https://github.com/Endilll commented:
I'm sorry it took us a while to notice this PR.
I think that documentation of new functions should describe what happens on
unhappy code paths, too.
I also would like to see unit tests and a release note.
Even more, I'd like @AaronBallman to sign this off
https://github.com/Endilll edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/113754
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -71,3 +71,5 @@ pythonenv*
/clang/utils/analyzer/projects/*/RefScanBuildResults
# automodapi puts generated documentation files here.
/lldb/docs/python_api/
+silver-debug
+silver-build
Endilll wrote:
Those are unrelated changes that should remain local to yo
https://github.com/Endilll approved this pull request.
You should add a release note and a PR description.
LGTM otherwise.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/120483
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/c
Endilll wrote:
The failure reminds me of #122063, which was merged just 2 hours ago.
Do you mind merging the `main` into your PR and try again?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/120494
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
htt
Author: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: 2025-01-24T15:01:09+04:00
New Revision: 33fc477e6e2614f71541f4287c1d68757b9203b0
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/33fc477e6e2614f71541f4287c1d68757b9203b0
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/33fc477e6e2614f71541f4287c1d68757b9203b0.
Author: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: 2025-01-20T14:19:32+04:00
New Revision: 5a7a3242639a17b049d70ee00798957ea21eb182
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/5a7a3242639a17b049d70ee00798957ea21eb182
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/5a7a3242639a17b049d70ee00798957ea21eb182.
https://github.com/Endilll commented:
Maybe worth adding a release note, especially if you can write a test that
would fail without this patch?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/123599
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
ht
https://github.com/Endilll edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/123599
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -91,6 +91,31 @@ class FixedPoint final {
return ComparisonCategoryResult::Greater;
}
+ size_t bytesToSerialize() const {
+return sizeof(uint32_t) + (V.getValue().getBitWidth() / CHAR_BIT);
+ }
+
+ void serialize(std::byte *Buff) const {
+// Semantics follow
@@ -91,6 +91,31 @@ class FixedPoint final {
return ComparisonCategoryResult::Greater;
}
+ size_t bytesToSerialize() const {
+return sizeof(uint32_t) + (V.getValue().getBitWidth() / CHAR_BIT);
Endilll wrote:
I wonder how much do we care about `CHAR_
Endilll wrote:
> No problem, I know everybody is busy.
>
> > The first step is to get the PR out of draft state.
>
> Do you just mean to mark it "read for review" or to apply changes so that it
> can be merged? Because the current implementation is not ready as I still
> have some questions a
https://github.com/Endilll commented:
Python part of this looks fine to me.
We need to rename `fields_visit_callback` to something else, but that's not in
the scope of this PR.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/123539
___
cfe-commits mailing l
Endilll wrote:
You need to add a test.
We have ASan buildbots, but they only run post-merge. You can use
`LLVM_USE_SANITIZER` [CMake
option](https://llvm.org/docs/CMake.html#:~:text=llvm_use_sanitizer%3Astring)
to check locally that Clang crashes on your test without the fix.
https://github.c
@@ -649,15 +649,15 @@ namespace cwg241 { // cwg241: 9
A::g<3>(b);
C::f<3>(b);
// expected-error@-1 {{no matching function for call to 'f'}}
-// expected-note@#cwg241-C-f {{candidate template ignored: invalid
explicitly-specified argument for template paramete
https://github.com/Endilll edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/122754
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -649,15 +649,15 @@ namespace cwg241 { // cwg241: 9
A::g<3>(b);
C::f<3>(b);
// expected-error@-1 {{no matching function for call to 'f'}}
-// expected-note@#cwg241-C-f {{candidate template ignored: invalid
explicitly-specified argument for template paramete
https://github.com/Endilll commented:
The way you applied changes to C++ DR tests is good, but I think the diagnostic
message would benefit from further wordsmithing.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/122754
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-co
https://github.com/Endilll edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/122754
___
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/122754
___
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/Endilll created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/124844
This patch implements the rule described in
N5001.[[over.match.best]/4](https://eel.is/c++draft/over.match.best#general-4):
> If the best viable function resolves to a function for which multiple
> declarations
https://github.com/Endilll commented:
Changes to DR tests look good.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/124668
___
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/124844
>From da30f708caee020677675277673e0b7c6f9c644f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2025 15:15:17 +0400
Subject: [PATCH 01/14] [clang] Diagnose default arguments defined in differe
https://github.com/Endilll updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/124844
>From da30f708caee020677675277673e0b7c6f9c644f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2025 15:15:17 +0400
Subject: [PATCH 01/13] [clang] Diagnose default arguments defined in differe
Endilll wrote:
During offline discussion with Corentin he pointed out that [over.match.best]/4
talks about multiple declarations that are _found_, and not simply reachable,
like my implementation currently assumes. I'll update it to take the results of
name lookup into account.
https://github
https://github.com/Endilll commented:
I find the doc somewhat hand-wavy, but that's fine.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/124997
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commi
@@ -710,7 +710,7 @@ Before Clang 19, a change in BMI of any (transitive)
dependency would cause the
outputs of the BMI to change. Starting with Clang 19, changes to non-direct
dependencies should not directly affect the output BMI, unless they affect the
results of the compila
https://github.com/Endilll edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/124997
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -488,6 +490,20 @@ bool Sema::MergeCXXFunctionDecl(FunctionDecl *New,
FunctionDecl *Old,
continue;
}
+if (PrevForDefaultArgs->getLexicalDeclContext()->getPrimaryContext() !=
+ScopeDC->getPrimaryContext() &&
+!New->isCXXClassMember())
+
@@ -10960,6 +10960,10 @@ OverloadCandidateSet::BestViableFunction(Sema &S,
SourceLocation Loc,
S.diagnoseEquivalentInternalLinkageDeclarations(Loc, Best->Function,
EquivalentCands);
+ // [over.match.best]/4 is checked f
@@ -27,3 +27,23 @@ extern double(*func2)(
P_1(int u)
P_1(int v) // expected-error {{too many function parameters; subsequent
parameters will be ignored}}
int w);
+
+#define PD_10(x) x, x, x, x, x, x, x, x, x, x,
+#define PD_100(x) PD_10(x) PD_10(x) PD_10(x) PD_10
@@ -73,6 +73,11 @@ C++17 Feature Support
Resolutions to C++ Defect Reports
^
+- Clang now diagnoses ambiguous default arguments declared in different scopes
+ when calling functions, implementing [over.match.best] p4.
+ (`CWG1: What if two usi
https://github.com/Endilll closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/121667
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Endilll wrote:
I don't feel qualified to review this, but I appreciate that you fix holes in
my original quite naive implementation.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/122726
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists
Endilll wrote:
Looking at diagnostics in the test you add, I wonder why don't we issue them,
and especially the fixit, when we parse bit-field declaration. Why waiting
until assignment happens?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/116785
___
cfe
https://github.com/Endilll created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/121660
This patch adds a test for
[CWG794](https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/794.html), which is an NB
comment closed as NAD. Author was asked to bring a paper to Evolution, which
never happened. So we test for
Endilll wrote:
> and I thought making just preferred_type warnings early would be especially
> insane :D
I don't necessarily agree. `preferred_type` is a relatively new thing, so we
can try doing something new here.
> [edit: I just realized even that might need to be an option because I can
https://github.com/Endilll created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/121667
This patch adds test for
[CWG170](https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/170.html). The resolution adds
explicit undefined behavior, so I think the best we can do is to put the test
into constexpr evaluator. C
https://github.com/Endilll created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/121668
This patch adds test for
[CWG190](https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/190.html), leveraging
`__is_layout_compatible` intrinsic added for C++20 `std::is_layout_compatible`.
I conservatively set the status to
https://github.com/Endilll closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/121642
___
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/121668
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/Endilll created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/121642
This patch brings our C++ DR status page up to date with WG21 updates.
[CWG1223](https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/1223.html) "Syntactic
disambiguation and _trailing-return-types_" is resolved by
[P2915R0
https://github.com/Endilll edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/121642
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Author: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: 2025-01-05T21:29:32+03:00
New Revision: f53abc2db07abfa38af9365bc15572112adbe040
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/f53abc2db07abfa38af9365bc15572112adbe040
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/f53abc2db07abfa38af9365bc15572112adbe040.
https://github.com/Endilll closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/121679
___
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/121660
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/Endilll created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/121687
This patch adds test for
[CWG203](https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/203.html). Author was asking to
change the type of pointer-to-member expression to be closer to how it's
written as opposed to where the
https://github.com/Endilll updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/121654
>From dcd29ca8c77e24c532ca8300a7e46f5498ffebbb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2025 19:37:46 +0300
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [clang] Add test for CWG156 "Name lookup for conversion
https://github.com/Endilll updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/121687
>From bca2bfe17b71faeebf65eba11adcb70927f878fd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2025 13:58:16 +0300
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [clang] Add test for CWG203 "Type of address-of-member
https://github.com/Endilll created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/121688
This patch plugs holes in RUN lines in C++ DR tests, making sure they are run
in C++98 through C++26, with the exception of C++03, which in Clang is
synonymous to C++98.
>From d6e8b78f2209c4bc29d47b8d196ec9ec9
https://github.com/Endilll edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/121654
___
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/121654
___
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/121654
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Author: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: 2025-01-05T20:46:23+03:00
New Revision: 743c84bb9b79ed70d9bed926c2a173db3b30f587
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/743c84bb9b79ed70d9bed926c2a173db3b30f587
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/743c84bb9b79ed70d9bed926c2a173db3b30f587.
https://github.com/Endilll created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/121679
This patch adds a rather simple test for
[CWG192](https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/192.html). Parameter
declarations of member functions are not complete-class contexts (unlike
default arguments), so the
https://github.com/Endilll closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/121688
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/Endilll created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/121654
This patch adds test for
[CWG156](https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/156.html). The most relevant
piece of current wording is
[[basic.lookup.unqual]/5](https://eel.is/c++draft/basic.lookup#unqual-5):
> An
@@ -922,6 +922,49 @@ namespace cwg155 { // cwg155: dup 632
// expected-warning@-1 {{braces around scalar initializer}}
}
+namespace cwg156 { // cwg156: partial
+namespace ex1 {
+struct A {
+ operator int();
+} a;
+void foo() {
+ typedef int T;
+ a.operator T(); // T is fo
Endilll wrote:
> I wonder if we just mark that as superseded and/or N/A.
To do that, we need to downgrade CWG from being available in Clang 3.2 to
"partial", and merge in at least the test that doesn't pass. Maybe we should do
that anyway.
> The original requirements that lookup must find
Endilll wrote:
I'm sorry it took us a while.
The first step is to get the PR out of draft state.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115234
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cf
Endilll wrote:
This was discussed during Clang C/C++ Language Working Group meeting today, and
the consensus seems that this PR shouldn't land before Clang 20 branch, which
is scheduled to happen on January 28th.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/122423
https://github.com/Endilll commented:
Changes to C++ DR tests LGTM.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/43
___
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/127166
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/Endilll commented:
I'd like to see a test that checks that it's available in C++23 but not C++20
(with a fixme on this). You can also point me out to an existing one.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/127166
___
cfe-commits
@@ -510,6 +510,12 @@ C++23 implementation status
Yes
+
+
+(12): In Clang 20, this change is not yet retroactively
Endilll wrote:
```suggestion
(12): This feature is not yet available in C++20 and earlier
modes.
```
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-pr
Endilll wrote:
> edit: looks like release notes were "reset" after cutting rc (?)
Yes, this happens every time a release branch is created.
I checked your release notes, they seem fine to me.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/123539
___
cfe-co
@@ -54,6 +54,33 @@ unsigned clang_visitCXXBaseClasses(CXType PT, CXFieldVisitor
visitor,
return true;
}
+unsigned clang_visitCXXMethods(CXType PT, CXFieldVisitor visitor,
+ CXClientData client_data) {
+ CXCursor PC = clang_getTypeDeclaration(P
https://github.com/Endilll commented:
Seems fine to me, but I'd like @AaronBallman to take a look, too, because
libclang doesn't have a dedicated maintainer and I'm not familiar enough with
it to sign off new functions we add to it.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/123539
https://github.com/Endilll edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/123539
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Author: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: 2025-03-20T01:58:55+03:00
New Revision: f157365a0b0f1dab12f7e8fcbf603a232e611792
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/f157365a0b0f1dab12f7e8fcbf603a232e611792
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/f157365a0b0f1dab12f7e8fcbf603a232e611792.
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@
import sys
from pathlib import Path
-kInputsDir = os.path.join(os.path.dirname(__file__), "INPUTS")
+k_inputs_dir = os.path.join(os.path.dirname(__file__), "INPUTS")
Endilll wrote:
"Konstant", I guess
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pu
https://github.com/Endilll approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132378
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/Endilll commented:
Changes to C++ DR tests look good to me
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132129
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -1,12 +1,13 @@
import os
-from clang.cindex import Config, File, Index
+from clang.cindex import Config, File, Index, TranslationUnit
if "CLANG_LIBRARY_PATH" in os.environ:
Config.set_library_path(os.environ["CLANG_LIBRARY_PATH"])
import unittest
+kInputsDir = o
https://github.com/Endilll edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/130383
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Endilll wrote:
> This missed updating lldb, which we didn't notice due to lack of pre-commit
> CI.
This is unfortunate, because lack of lldb testing on clang changes was a
temporary measure that has been in effect for 8 months at this point (#95537).
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@
import sys
from pathlib import Path
-kInputsDir = os.path.join(os.path.dirname(__file__), "INPUTS")
+k_inputs_dir = os.path.join(os.path.dirname(__file__), "INPUTS")
Endilll wrote:
Can you also drop `k_` prefix? According to PEP 8, naming co
https://github.com/Endilll edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132378
___
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/130383
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/Endilll commented:
LGTM otherwise
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132378
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Endilll wrote:
I was pointed out that there is a separate rule that constants are supposed to
be in `SCREAMING_CAPS` (https://peps.python.org/pep-0008/#constants). We
should've changed the names (`k` prefix is out of place anyway), but not to
`snake_case` as I implied.
https://github.com/llvm
Endilll wrote:
Sorry for the churn
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132378
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -0,0 +1,95 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -verify=expected,c2y -pedantic -std=c2y %s
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -verify=expected,c2y,compat -Wpre-c2y-compat -std=c2y %s
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -verify=expected,ext -pedantic -std=c23 %s
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -verify=expected,ext -pedantic -x c++ -Wn
https://github.com/Endilll created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/131816
Otherwise Windows users have troubles with lexer tests that use emojis.
>From e7b2dc54e409f43df1f1e0bf17ec2f06ce61be42 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2025 18:04:04 +0300
Sub
Endilll wrote:
#131812 is needed to successfully run the script.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/131816
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Endilll wrote:
Both #131812 and #131816 have been merged, so you can update your branch and
run the script.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/131794
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman
https://github.com/Endilll closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/131816
___
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/131816
>From e7b2dc54e409f43df1f1e0bf17ec2f06ce61be42 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2025 18:04:04 +0300
Subject: [PATCH] [clang] Enforce UTF-8 in `make_cxx_dr_status`
Otherwise Wi
https://github.com/Endilll edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132045
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/Endilll created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132045
Aaron reported that `make_cxx_dr_status` replaces all newlines in
`cxx_dr_status.html`, which makes for a huge diff. On Windows, we can't be
compatible with all `autocrlf` modes at once, so this patch adds auto
@@ -47,6 +47,28 @@ void f() {
#endif
} // namespace cwg2813
+namespace cwg2815 { // cwg2815: 21
+#if __cpp_noexcept_function_type >= 201510
Endilll wrote:
Yes, C++ DR tests are concerned with language modes, and not individual
features.
https://github.com/l
https://github.com/Endilll closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132045
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Author: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: 2025-04-05T10:45:51+03:00
New Revision: 70a20757e8fff0a56cd7f95c2854b0fa68e7089c
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/70a20757e8fff0a56cd7f95c2854b0fa68e7089c
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/70a20757e8fff0a56cd7f95c2854b0fa68e7089c.
https://github.com/Endilll approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132377
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -1073,6 +1073,35 @@ inputs. Here is some example of ``$``-prefixed options:
Language and Target-Independent Features
+Freestanding Builds
+---
+Passing the ``-ffreestanding`` flag causes Clang to build for a freestand
@@ -1073,6 +1073,35 @@ inputs. Here is some example of ``$``-prefixed options:
Language and Target-Independent Features
+Freestanding Builds
+---
+Passing the ``-ffreestanding`` flag causes Clang to build for a freestand
@@ -6,6 +6,89 @@
// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++23 -pedantic-errors
-verify=expected,since-cxx11,cxx11-23,since-cxx20,since-cxx23 %s
// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++2c -pedantic-errors
-verify=expected,since-cxx11,since-cxx20,since-cxx23,since-cxx26 %s
+namespace cwg2803 { // cwg2803
@@ -47,6 +47,31 @@ void f() {
#endif
} // namespace cwg2813
+namespace cwg2815 { // cwg2815: 21
+#if __cplusplus >= 201703L
+int arg() noexcept;
+
+int f(int (&)() noexcept);
+void f(int (&)());
+int i = f(arg);
+
+int g(int (*)() noexcept);
+void g(int (&)());
+int j = g(arg)
Endilll wrote:
It's not clear to me why the example in the PR description should be rejected,
given https://eel.is/c++draft/dcl.enum#12.sentence-1. I also don't see a clear
consensus on CWG reflector to determine whether this change moves us in the
right direction. Do we have to change status
2001 - 2100 of 2323 matches
Mail list logo
