class C {
void g(C c);
virtual void f() = 0;
};
In this case, C is not known to be abstract when doing semantic analysis on g. This is done by recursively traversing the abstract class and checking the types of member functions.
llvm-svn: 67594
a class template. At present, we can only instantiation normal
methods, but not constructors, destructors, or conversion operators.
As ever, this contains a bit of refactoring in Sema's type-checking. In
particular:
- Split ActOnFunctionDeclarator into ActOnFunctionDeclarator
(handling the declarator itself) and CheckFunctionDeclaration
(checking for the the function declaration), the latter of which
is also used by template instantiation.
- We were performing the adjustment of function parameter types in
three places; collect those into a single new routine.
- When the type of a parameter is adjusted, allocate an
OriginalParmVarDecl to keep track of the type as it was written.
- Eliminate a redundant check for out-of-line declarations of member
functions; hide more C++-specific checks on function declarations
behind if(getLangOptions().CPlusPlus).
llvm-svn: 67575
QualifiedNameType and QualifiedDeclRefExpr. We now keep track of the
exact nested-name-specifier spelling for a QualifiedDeclRefExpr, and
use that spelling when printing ASTs. This fixes PR3493.
llvm-svn: 67283
specialization names. This way, we keep track of sugared types like
std::vector<Real>
I believe we are now using QualifiedNameTypes everywhere we can. Next
step: QualifiedDeclRefExprs.
llvm-svn: 67268
qualified name, e.g.,
foo::x
so that we retain the nested-name-specifier as written in the source
code and can reproduce that qualified name when printing the types
back (e.g., in diagnostics). This is PR3493, which won't be complete
until finished the other tasks mentioned near the end of this commit.
The parser's representation of nested-name-specifiers, CXXScopeSpec,
is now a bit fatter, because it needs to contain the scopes that
precede each '::' and keep track of whether the global scoping
operator '::' was at the beginning. For example, we need to keep track
of the leading '::', 'foo', and 'bar' in
::foo::bar::x
The Action's CXXScopeTy * is no longer a DeclContext *. It's now the
opaque version of the new NestedNameSpecifier, which contains a single
component of a nested-name-specifier (either a DeclContext * or a Type
*, bitmangled).
The new sugar type QualifiedNameType composes a sequence of
NestedNameSpecifiers with a representation of the type we're actually
referring to. At present, we only build QualifiedNameType nodes within
Sema::getTypeName. This will be extended to other type-constructing
actions (e.g., ActOnClassTemplateId).
Also on the way: QualifiedDeclRefExprs will also store a sequence of
NestedNameSpecifiers, so that we can print out the property
nested-name-specifier. I expect to also use this for handling
dependent names like Fibonacci<I - 1>::value.
llvm-svn: 67265
class members to the corresponding in-class declaration.
Diagnose the erroneous use of 'static' on out-of-line definitions of
class members.
llvm-svn: 66740
template. More importantly, start to sort out the issues regarding
complete types and nested-name-specifiers, especially the question of:
when do we instantiate a class template specialization that occurs to
the left of a '::' in a nested-name-specifier?
llvm-svn: 66662
- When we are declaring a function in local scope, we can merge with
a visible declaration from an outer scope if that declaration
refers to an entity with linkage. This behavior now works in C++
and properly ignores entities without linkage.
- Diagnose the use of "static" on a function declaration in local
scope.
- Diagnose the declaration of a static function after a non-static
declaration of the same function.
- Propagate the storage specifier to a function declaration from a
prior declaration (PR3425)
- Don't name-mangle "main"
llvm-svn: 65360
information about types. We often print diagnostics where we say
"foo_t" is bad, but the user doesn't know how foo_t is declared
(because it is a typedef). Fix this by expanding sugar when present
in a diagnostic (and not one of a few special cases, like vectors).
Before:
t.m:5:2: error: invalid operands to binary expression ('typeof(P)' and 'typeof(F)')
MAX(P, F);
^~~~~~~~~
t.m:1:78: note: instantiated from:
#define MAX(A,B) ({ __typeof__(A) __a = (A); __typeof__(B) __b = (B); __a < __b ? __b : __a; })
^
After:
t.m:5:2: error: invalid operands to binary expression ('typeof(P)' (aka 'struct mystruct') and 'typeof(F)' (aka 'float'))
MAX(P, F);
^~~~~~~~~
t.m:1:78: note: instantiated from:
#define MAX(A,B) ({ __typeof__(A) __a = (A); __typeof__(B) __b = (B); __a < __b ? __b : __a; })
^
llvm-svn: 65081
(as GCC does), except when we've performed overload resolution and
found an unavailable function: in this case, we actually error.
Merge the checking of unavailable functions with the checking for
deprecated functions. This unifies a bit of code, and makes sure that
we're checking for unavailable functions in the right places. Also,
this check can cause an error. We may, eventually, want an option to
make "unavailable" warnings into errors.
Implement much of the logic needed for C++0x deleted functions, which
are effectively the same as "unavailable" functions (but always cause
an error when referenced). However, we don't have the syntax to
specify deleted functions yet :)
llvm-svn: 64955
to do in this area, since there are other places that reference
FunctionDecls.
Don't allow "overloadable" functions (in C) to be declared without a
prototype.
llvm-svn: 64897
complex conversions where the conversion between the real types is an
integral promotion. This is how G++ handles complex promotions for its
complex integer extension.
llvm-svn: 64344
system. Since C99 doesn't have overloading and C++ doesn't have
_Complex, there is no specification for this. Here's what I think
makes sense.
Complex conversions come in several flavors:
- Complex promotions: a complex -> complex conversion where the
underlying real-type conversion is a floating-point promotion. GCC
seems to call this a promotion, EDG does something else. This is
given "promotion" rank for determining the best viable function.
- Complex conversions: a complex -> complex conversion that is
not a complex promotion. This is given "conversion" rank for
determining the best viable function.
- Complex-real conversions: a real -> complex or complex -> real
conversion. This is given "conversion" rank for determining the
best viable function.
These rules are the same for C99 (when using the "overloadable"
attribute) and C++. However, there is one difference in the handling
of floating-point promotions: in C99, float -> long double and double
-> long double are considered promotions (so we give them "promotion"
rank), while C++ considers these conversions ("conversion" rank).
llvm-svn: 64343
Also, put Objective-C protocols into their own identifier
namespace. Otherwise, we find protocols when we don't want to in C++
(but not in C).
llvm-svn: 63877
extension. The interaction with designated initializers is a
bit... interesting... but we follow GNU's lead and don't permit too
much crazy code in this area.
Also, make the "excess initializers" error message a bit more
informative.
Addresses PR2561: http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=2561
llvm-svn: 63785
Anders Carlsson