that verifies
in a `.cpp` file that we also do not obtain a diagnostic for this.
https://github.com/llvm/llv
@@ -993,11 +993,18 @@ MacroArgs *Preprocessor::ReadMacroCallArgumentList(Token
&MacroName,
// If the macro contains the comma pasting extension, the diagnostic
// is suppressed; we know we'll get another diagnostic later.
if (!MI->hasCommaPasting()) {
-
https://github.com/shafik edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84520
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Just a nit here.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84520
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84519
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
nitpick
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84519
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -596,8 +596,21 @@ VarDecl *Sema::buildCoroutinePromise(SourceLocation Loc) {
// Add implicit object parameter.
if (auto *MD = dyn_cast(FD)) {
-if (MD->isImplicitObjectMemberFunction() && !isLambdaCallOperator(MD)) {
- ExprResult ThisExpr = ActOnCXXThis(Loc);
+
shafik wrote:
Looks like the build failed b/c you did not run `git clang-format`
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84515
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
shafik wrote:
> @shafik We dont have a dedicated cpp test for this. I can add one if you
> want, but clang/test/Sema/warn-compare-enum-types-mismatch.c runs clang both
> on C and C++ mode, so I didnt think it necessary.
I think we just a bug that demonstrates this issue:
https://github.com/ll
shafik wrote:
It looks like it passed on your last commit but you have a conflict now which
you need to resolve.
Can you merge or do you need help with that?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/80040
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lis
https://github.com/shafik updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82407
>From 5fcaeaddccc0f7e370bf7bebce113d8d52e1b1bd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Shafik Yaghmour
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2024 11:22:39 -0800
Subject: [PATCH] [Clang][Sema] Fix incorrect rejection default construction of
u
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Thank you for this PR. This change should have some tests to verify the
behavior is correct. I am a little surprised that this does not change any
existing tests but maybe we don't have good test coverage.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/80244
___
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Hello, the diff is only showing a single whitespace change which from the title
does not seem the intent.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/80063
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http
https://github.com/shafik commented:
The failure of the Windows CI is due to a know problem w/ false detection of a
virus. You can use `--allow-empty` to make an empty commit and restart the
process. You have approval, so once it goes green you should be good to squash
and merge.
https://gith
https://github.com/shafik edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/78742
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -18,6 +19,40 @@ enum x // expected-warning
{{enumeration values exceed rang
{ y = -9223372036854775807LL-1, // expected-warning {{ISO C restricts
enumerator values to range of 'int'}}
z = 9223372036854775808ULL };// expected-warning {{ISO C restric
https://github.com/shafik commented:
I think a more appropriate title would be "Fix for overflow in enumerators"
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/78742
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mail
https://github.com/shafik updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82407
>From 5fcaeaddccc0f7e370bf7bebce113d8d52e1b1bd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Shafik Yaghmour
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2024 11:22:39 -0800
Subject: [PATCH] [Clang][Sema] Fix incorrect rejection default construction of
u
https://github.com/shafik updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82407
>From 5fcaeaddccc0f7e370bf7bebce113d8d52e1b1bd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Shafik Yaghmour
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2024 11:22:39 -0800
Subject: [PATCH] [Clang][Sema] Fix incorrect rejection default construction of
u
@@ -120,6 +120,10 @@ Non-comprehensive list of changes in this release
New Compiler Flags
--
+- ``-Wmissing-designated-field-initializers``, grouped under
``-Wmissing-designated-field-initializers``.
shafik wrote:
CC @AaronBallman
https://g
@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
+// RUN: %clang++ -S -emit-llvm -o - %s | FileCheck %s
+#include
+
+// CHECK: call void @llvm.memset.p0.i64(ptr align 1 %x, i8 0, i64 8, i1 false)
+// CHECK: call void @llvm.memset.p0.i64(ptr align 16 %x, i8 0, i64 32, i1
false)
+template
shafi
shafik wrote:
Thank you for this fix.
Can you put more details in your summary. The approach I like to take is 1.
what the problem is 2. what is the approach of the fix 3. any other important
details.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/83124
shafik wrote:
Can you explain which cases the `if (!ArraySize)` condition was catching before
and why the change does not effect those cases? My fear is that we are breaking
other cases but we don't have test coverage for those cases and we are missing
those breaks.
https://github.com/llvm/ll
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Thank you for this fix. I am happy the changes were not too different from my
suggestion. Sometimes problems end up being more difficult then they seem
initially.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/83152
__
@@ -16538,6 +16538,17 @@ void Sema::DiagnoseAlwaysNonNullPointer(Expr *E,
}
}
+ // Complain if we are converting a lambda expression to a boolean value
+ if (const auto *MCallExpr = dyn_cast(E)) {
+if (const auto *MRecordDecl = MCallExpr->getRecordDecl();
+
@@ -16538,6 +16538,17 @@ void Sema::DiagnoseAlwaysNonNullPointer(Expr *E,
}
}
+ // Complain if we are converting a lambda expression to a boolean value
+ if (const auto *MCallExpr = dyn_cast(E)) {
+if (const auto *MRecordDecl = MCallExpr->getRecordDecl();
+
https://github.com/shafik edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/83152
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik requested changes to this pull request.
I don't believe this is the right approach.
I can only replicate one of the issues: https://godbolt.org/z/7dee3a3cY
I spent some time looking at it and it is quite gnarly but we need to
understand better what is going on.
htt
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
LGTM, any objections @tbaederr
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/76646
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/76646
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -35,11 +41,14 @@ class field_test {
int x;
field_test(field_test&& other) {
x = std::move(x); // expected-warning{{explicitly moving}}
+x = static_cast(x); // expected-warning{{explicitly moving}}
shafik wrote:
Can you add some tests where we
shafik wrote:
Adding @AaronBallman and @erichkeane for a wider audience
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/76596
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
LGTM after addressing comment.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/83476
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/83476
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -17615,31 +17615,28 @@ class SequenceChecker : public
ConstEvaluatedExprVisitor {
return VisitExpr(CCE);
// In C++11, list initializations are sequenced.
-SmallVector Elts;
-SequenceTree::Seq Parent = Region;
-for (CXXConstructExpr::const_arg_iterator
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/83476
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82407
>From 5fcaeaddccc0f7e370bf7bebce113d8d52e1b1bd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Shafik Yaghmour
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2024 11:22:39 -0800
Subject: [PATCH] [Clang][Sema] Fix incorrect rejection default construction of
u
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Note, I opened an issue for this here:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/83385
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/83611
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.or
@@ -100,6 +100,12 @@ void AttributePool::takePool(AttributePool &pool) {
pool.Attrs.clear();
}
+void AttributePool::takeFrom(ParsedAttributesView &List, AttributePool &Pool) {
+ assert(&Pool != this && "AttributePool can't take attributes from itself");
+ llvm::for_each(Li
https://github.com/shafik requested changes to this pull request.
We need a minimal reproducer here. Looking at the bug report it is not clear to
me if this is the correct fix or not. After we have a reproducer we would need
a test added to the PR and a release note.
https://github.com/llvm/ll
101 - 200 of 956 matches
Mail list logo
