why the candidate is non-viable. There's a lot we can do to improve this, but
it's a good start. Further improvements should probably be integrated with the
bad-initialization reporting routines.
llvm-svn: 93277
InitializationSequence. Specially, switch initialization of a C++
class type (either copy- or direct-initialization).
Also, make sure that we create an elidable copy-construction when
performing copy initialization of a C++ class variable. Fixes PR5826.
llvm-svn: 91750
- This is designed to make it obvious that %clang_cc1 is a "test variable"
which is substituted. It is '%clang_cc1' instead of '%clang -cc1' because it
can be useful to redefine what gets run as 'clang -cc1' (for example, to set
a default target).
llvm-svn: 91446
such initializations properly convert constructor arguments and fill
in default arguments where necessary. This also makes the ownership
model more clear.
llvm-svn: 81394
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
sequence. Previously, we weren't permitting the second step to call
copy constructors, which left user-defined conversion sequences
surprisingly broken.
Now, we perform overload resolution among all of the constructors, but
only accept the result if it makes the conversion a standard
conversion. Note that this behavior is different from both GCC and EDG
(which don't agree with each other, either); I've submitted a core
issue on the matter.
llvm-svn: 63450
- Support initialization of reference members; complain if any
reference members are left uninitialized.
- Use C++ copy-initialization for initializing each element (falls
back to constraint checking in C)
- Make sure we diagnose when one tries to provide an initializer
list for a non-aggregate.
- Don't complain about empty initializers in C++ (they are permitted)
- Unrelated but necessary: don't bother trying to convert the
decl-specifier-seq to a type when we're dealing with a C++
constructor, destructor, or conversion operator; it results in
spurious warnings.
llvm-svn: 63431
Douglas Gregor