https://github.com/Endilll approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101382
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Endilll wrote:
Do you want this to be merged once CI passes?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101382
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -160,6 +160,9 @@ Bug Fixes in This Version
Bug Fixes to Compiler Builtins
^^
+- ``__is_layout_compatible`` no longer requires the empty bases to be the same
in two
+ standard-layout classes. It now only compares non-static data members.
---
Endilll wrote:
> Still need to add tests for [CWG
> 2917](https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/2917.html), which I filed while
> working on this, to the DR test suite proper. (@Endilll Sorry for asking this
> again, but do I need to run the script that updates the DR tests as part of
> this
https://github.com/Endilll closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101382
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/Endilll updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101297
>From d75b3cef41c370fef939a347935a4f3ed53c46ea Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2024 10:29:04 +0300
Subject: [PATCH 1/4] [clang] Fix crash with multiple non-parenthsized `sizeo
https://github.com/Endilll closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/97200
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Endilll wrote:
> Testing for stack exhaustion is always a challenge and so it is reasonable
> for this to not come with a test case. However, did you manually verify that
> it fixes the crash for you?
Yes, the test I originally included wasn't passing without my fix, but passed
with my fix lo
https://github.com/Endilll closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101297
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/Endilll updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100765
>From 22b2d8972b06cce2d97abc3f07b62aca52ece67c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2024 18:43:18 +0300
Subject: [PATCH] [clang] Add test for CWG2091 "Deducing reference non-type
https://github.com/Endilll closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/92103
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Endilll wrote:
/cherry-pick
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/92103
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Endilll wrote:
/cherry-pick 5d7357cc9ee84578e7142c5fa7c03b1331cba6d2
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/92103
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Author: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: 2024-08-01T18:01:10+03:00
New Revision: 5ad15e58136bc80eadcc0a7fceb463bbb5317345
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/5ad15e58136bc80eadcc0a7fceb463bbb5317345
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/5ad15e58136bc80eadcc0a7fceb463bbb5317345.
Endilll wrote:
> @Endilll I found another bug on the way, so here's a fix+test. Does this need
> a release note under `Python Binding Changes`?
Yes, the general approach is that every change should come with a test and a
release note.
On a different note, I wonder if there's a way to prevent
https://github.com/Endilll edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101548
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/Endilll approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101548
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/Endilll closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101548
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Endilll wrote:
> Could you merge this for me?
Done.
> On related note, do you think my contributions would count for "a track
> record of submitting high quality patches", i.e. should I apply for commit
> access?
You have unread messages in Discord :)
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pu
https://github.com/Endilll updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100765
>From 22b2d8972b06cce2d97abc3f07b62aca52ece67c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2024 18:43:18 +0300
Subject: [PATCH] [clang] Add test for CWG2091 "Deducing reference non-type
Endilll wrote:
> [200](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/97200) to land first, then
> update this PR with the output of `make_cxx_dr_status`.
This is done.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100765
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-comm
https://github.com/Endilll created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101807
This intrinsic supports [P2647R1](https://wg21.link/p2674r1) "A trait for
implicit lifetime types".
>From 9c4e7ccf47d5ede2b6169effb2a09668f512a182 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: Sat, 3
@@ -386,6 +386,10 @@ def __contains__(self, other):
# same file, in between lines
if self.start.line < other.line < self.end.line:
return True
+# between columns in one-liner range
+elif self.start.line == other.line == self.end.line:
https://github.com/Endilll edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101807
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/Endilll edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101807
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -54,6 +54,8 @@ LLVM_13 {
clang_Cursor_Evaluate;
clang_Cursor_getArgument;
clang_Cursor_getBriefCommentText;
+clang_Cursor_getBinaryOpcode;
+clang_Cursor_getBinaryOpcodeStr;
Endilll wrote:
This is symbol versioning, which allows us to upd
https://github.com/Endilll updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101807
>From 9c4e7ccf47d5ede2b6169effb2a09668f512a182 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2024 13:05:21 +0300
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [clang] Implement `__builtin_is_implicit_lifetime()`
Th
@@ -54,6 +54,8 @@ LLVM_13 {
clang_Cursor_Evaluate;
clang_Cursor_getArgument;
clang_Cursor_getBriefCommentText;
+clang_Cursor_getBinaryOpcode;
+clang_Cursor_getBinaryOpcodeStr;
Endilll wrote:
Make sure to fix this on `main` first, then we ca
https://github.com/Endilll approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101820
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/Endilll edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101820
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/Endilll edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101820
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Endilll wrote:
I wrote a description to provide readers some context. In general PRs without
descriptions are discouraged.
Hope you don't mind.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101820
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
ht
Endilll wrote:
/cherry-pick 2bae7aeab42062e61d6f9d6458660d4a5646f7af
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101820
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Endilll wrote:
The failure is not related to this PR
```
[7756/8607] Building CXX object
tools/flang/lib/Lower/CMakeFiles/FortranLower.dir/OpenMP/Clauses.cpp.o
FAILED: tools/flang/lib/Lower/CMakeFiles/FortranLower.dir/OpenMP/Clauses.cpp.o
/home/tcwg-buildbot/worker/clang-aarch64-sve-vla-2stage/
Endilll wrote:
This one is the same, consequently not related:
```
[7789/8607] Building CXX object
tools/flang/lib/Lower/CMakeFiles/FortranLower.dir/OpenMP/Clauses.cpp.o
FAILED: tools/flang/lib/Lower/CMakeFiles/FortranLower.dir/OpenMP/Clauses.cpp.o
/home/tcwg-buildbot/worker/clang-aarch64-sve-v
Endilll wrote:
Thank you for your contribution! This is somewhat tricky situation, now that we
have multiple opened PR in the same area of the codebase. But I think there is
way forward:
1. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/78114 and related work has been
underway for several weeks, a
https://github.com/Endilll commented:
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101879
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Endilll wrote:
> The intent is for this to be backported to 19 (therefore no changelog)
Yes, this is very important to backport.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101879
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llv
https://github.com/Endilll commented:
`Sema.h` changes LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101857
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -86,6 +86,9 @@ C++23 Feature Support
C++2c Feature Support
^
+- Add ``__builtin_is_implicit_lifetime`` intrinsic, which supports
Endilll wrote:
See #98310
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101807
___
https://github.com/Endilll closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100765
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -64,48 +64,80 @@
from ctypes import *
-import collections.abc
import os
+import sys
from enum import Enum
+from typing import (
+Any,
+Callable,
+Generic,
+Optional,
+Type as TType,
+TypeVar,
+TYPE_CHECKING,
+Union as TUnion,
+)
+
+if TY
https://github.com/Endilll edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101941
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/Endilll commented:
Thank you for splitting that large PR into something smaller. That said, 1.6k
lines of changes is no small change either.
This PR needs more high-level explanation of what you try to achieve and how.
At the moment I'm not sold we want to go in this directio
Endilll wrote:
I don't see value in annotating exported C functions themselves (`binder.py`),
because they are wrapped by `cindex.py`. From maintenance perspective I'd
rather leave `# type: ignore` at the call sites of those functions, than accept
a whole new
Endilll wrote:
This file seems to implement a whole abstraction layer for annotations. I'd
like to understand what the benefits are, because I see a non-trivial amount of
complexity here.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101941
__
@@ -64,48 +64,80 @@
from ctypes import *
-import collections.abc
import os
+import sys
from enum import Enum
+from typing import (
+Any,
+Callable,
+Generic,
+Optional,
+Type as TType,
+TypeVar,
+TYPE_CHECKING,
+Union as TUnion,
+)
+
+if TY
@@ -134,7 +134,7 @@ void test() {
}
namespace cwg2798 { // cwg2798: 17
-#if __cpp_static_assert >= 202306
+#if __cplusplus > 202302L
Endilll wrote:
Yeah, checking for `__cplusplus` makes more sense in DR test suite.
But I wonder if we can leverage feature tes
@@ -671,10 +671,8 @@ static void InitializeCPlusPlusFeatureTestMacros(const
LangOptions &LangOpts,
LangOpts.CPlusPlus23 ? "202211L"
: LangOpts.CPlusPlus17 ? "201603L"
: "200907");
@@ -671,10 +671,8 @@ static void InitializeCPlusPlusFeatureTestMacros(const
LangOptions &LangOpts,
LangOpts.CPlusPlus23 ? "202211L"
: LangOpts.CPlusPlus17 ? "201603L"
: "200907");
@@ -386,6 +386,10 @@ def __contains__(self, other):
# same file, in between lines
if self.start.line < other.line < self.end.line:
return True
+# between columns in one-liner range
+elif self.start.line == other.line == self.end.line:
Endilll wrote:
I've been staring at `cindex.py` for the better part of yesterday and today.
I'll try to describe the status quo as I understand it first, to make sure all
three of us are on the same page, then I'll describe the direction I think we
should take.
Status quo
1. I be
@@ -386,6 +386,10 @@ def __contains__(self, other):
# same file, in between lines
if self.start.line < other.line < self.end.line:
return True
+# between columns in one-liner range
+elif self.start.line == other.line == self.end.line:
Endilll wrote:
I think this can be prevented by addition testing. Feel free to submit your
suggestion as an additional test.
I also saw declared, but unused symbols in `functionList`, e.g.
`clang_getTemplateCursorKind`. That might be worth loo
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101941
_
Endilll wrote:
> Good point about the restype for clang_Cursor_getTemplateArgumentKind though,
> I didn't notice and we should probably change that
Yes, I'd like us to stop relying on that for the same reason I don't like
`errcheck`. The fact that it's deprecated further adds to it.
> I don't
Author: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: 2024-08-17T14:57:59+03:00
New Revision: 27d37ee4d067f42e9a46a0871d3cb961323e5c85
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/27d37ee4d067f42e9a46a0871d3cb961323e5c85
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/27d37ee4d067f42e9a46a0871d3cb961323e5c85.
Endilll wrote:
@MitalAshok Is there anything left to do here?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94118
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/Endilll closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94118
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Endilll wrote:
@davidstone Do you plan to get back to this PR?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93493
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/Endilll edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/104687
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/Endilll edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/104687
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Endilll wrote:
I think the main contribution of this patch is showing the extent of the
propagation. I personally was surprised this got to `ASTMatchers` and
`APValue`. Now that we understand the scope, we can try to draw a line where
changes here stop making sense, and do some else where we'd
Endilll wrote:
I'll deal with the formatting later, because I don't want to burden reviewers
with more changes than necessary.
I also updated the description after fixing clang-tidy build. We've got two
more bad `const_cast`s.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/104687
__
@@ -0,0 +1,56 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++98 %s -verify -pedantic-errors
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++11 %s -verify -pedantic-errors -ast-dump |
FileCheck %s
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++14 %s -verify -pedantic-errors -ast-dump |
FileCheck %s
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++17 %s -
@@ -0,0 +1,56 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++98 %s -verify -pedantic-errors
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++11 %s -verify -pedantic-errors -ast-dump |
FileCheck %s
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++14 %s -verify -pedantic-errors -ast-dump |
FileCheck %s
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++17 %s -
Endilll wrote:
I think this is a language extensions that requires an RFC on
https://discource.llvm.org first.
See https://clang.llvm.org/get_involved.html for details.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/104777
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-
https://github.com/Endilll created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/104833
This patch adds a parser check when a function declaration or function type
declaration (in a function pointer declaration, for example) has too many
parameters for `FunctionTypeBits::NumParams` to hold. At the
https://github.com/Endilll updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/104833
>From 424818620766cedb2770e076ee359afeb0cc14ec Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2024 19:26:46 +0300
Subject: [PATCH 1/6] Add in-loop check
---
clang/include/clang/AST/Type.h
@@ -9311,6 +9311,9 @@ def note_constinit_missing_here : Note<
def err_dimension_expr_not_constant_integer : Error<
"dimension expression does not evaluate to a constant unsigned int">;
+def err_function_parameter_limit_exceeded : Error<
+ "too many function parameters; subs
https://github.com/Endilll updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/104833
>From 424818620766cedb2770e076ee359afeb0cc14ec Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2024 19:26:46 +0300
Subject: [PATCH 1/7] Add in-loop check
---
clang/include/clang/AST/Type.h
Endilll wrote:
> @Endilll you forgot to update the tests - hence the ci failure
Thank you! Should be good to go now
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/104833
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin
Endilll wrote:
I wonder if we can reduce binary size by simply marking RAV as
`visibility("hidden")`
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/105195
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listin
Endilll wrote:
@Sirraide CWG looked at 2917 last week, and changed the status of the issue.
Can you revisit your test for it?
https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/2917.html
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101448
___
cfe-commits mailing li
@@ -23,3 +23,29 @@ struct S {
friend class C::Nested...; // expected-error {{friend declaration
expands pack 'Ts' that is declared it its own template parameter list}}
};
} // namespace cwg2917
+
+#if __cplusplus >= 202002
+
+namespace std {
+ using size_t = decltype(sizeof
Endilll wrote:
Note that there have been additional discussions happening on the new proposed
resolution.
https://lists.isocpp.org/core/2024/08/16236.php
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101448
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.l
https://github.com/Endilll commented:
I think this PR moves things in the right direction, but it would be nice to
make notes more helpful.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/105647
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https:
https://github.com/Endilll edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/105647
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -189,6 +189,11 @@ namespace ModifyingCapture {
[=] {
n = 1; // expected-error {{cannot assign to a variable captured by copy
in a non-mutable lambda}}
};
+const int cn = 0;
+// cxx03-cxx11-warning@+1 {{initialized lambda captures are a C++14
extension
@@ -189,6 +189,11 @@ namespace ModifyingCapture {
[=] {
n = 1; // expected-error {{cannot assign to a variable captured by copy
in a non-mutable lambda}}
};
+const int cn = 0;
+// cxx03-cxx11-warning@+1 {{initialized lambda captures are a C++14
extension
Endilll wrote:
> I would recommend creating an issue and see how ewg handles the new
> information before reaping out a lot of code.
Sure, we don't necessarily need to change our implementation as CWG continues
to consider the issue, but we need to update the test and the status for
bookkeepi
Endilll wrote:
> I think the dr test already say "Clang 20 implements 2024-07-30 resolution"
> which is correct
While I understand what you're referring to (author's claim that the example is
nonsense and should be rejected), if you open
https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/2917.html, the o
Endilll wrote:
> the date changed. weird! the resolution did not
I think it did:
https://github.com/cplusplus/CWG/commit/4492036f0958d140ca14fc49ebb2a3a13f75c28c
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101448
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commi
Endilll wrote:
Jens restored the suggested resolution in
https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/2917.html and even put a date on it in
case we need to reference it.
I also notified him that in our tests we are referring to proposed and
suggested resolution by dates.
He also mentioned we can't
Endilll wrote:
LGTM
> We should eventually develop proper formatters for Clang data-types, but
> these are currently not ready.
Yes, I'm still working on that in background. LLDB has to have a way to
understand custom RTTI we use in AST nodes for statements and types, because
adding a vtable
https://github.com/Endilll commented:
LGTM
> There is also TokenKind: this one does not currently inherit from
> BaseEnumeration and is defined somewhat differently, having all its variants
> and their IDs as a dictionary in enumerations.py. This seems quite arbitrary
> to me, is there any re
Endilll wrote:
> @Endilll are you taking a look at this, and/or should I ask other reviewers?
It's never a bad idea to add more reviewers, as long as they are relevant.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/95608
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-c
https://github.com/Endilll edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/95608
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/Endilll closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/68846
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Endilll wrote:
All 3 buildbot failures are unrelated.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/68846
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Endilll wrote:
Also worth pinging @linux4life798
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/95608
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/Endilll edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96628
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/Endilll commented:
`Sema.h` changes look good to me.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96628
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/Endilll edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96831
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/Endilll commented:
This looks good overall, but I have minor suggestions.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96831
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-com
@@ -2056,40 +2056,40 @@ void CXXRecordDecl::completeDefinition() {
completeDefinition(nullptr);
}
+static bool hasPureVirtualFinalOverrider(
+const CXXRecordDecl &RD, const CXXFinalOverriderMap *FinalOverriders) {
+ auto ExistsIn = [](const CXXFinalOverriderMap &FinalOv
https://github.com/Endilll closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96641
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/Endilll approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96831
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/Endilll updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96097
>From b77b2d9b10ad90ee67893904732003bf11eec21d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Corentin Jabot
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2024 19:47:43 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] [Clang] Move the builtin workaround logic to the lexer
---
@@ -1180,6 +1180,16 @@ void Sema::PrintPragmaAttributeInstantiationPoint() {
diag::note_pragma_attribute_applied_decl_here);
}
+void Sema::DiagnoseExcessPrecision() {
+ if (NumExcessPrecisionNotSatisfied > 0) {
+for (auto &[Loc, Type, Num] : ExcessPrecision
@@ -626,6 +626,11 @@ class Sema final : public SemaBase {
const llvm::MapVector &
getMismatchingDeleteExpressions() const;
+ std::vector>
+ ExcessPrecisionNotSatisfied;
Endilll wrote:
I think all three data members should be moved down to `SemaExpr.
1701 - 1800 of 2323 matches
Mail list logo
