@@ -48,24 +48,49 @@ namespace std __attribute__((__visibility__("default"))) {
isnan(double __x);
bool
isnan(long double __x);
-bool
+ bool
isfinite(float __x);
bool
isfinite(double __x);
bool
isfinte(long double __x);
- bool
+ bool
isunordered(float _
shafik wrote:
I would like to see some more compelling motivation for an extension here.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/91070
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commit
@@ -1155,7 +1156,7 @@ namespace {
if (CTSD->isInStdNamespace() && ClassII &&
ClassII->isStr("allocator") && TAL.size() >= 1 &&
TAL[0].getKind() == TemplateArgument::Type)
- return {Call->Index, TAL[0].getAsType()};
+ return {Cal
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/123744
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Thanks, this would be an improvement but I have one concern with this change.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/123744
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/m
@@ -2290,18 +2290,21 @@ CXXDeductionGuideDecl *CXXDeductionGuideDecl::Create(
ASTContext &C, DeclContext *DC, SourceLocation StartLoc,
ExplicitSpecifier ES, const DeclarationNameInfo &NameInfo, QualType T,
TypeSourceInfo *TInfo, SourceLocation EndLocation, CXXConstr
@@ -8147,6 +8149,26 @@ TEST_P(ImportFunctions, CTADWithLocalTypedef) {
ASSERT_TRUE(ToD);
}
+TEST_P(ImportFunctions, CTADAliasTemplate) {
+ Decl *TU = getTuDecl(
+ R"(
+ template struct A {
+A(T);
+ };
+ template
+ using B = A;
+ B b{(i
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/123875
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
I know you have approvals but you should expand the tests first.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/123875
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listin
https://github.com/shafik commented:
when the discussion is eventually resolved please add a more detailed summary
explaining how the fix is implemented and why.
These go in the git log and it is important for relevant details to show up
there w/o the need for git show etc
https://github.com/
https://github.com/shafik requested changes to this pull request.
Please add a more detailed summary to this PR. I have asked this on several PRs
and I believe the confusion reflected in the comments is very much attributed
to not explaining why you believe your fix works. It may be incorrect b
@@ -13464,6 +13464,14 @@ Decl *Sema::ActOnAliasDeclaration(Scope *S,
AccessSpecifier AS,
}
TemplateParameterList *TemplateParams = TemplateParamLists[0];
+// Check shadowing of a template parameter name
+for (NamedDecl *TP : TemplateParams->asArray()) {
+
https://github.com/shafik commented:
I see a lot of diagnostics were updated to `DefaultError` but I don't see
matching tests that demonstrate the now error. We should be testing each
diagnostic.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/123470
___
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Shouldn't this have some sort of Release not maybe under the X86 section?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/120670
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailm
https://github.com/shafik commented:
LGTM but I will let @cor3ntin give the accept
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/121056
___
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 -std=c++2c -verify -fsyntax-only %s
+
+template
+void decompose_array() {
+ int arr[4] = {1, 2, 3, 5};
+ auto [x, ... // #1
+rest, ...more_rest] = arr; // expected-error{{multiple packs in structured
binding declaration}}
+
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Thank you for the PR, small comments.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/121417
___
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/121417
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -0,0 +1,117 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -std=c++26 %s -verify
shafik wrote:
+1 we should always cover all the examples from the proposal.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/121417
___
cfe-commits mai
shafik wrote:
> > I see a lot of diagnostics were updated to `DefaultError` but I don't see
> > matching tests that demonstrate the now error. We should be testing each
> > diagnostic.
>
> #123464 also added `-Werror=return-type` to some tests; we can remove those
> now, which should cover at
https://github.com/shafik commented:
I feel like matching gcc's behavior makes sense for users but I am not sure
about the timing for clang-20. This seems like the change in behavior could be
impactful.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/122486
__
shafik wrote:
ping, is this still a problem?
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
Alejandro =?utf-8?q?=C3=81lvarez_Ayll=C3=B3n?=,
Alejandro =?utf-8?q?=C3=81lvarez_Ayll=C3=B3n?=,
Alejandro =?utf-8?q?=C3=81lvarez_Ayll=C3=B3n?=
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
https://github.com/shafik commented:
This looks about right to me but I would like another set of eyes.
https://github.com/llv
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Flagging what looks like a bug
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101469
___
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/101469
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -1212,6 +1212,14 @@ static void handlePreferredName(Sema &S, Decl *D, const
ParsedAttr &AL) {
<< TT->getDecl();
}
+static void handleNoSpecializations(Sema &S, Decl *D, const ParsedAttr &AL) {
+ StringRef Message;
+ if (AL.getNumArgs() != 0)
+S.checkStringLit
https://github.com/shafik closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/124478
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
shafik wrote:
First failure looks like a flaky build issue:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/124485
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/124478
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mail
https://github.com/shafik created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/124478
When implmenting P2280R4 here: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/95474
When creating the APValue to store and constexprUnknown value I used an offset
of CharUnits::One() but it should have been CharUnits
shafik wrote:
No Release notes b/c this is a fix for
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/95474 which has its own release note.
Tests for this fix will be added by
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/124476
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/124478
__
=?utf-8?q?André?= Brand ,
=?utf-8?q?André?= Brand
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
shafik wrote:
> @cor3ntin Thanks! I just added some details to the GitHub description. I hope
> it's not too verbose. And I rebased the branch to resolve the conflict in the
> release notes.
Terse summaries are reall
@@ -528,3 +528,21 @@ D d(0); // expected-note {{in implicit initialization for
inherited constructor
// expected-error@-1 {{call to immediate function 'GH112677::D::SimpleCtor' is
not a constant expression}}
}
+
+namespace GH123405 {
+
+consteval void fn() {}
+
+template
+c
https://github.com/shafik commented:
In my comment here, it really looks like a clang-17 regression:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/124161#event-16079402729
>From what I can tell you also address the simplified version, so I believe a
>release note is probably warrented.
Are ther
https://github.com/shafik commented:
I second that we need to document how values outside of zero and one are
handled.
I would like also really want to see a test that demonstrates the behavior we
are expecting to support with comments explaining the result and why we expect
it.
After seei
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/116708
___
cfe-commits mailing list
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Apologies if I somehow missed it but it looks like we are not really covering
the diagnostics fully and we need to in
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
@@ -10134,6 +10137,24 @@ def note_format_fix_specifier : Note<"did you mean to
use '%0'?">;
def note_printf_c_str: Note<"did you mean to
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
@@ -10134,6 +10137,24 @@ def note_format_fix_specifier : Note<"did you mean to
use '%0'?">;
def note_printf_c_str: Note<"did you mean to
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
@@ -10134,6 +10137,24 @@ def note_format_fix_specifier : Note<"did you mean to
use '%0'?">;
def note_printf_c_str: Note<"did you mean to
shafik wrote:
ping, any chance we can make progress here?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/112111
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -4861,8 +4861,9 @@ static void TryListInitialization(Sema &S,
S.Context.hasSameUnqualifiedType(SubInit[0]->getType(), DestType)
&&
"Deduced to other type?");
TryArrayCopy(S,
- InitializationKind::CreateCopy(Kind.getLocatio
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Definitely makes sense. Definitely we need a test, I think the right test to
add an example to is `ast-dump-decl.cpp`.
Could you also put a few more details in the summary, basically explain you are
modifying `TextNodeDumper::VisitEnumDecl` to be more consi
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Please add a summary to your PR something like `Enables continuous PGO mode
where profile counter updates are continuously synced to a file.` seems ok.
This is what will show up in the git log and it useful to have more than a
title in the log.
https://gi
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Thank you for the fix.
Please add a more detailed summary, the title feels sufficient to describe the
problem but you should outline the solution in the summary, at least briefly.
e.g. adding `checkMethodPointerType` which will called during to verify
@@ -96,3 +96,13 @@ namespace PR38286 {
template struct C; // expected-note {{non-type declaration found}}
template C::~C() {} // expected-error {{identifier 'C' after
'~' in destructor name does not name a type}}
}
+
+namespace GH121706 {
+struct S {
+ *S(); // expected-
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/122621
___
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.
At a first glance this seems to make sense to me, I added some more reviewers.
Please add a release note.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/121854
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-c
https://github.com/shafik commented:
I would love to see tests that highlight any differences between C and C++ in
this area.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/121950
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.o
@@ -284,11 +284,26 @@ void f(_Atomic(int) *i, const _Atomic(int) *ci,
const volatile int flag_k = 0;
volatile int flag = 0;
- (void)(int)__atomic_test_and_set(&flag_k, memory_order_seq_cst); //
expected-warning {{passing 'const volatile int *' to parameter of type
'vola
@@ -1969,7 +1970,7 @@ void
ASTDeclWriter::VisitTemplateTypeParmDecl(TemplateTypeParmDecl *D) {
if (OwnsDefaultArg)
Record.AddTemplateArgumentLoc(D->getDefaultArgument());
- if (!TC && !OwnsDefaultArg &&
+ if (!D->hasTypeConstraint() && !OwnsDefaultArg &&
-
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/122065
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
After commit review.
Thank you for the fix.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/122065
___
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/123060
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
`Lexer::findNextToken` has an additional check:
`if (!Lexer::isAtEndOfMacroExpansion(Loc, SM, LangOpts, &Loc))`
Does this not change behavior in the case we are replacing? I imagine folks
just copied from `Lexer::findNextToken` and purposely left this out,
@@ -118,47 +118,19 @@ findMembersUsedInInitExpr(const CXXCtorInitializer
*Initializer,
return Results;
}
-/// Returns the next token after `Loc` (including comment tokens).
-static std::optional getTokenAfter(SourceLocation Loc,
shafik wrote:
This looks li
@@ -47,6 +49,10 @@ template void f() {
}(), ...);
}(1, 2);
+ [](Is...) {
+([] { using T = ElementType; }(), ...);
shafik wrote:
Out of curiosity were applying the `getCanonicalType` to `T` and getting `int`
while we really wanted `ElementType`?
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
LGTM
Assuming no objections from @tbaederr
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125522
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/
@@ -1648,8 +1648,11 @@ SourceLocation CallExpr::getBeginLoc() const {
if (const auto *Method =
dyn_cast_if_present(getCalleeDecl());
Method && Method->isExplicitObjectMemberFunction()) {
-assert(getNumArgs() > 0 && getArg(0));
-return getArg(0)->getBeg
shafik wrote:
Can we please add more details in the summary about e.g. "This fixes a crash
when ... and the fix is ..."
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/126868
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cg
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/131450
___
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 quick fix, I would have also added the test that did not
crash but issued a diagnostic from the issue as well:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/131530
unless we have a similar test already.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/
https://github.com/shafik commented:
I think you need to update this too, unless I missed something:
https://clang.llvm.org/docs/UsersManual.html#controlling-implementation-limits
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132021
___
cfe-commits mailin
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Why was this landed w/o any approvals?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132516
___
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!
Second, that we need a summary explaining the problem and solution.
Is this linked to a bug report, if it is, then we should mention that bug
report as well.
I would also like to see a test showing a case where we successfully print
shafik wrote:
> Clang does crash with one of the included test cases, if you try to actually
> use the function: https://godbolt.org/z/e6e6Ehjoj
That is not a regression test, at minimum when fixing a bug we should include a
test that directly reproduces the bug to ensure that we don't reintro
https://github.com/shafik commented:
LGTM, thank you for adding this comment!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132527
___
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/131515
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -0,0 +1,182 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 %s -std=c++2c -fsyntax-only -verify
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 %s -std=c++2c -fsyntax-only -verify
-fexperimental-new-constant-interpreter
+
+
+struct S0 {};
+struct S1 {int a;};
+struct S2 {int a; int b;};
+struct S3 {double a; int b; int c;};
@@ -257,7 +260,7 @@ Improvements to Clang's diagnostics
as function arguments or return value respectively. Note that
:doc:`ThreadSafetyAnalysis` still does not perform alias analysis. The
feature will be default-enabled with ``-Wthread-safety`` in a future release.
-- Th
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/131515
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -368,7 +368,11 @@ std::optional SValBuilder::getConstantVal(const Expr
*E) {
case Stmt::TypeTraitExprClass: {
const auto *TE = cast(E);
-return makeTruthVal(TE->getValue(), TE->getType());
+if (TE->isStoredAsBoolean())
+ return makeTruthVal(TE->getBoolVa
@@ -1911,6 +1911,38 @@ A simplistic usage example as might be seen in standard
C++ headers follows:
// Emulate type trait for compatibility with other compilers.
#endif
+
+.. _builtin_structured_binding_size-doc:
+
+__builtin_structured_binding_size (C++)
+---
@@ -10792,47 +10822,54 @@ void ASTReader::FinishedDeserializing() {
--NumCurrentElementsDeserializing;
if (NumCurrentElementsDeserializing == 0) {
-// Propagate exception specification and deduced type updates along
-// redeclaration chains.
-//
-// We do t
@@ -4309,12 +4309,12 @@ Decl *ASTReader::ReadDeclRecord(GlobalDeclID ID) {
void ASTReader::PassInterestingDeclsToConsumer() {
assert(Consumer);
- if (PassingDeclsToConsumer)
+ if (!CanPassDeclsToConsumer)
return;
// Guard variable to avoid recursively redoing the
shafik wrote:
> LGTM with nit addressed. Test coverage would be nice to add, but not strictly
> required if this is purely a defensive measure (which it seems to be).
Exactly.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/131677
___
cfe-commits mailing l
@@ -1913,8 +1919,9 @@ TEST_F(StructuralEquivalenceCacheTest,
Lang_CXX03);
StructuralEquivalenceContext Ctx(
- get<0>(TU)->getASTContext(), get<1>(TU)->getASTContext(),
- NonEquivalentDecls, StructuralEquivalenceKind::Default, false, false);
+ get<0>(TU)-
@@ -1849,8 +1852,9 @@ TEST_F(StructuralEquivalenceCacheTest, ReturnStmtNonEq) {
Lang_CXX03);
StructuralEquivalenceContext Ctx(
- get<0>(TU)->getASTContext(), get<1>(TU)->getASTContext(),
- NonEquivalentDecls, StructuralEquivalenceKind::Default, false, false);
@@ -156,11 +158,11 @@ struct StructuralEquivalenceTest : ::testing::Test {
StructuralEquivalenceContext::NonEquivalentDeclSet NonEquivalentDecls01;
StructuralEquivalenceContext::NonEquivalentDeclSet NonEquivalentDecls10;
StructuralEquivalenceContext Ctx01(
-
@@ -2080,9 +2090,9 @@ TEST_F(StructuralEquivalenceCacheTest, TemplateParmDepth)
{
EXPECT_FALSE(isInNonEqCache(std::make_pair(NonEqDecl0, NonEqDecl1), true));
StructuralEquivalenceContext Ctx_IgnoreTemplateParmDepth(
- get<0>(TU)->getASTContext(), get<1>(TU)->getASTCo
@@ -11432,6 +11433,22 @@ static QualType mergeEnumWithInteger(ASTContext
&Context, const EnumType *ET,
return {};
}
+QualType ASTContext::mergeTagTypes(QualType LHS, QualType RHS) {
+ // C17 and earlier and C++ disallow two tag definitions within the same TU
+ // from bei
@@ -2003,8 +2012,9 @@ TEST_F(StructuralEquivalenceCacheTest, Cycle) {
Lang_CXX03);
StructuralEquivalenceContext Ctx(
- get<0>(TU)->getASTContext(), get<1>(TU)->getASTContext(),
- NonEquivalentDecls, StructuralEquivalenceKind::Default, false, false);
+ ge
@@ -9089,8 +9089,8 @@ bool Sema::hasStructuralCompatLayout(Decl *D, Decl
*Suggested) {
// FIXME: Add a specific mode for C11 6.2.7/1 in StructuralEquivalenceContext
// and isolate from other C++ specific checks.
StructuralEquivalenceContext Ctx(
- D->getASTContext()
@@ -1932,8 +1939,9 @@ TEST_F(StructuralEquivalenceCacheTest,
VarDeclWithInitNoEq) {
Lang_CXX03);
StructuralEquivalenceContext Ctx(
- get<0>(TU)->getASTContext(), get<1>(TU)->getASTContext(),
- NonEquivalentDecls, StructuralEquivalenceKind::Default, false, fa
@@ -1868,8 +1872,9 @@ TEST_F(StructuralEquivalenceCacheTest, VarDeclNoEq) {
Lang_CXX03);
StructuralEquivalenceContext Ctx(
- get<0>(TU)->getASTContext(), get<1>(TU)->getASTContext(),
- NonEquivalentDecls, StructuralEquivalenceKind::Default, false, false);
+
@@ -1826,8 +1828,9 @@ TEST_F(StructuralEquivalenceCacheTest, SimpleNonEq) {
Lang_CXX03);
StructuralEquivalenceContext Ctx(
- get<0>(TU)->getASTContext(), get<1>(TU)->getASTContext(),
- NonEquivalentDecls, StructuralEquivalenceKind::Default, false, false);
+
@@ -1572,13 +1571,12 @@ TryCastResult TryLValueToRValueCast(Sema &Self, Expr
*SrcExpr,
if (RefConv & Sema::ReferenceConversions::DerivedToBase) {
Kind = CK_DerivedToBase;
-CXXBasePaths Paths(/*FindAmbiguities=*/true, /*RecordPaths=*/true,
- /*D
@@ -23,3 +22,66 @@ void test(A &a, B &b) {
const A &&ar10 = static_cast(xvalue());
const A &&ar11 = static_cast(xvalue());
}
+
+struct C : private A { // expected-note 4 {{declared private here}}
shafik wrote:
Normally when we add tests to an existing file
@@ -1964,8 +1972,9 @@ TEST_F(StructuralEquivalenceCacheTest, SpecialNonEq) {
Lang_CXX03);
StructuralEquivalenceContext Ctx(
- get<0>(TU)->getASTContext(), get<1>(TU)->getASTContext(),
- NonEquivalentDecls, StructuralEquivalenceKind::Default, false, false);
+
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132939
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -4567,8 +4567,9 @@ namespace {
Reader.getOwningModuleFile(Cat)) {
StructuralEquivalenceContext::NonEquivalentDeclSet
NonEquivalentDecls;
StructuralEquivalenceContext Ctx(
- Cat->getASTContext(), Existing->getASTCo
https://github.com/shafik commented:
A lot of nits
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132939
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
I have a few concerns w/ this PR.
Number one we do not cover the original test case which crashes, as far as I
can tell none of the tests crash before this fix. This is large oversight.
It looks like currently gcc is the only one that rejects this code as w
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132939
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Second round of comments, I may make a third go around but I wouldn't wait for
me.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132939
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi
@@ -0,0 +1,472 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -std=c23 -pedantic -Wall -Wno-comment
-verify=both,c23 %s
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -std=c17 -pedantic -Wall -Wno-comment
-Wno-c23-extensions -verify=both,c17 %s
+
+/* WG14 N3037:
+ * Improved tag compatibility
+ *
+ *
@@ -0,0 +1,472 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -std=c23 -pedantic -Wall -Wno-comment
-verify=both,c23 %s
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -std=c17 -pedantic -Wall -Wno-comment
-Wno-c23-extensions -verify=both,c17 %s
+
+/* WG14 N3037:
+ * Improved tag compatibility
+ *
+ *
@@ -0,0 +1,472 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -std=c23 -pedantic -Wall -Wno-comment
-verify=both,c23 %s
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -std=c17 -pedantic -Wall -Wno-comment
-Wno-c23-extensions -verify=both,c17 %s
+
+/* WG14 N3037:
+ * Improved tag compatibility
+ *
+ *
@@ -0,0 +1,117 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -std=c2y -pedantic -Wall -Wno-comment -verify
%s
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -std=c2y -pedantic -Wall -Wno-comment
-fexperimental-new-constant-interpreter -verify %s
+
+/* WG14 N3369: Clang 21
+ * _Lengthof operator
+ *
+
@@ -0,0 +1,117 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -std=c2y -pedantic -Wall -Wno-comment -verify
%s
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -std=c2y -pedantic -Wall -Wno-comment
-fexperimental-new-constant-interpreter -verify %s
+
+/* WG14 N3369: Clang 21
+ * _Lengthof operator
+ *
+
@@ -467,3 +467,29 @@ namespace VexingParse {
template int var; // expected-note {{declared here}}
int x(var); // expected-error {{use of variable template 'var' requires
template arguments}}
}
+
+#ifndef PRECXX11
+
+namespace GH79750 {
shafik wrote:
I am
801 - 900 of 1043 matches
Mail list logo
