https://github.com/shafik commented:
Looks good, I will let Tom make the final accept.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/90490
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
shafik wrote:
@MitalAshok ping
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
@@ -67,6 +68,69 @@ void B::g() requires true;
} // namespace cwg2847
+namespace cwg2851 { // cwg2851: 19
+
+#if __cplusplus >= 202002L
+template struct Val { static constexpr T value = v; };
+
+
+// Floating-point promotions
+
+static_assert(Val::value == 0.0L);
+static_asser
https://github.com/shafik commented:
I don't think the test failures look related to the changes can you push and
empty change to see if rerunning the tests comes up clean?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96301
___
cfe-commits mailing list
c
https://github.com/shafik commented:
This make sense to me, @dwblaikie wdyt?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106033
___
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 the summary, in this case
some details on the fix and why it works would be helpful.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/105727
___
cfe-commits mailing list
shafik wrote:
Looks like this is linked to a clang-19 regression:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/106182
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/95202
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
LGTM except for nitpicks
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106453
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -9491,8 +9496,8 @@ static ExprResult widenIterationCount(unsigned Bits, Expr
*E, Sema &SemaRef) {
return ExprResult(E);
// OK to convert to signed, because new type has more bits than old.
QualType NewType = C.getIntTypeForBitwidth(Bits, /*Signed=*/true);
- return
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106453
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -9469,7 +9473,8 @@ static ExprResult buildCounterUpdate(
if (!SemaRef.Context.hasSameType(Update.get()->getType(),
VarRef.get()->getType())) {
Update = SemaRef.PerformImplicitConversion(
- Update.get(), VarRef.get()->ge
@@ -8819,8 +8822,8 @@ Expr *OpenMPIterationSpaceChecker::buildNumIterations(
NewSize, Type->hasSignedIntegerRepresentation() ||
C.getTypeSize(Type) < NewSize);
if (!SemaRef.Context.hasSameType(Diff.get()->getType(), NewType)) {
-Di
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Can you add more details to the summary explaining why the fix is necessary.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106552
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/ma
https://github.com/shafik commented:
@tbaederr I am not confident this is the right approach.
If we compare the non-statement-expression case: https://godbolt.org/z/vseWeh5jP
We don't have the same issue as the original case:
https://godbolt.org/z/Gh13WcMEz
So I suspect there is something abo
shafik wrote:
You reapplied this here:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/1595988ee6f9732e7ea79928af8a470ad5ef7dbe
but it has caused a regression:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/97646
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/90500
_
@@ -249,13 +249,15 @@ class APValue {
struct NoLValuePath {};
struct UninitArray {};
struct UninitStruct {};
+ struct ConstexprUnknown {};
template friend class clang::serialization::BasicReaderBase;
friend class ASTImporter;
friend class ASTNodeImporter;
https://github.com/shafik deleted
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/95474
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -249,13 +249,15 @@ class APValue {
struct NoLValuePath {};
struct UninitArray {};
struct UninitStruct {};
+ struct ConstexprUnknown {};
template friend class clang::serialization::BasicReaderBase;
friend class ASTImporter;
friend class ASTNodeImporter;
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96228
___
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 this fix!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/98439
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
shafik wrote:
I don't think the build error is related to this change.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/98439
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
shafik wrote:
> The sad part is that MSVC and some old versions of GCC don't like `template`
> being added here :(
It looks like the description provides a workaround for gcc but a bug report
against MSVC should be filed if we don' have one already.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/9
https://github.com/shafik requested changes to this pull request.
It looks like we are using the same pattern that fix is using in
`ASTStmtReader::VisitRequiresExpr` which gives me some comfort but I am not
happy that we have a relatively complex and easy to get wrong operation
repeated in thr
@@ -2157,17 +2157,19 @@ CXXDeductionGuideDecl *CXXDeductionGuideDecl::Create(
ASTContext &C, DeclContext *DC, SourceLocation StartLoc,
ExplicitSpecifier ES, const DeclarationNameInfo &NameInfo, QualType T,
TypeSourceInfo *TInfo, SourceLocation EndLocation, CXXConstr
https://github.com/shafik edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/98788
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Quick drive by comment
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/98788
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -67,6 +68,69 @@ void B::g() requires true;
} // namespace cwg2847
+namespace cwg2851 { // cwg2851: 19
+
+#if __cplusplus >= 202002L
+template struct Val { static constexpr T value = v; };
+
+
+// Floating-point promotions
+
+static_assert(Val::value == 0.0L);
+static_asser
shafik wrote:
> @cor3ntin @shafik Hi, I want to take charge of this issue and submit a PR for
> the fix.
I would open a new PR and reference this one in the summary for completeness.
It looks like this one is not going to picked up by the author and so if you
can take it over and finish it th
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++2a -verify -ast-dump -ast-dump-decl-types
-ast-dump-filter "deduction guide" %s | FileCheck %s --strict-whitespace
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++2a -verify -ast-dump -ast-dump-decl-types
-Wno-c++11-narrowing -ast-dump-filter "deduction g
@@ -2803,7 +2803,207 @@ getRHSTemplateDeclAndArgs(Sema &SemaRef,
TypeAliasTemplateDecl *AliasTemplate) {
return {Template, AliasRhsTemplateArgs};
}
-// Build deduction guides for a type alias template.
+// Build deduction guides for a type alias template from the given unde
https://github.com/shafik edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/90842
___
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 this fix.
You should reference the issue that this fixes in your summary.
This also need a release note.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/90842
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists
@@ -2876,10 +2876,21 @@ class TreeTransform {
return ExprError();
Base = BaseResult.get();
+ // We want to use `BuildMemberReferenceExpr()` so we can use its logic
+ // that materializes `Base` into a temporary if it's a prvalue.
+ // To do so, we
shafik wrote:
Note there is a `BuildAnonymousStructUnionMemberReference`, I am not sure it
solves your problem.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/90842
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mail
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
Thank you for the additional test coverage, LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/90500
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listin
https://github.com/shafik edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/92425
___
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
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/92425
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify -std=c++20 %s
+// expected-no-diagnostics
+
+template
shafik wrote:
Nitpick wrap this in `namespace GH77377` since this is a regression test from a
bug report
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/9
@@ -167,9 +167,11 @@ Parser::DeclGroupPtrTy
Parser::ParseTemplateDeclarationOrSpecialization(
LastParamListWasEmpty);
// Parse the actual template declaration.
- if (Tok.is(tok::kw_concept))
-return Actions.ConvertDeclToDeclGroup(
-
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/92295
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ namespace InExpr {
// These are valid expressions.
foo(0);
+foo(0); // expected-warning {{comparisons like 'X<=Y<=Z' don't have
their mathematical meaning}}
foo(false);
shafik wrote:
It is a shame we don't catch this one bu
https://github.com/shafik commented:
This makes sense given the pain we are seeing here.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/92740
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -11298,8 +11298,14 @@ static void DiagnoseBadConversion(Sema &S,
OverloadCandidate *Cand,
Expr *FromExpr = Conv.Bad.FromExpr;
QualType FromTy = Conv.Bad.getFromType();
QualType ToTy = Conv.Bad.getToType();
- SourceRange ToParamRange =
- !isObjectArgument ? Fn->g
https://github.com/shafik edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/92721
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Can you add some details to the summary. What was the original code doing wrong
and the proposed new approach.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/92721
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
@@ -467,15 +467,18 @@ class Parser : public CodeCompletionHandler {
/// Flags describing a context in which we're parsing a statement.
enum class ParsedStmtContext {
+/// This context permits declarations in language modes where declarations
+/// are not statements
https://github.com/shafik commented:
LGTM w/ a few nitpicks
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/92113
___
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/92113
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -451,6 +463,25 @@ static_assert(!__is_nothrow_constructible(D4, int), "");
#endif
} // namespace cwg1350
+namespace cwg1352 { // cwg1352: 3.0
+struct A {
+#if __cplusplus >= 201103L
+ int a = sizeof(A);
shafik wrote:
I think it might be worth it to see th
@@ -86,6 +86,23 @@ struct A {
};
}
+namespace cwg1458 { // cwg1458: 3.1
+#if __cplusplus >= 201103L
+struct A;
+
+void f() {
+ constexpr A* a = nullptr;
+ constexpr int p = &*a;
+ // expected-error@-1 {{cannot initialize a variable of type 'const int' with
an rvalue of typ
@@ -451,6 +463,25 @@ static_assert(!__is_nothrow_constructible(D4, int), "");
#endif
} // namespace cwg1350
+namespace cwg1352 { // cwg1352: 3.0
+struct A {
+#if __cplusplus >= 201103L
+ int a = sizeof(A);
shafik wrote:
It also mentions in the body of member
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
Thank you for the fix. Can you please a little more details to your summary so
that folks reading git log have more context.
This also needs a release note.
Please also add that this also fixes:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/
shafik wrote:
Can you also confirm this fixes:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/70191
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93079
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/c
https://github.com/shafik commented:
LGTM but I would like Tom or Aaron to also take a look
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93216
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-comm
https://github.com/shafik commented:
This looks good but you need to add a bit more details to your summary, more
specifically what case caused the bug to emerge.
I am also curious why this does not show up in C++, we obtain a similar
diagnostic but no crash.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-pro
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101426
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -9267,14 +9267,14 @@ bool Sema::RequireLiteralType(SourceLocation Loc,
QualType T,
if (!RT)
return true;
- const CXXRecordDecl *RD = cast(RT->getDecl());
-
// A partially-defined class type can't be a literal type, because a literal
// class type must have a t
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101426
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
shafik wrote:
For future reference the summary here is not really sufficient. Since this what
usually goes in the git log they should be enough details for folks reading the
git log to understand what the change was.
The summary should explain the problem and provide a summary of the fix as we
@@ -20,3 +19,15 @@ struct S : HasVT {
HasD<> v;
};
+// Ensure we don't get infinite recursion from the check, however. See GH104802
+namespace GH104802 {
+class foo { // expected-note {{definition of 'GH104802::foo' is not
complete until the closing '}'}}
+ foo a;
@@ -20,3 +19,29 @@ struct S : HasVT {
HasD<> v;
};
+// Ensure we don't get infinite recursion from the check, however. See GH104802
+namespace GH104802 {
+class foo { // expected-note {{definition of 'GH104802::foo' is not
complete until the closing '}'}}
+ foo a;
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/104829
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
shafik wrote:
Can you please add more details in your summary about the problem and how the
PR will fix the problem.
Having detailed summaries for got log is important. Also for the code reviewer
as well, I should get a good snapshot of the problem and fix from the summary.
https://github.com
shafik wrote:
Can we add more context to the summary i.e. "cppcheck
comparisonOfBoolWithBoolError flagged the use of ..."
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/102948
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/
@@ -3139,6 +3139,19 @@ Parser::DeclGroupPtrTy
Parser::ParseCXXClassMemberDeclaration(
return Actions.BuildDeclaratorGroup(Decls);
}
+ // Befriending a concept is invalid and would already fail if
+ // we did nothing here, but this allows us to issue a more
+ // helpf
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/105821
___
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/96228
___
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.
I am curious what specifically about this code triggers the crash. We do have a
test w/ a defaulted outside the class. So there is another condition needed to
trigger this. It looks like removing `constexpr` from `operator==(d h, g i)
@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++20 -fsyntax-only -verify %s
shafik wrote:
I think this is a better location for the test:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/clang/test/CXX/class/class.compare/class.compare.default/p1.cpp
We normally wra
shafik wrote:
There are several test failures that look related to this change, please check
them out.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96228
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listi
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Can you add some more details to the summary e.g. "The fix adds an additional
check in isGSLOwner() for Owner attribute" or something along those lines.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108280
___
cfe-comm
@@ -1243,12 +1247,19 @@ bool
ASTUnit::Parse(std::shared_ptr PCHContainerOps,
}
std::unique_ptr Act(
- new TopLevelDeclTrackerAction(*this));
+ new TopLevelDeclTrackerAction(*this, true));
shafik wrote:
We should use
[bugprone-argument-comment]
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108021
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -446,7 +446,12 @@ static bool tryDiagnoseOverloadedCast(Sema &S, CastType CT,
: InitializationKind::CreateCast(/*type range?*/ range);
InitializationSequence sequence(S, entity, initKind, src);
- assert(sequence.Failed() && "initialization succeeded on second try?");
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Thank you for the fix.
Is this from a bug report, if so it should be mentioned in the summary.
The summary itself could be a big clearer, maybe a small code example could
help.
I think this also needs a release note.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/p
https://github.com/shafik commented:
What about `module`, `import` and `export`?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/107982
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
shafik wrote:
So this looks like a regression: https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/h6GexT18E
Can we figure out which PR this regression came from and make sure the code
change makes sense in light of that PR?
Also please add a more detailed summary to this PR, describing why the crash
happens and the
https://github.com/shafik requested changes to this pull request.
So this looks like a regression: https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/h6GexT18E
Can we figure out which PR this regression came from and make sure the code
change makes sense in light of that PR?
Also please add a more detailed summary to
shafik wrote:
> > So this looks like a regression: https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/h6GexT18E
>
> @shafik https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/Ebvnjrc8e
Interesting it crashes in trunk w/o `c++20`:
https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/h9xa8eaqo but the backtrace looks the same.
We should test this in C++20 and C++23 as w
@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify -std=c++11 %s
shafik wrote:
I think this test should go in `clang/test/Sema/conditional-expr.c` and we
should add a section of the GNU extension there.
I am also a bit concerned that we don't have a spe
shafik wrote:
> LGTM but it would be nice to do the other changes to cxx_dr_status as a
> separate (NFC) commit
We should always strive to keep unrelated changes separate. There are a lot of
good reasons for this. The most basic is that if we have to revert then we lose
both set of changes bu
https://github.com/shafik commented:
You need to add more details to the summary something like: the fix was to
handle `CK_UserDefinedConversion` in `ComplexExprEvaluator::VisitCastExpr` as
opposed to treating it as an error.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108758
__
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108657
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Please add more details to the summary to explain what the fix actually does.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108657
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/m
@@ -9868,7 +9868,12 @@ static bool tryVectorConvertAndSplat(Sema &S, ExprResult
*scalar,
// if necessary.
CastKind scalarCast = CK_NoOp;
- if (vectorEltTy->isIntegralType(S.Context)) {
+ if (vectorEltTy->isBooleanType()) {
+if (scalarTy->isIntegralType(S.Context))
+
shafik wrote:
It looks like this is linked to this crash:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/11
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/111852
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailma
shafik wrote:
This regression: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/104720 seems to be
linked to this change.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/91339
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin
@@ -337,6 +343,8 @@ Parser::ParseConceptDefinition(const ParsedTemplateInfo
&TemplateInfo,
ExprResult ConstraintExprResult =
Actions.CorrectDelayedTyposInExpr(ParseConstraintExpression());
if (ConstraintExprResult.isInvalid()) {
+if (AddedToScope)
---
@@ -11536,6 +11536,9 @@ bool
ArrayExprEvaluator::VisitCXXParenListOrInitListExpr(
LValue Subobject = This;
Subobject.addArray(Info, ExprToVisit, CAT);
auto Eval = [&](const Expr *Init, unsigned ArrayIndex) {
+if (Init->isValueDependent())
shafik wrot
https://github.com/shafik requested changes to this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/112612
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -1989,7 +1989,7 @@ Expr *CastExpr::getSubExprAsWritten() {
SubExpr = IgnoreExprNodes(cast(SubExpr)->getArg(0),
ignoreImplicitSemaNodes);
} else if (E->getCastKind() == CK_UserDefinedConversion) {
- assert((isa(SubExpr) || isa(Su
shafik wrote:
This is also linked to this clang-19 regression:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/110914
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84146
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/ma
@@ -9827,6 +9827,9 @@ static IntRange GetExprRange(ASTContext &C, const Expr
*E, unsigned MaxWidth,
return IntRange(BitField->getBitWidthValue(C),
BitField->getType()->isUnsignedIntegerOrEnumerationType());
shafik wrote:
So why doesn'
@@ -9827,6 +9827,9 @@ static IntRange GetExprRange(ASTContext &C, const Expr
*E, unsigned MaxWidth,
return IntRange(BitField->getBitWidthValue(C),
BitField->getType()->isUnsignedIntegerOrEnumerationType());
shafik wrote:
What expr is
@@ -9827,6 +9827,9 @@ static IntRange GetExprRange(ASTContext &C, const Expr
*E, unsigned MaxWidth,
return IntRange(BitField->getBitWidthValue(C),
BitField->getType()->isUnsignedIntegerOrEnumerationType());
shafik wrote:
I think that
https://github.com/shafik commented:
After answering my questions this makes sense to me but I want a second set of
eyes.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/112081
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/c
@@ -39,7 +39,8 @@ bool Sema::SetMemberAccessSpecifier(NamedDecl *MemberDecl,
AccessSpecifier LexicalAS) {
if (!PrevMemberDecl) {
// Use the lexical access specifier.
-MemberDecl->setAccess(LexicalAS);
shafik wrote:
@@ -39,7 +39,8 @@ bool Sema::SetMemberAccessSpecifier(NamedDecl *MemberDecl,
AccessSpecifier LexicalAS) {
if (!PrevMemberDecl) {
// Use the lexical access specifier.
-MemberDecl->setAccess(LexicalAS);
shafik wrote:
shafik wrote:
This crash is due to this set of changes:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/11
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/78041
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/l
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
If you have approvals you don't have to wait for other reviewers unless they
have made a comment that required a change and you them to confirm the fix or
they explicitly blocked the review.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96464
601 - 700 of 956 matches
Mail list logo