fb4263f156
Consider the visibility of template template arguments. GCC doesn't, but it also
...
fails to consider the linkage, which we were already considering.
llvm-svn: 161070
2012-07-31 19:02:02 +00:00
a83aaa0da4
Add a missing testcase for merging the visibility of two declarations used
...
as arguments of a template.
llvm-svn: 160911
2012-07-28 02:51:03 +00:00
f97c636812
Record visibility pragmas when we see a tag declaration. We might use it
...
to build a type before seeing the definition.
llvm-svn: 160339
2012-07-17 04:22:25 +00:00
385c04269f
Apply visibility pragmas to class template declarations. This is needed because
...
we might use the declaration to build a type before seeing the definition.
llvm-svn: 160176
2012-07-13 18:04:45 +00:00
eca5cd20a1
Fix a bug in my previous commit. The problem is not that we were not using the
...
canonical decl for the template, but that we were not merging attributes for
templates at all!
llvm-svn: 160157
2012-07-13 01:19:08 +00:00
6140847647
Use the canonical template decl when trying to find if it has a visibility
...
attribute.
llvm-svn: 160139
2012-07-12 20:05:04 +00:00
4dedd0ceb8
Process #pragma visibility early in the parsing of class definitions. Fixes
...
pr13338.
llvm-svn: 160105
2012-07-12 04:47:34 +00:00
1fa9fade38
Handle #pragma visibility in explicit specializations and enums.
...
llvm-svn: 160057
2012-07-11 18:14:09 +00:00
5f0a1b89d7
Don't process #pragma visibility during instantiation. The visibility of the
...
instantiation depends on the template, its arguments and parameters, but not
where it is instantiated.
llvm-svn: 160034
2012-07-11 02:15:51 +00:00
a486f48e5b
We were computing the visibility and linkage of template parameters, but
...
only using the linkage.
Use and test both, documenting that considering the visibility and linkage
of template parameters is a difference from gcc.
llvm-svn: 158309
2012-06-11 14:29:58 +00:00
67a498cc5f
Don't ignore linkage when ignoring visibility in the instantiation of a
...
method template.
llvm-svn: 157486
2012-05-25 17:22:33 +00:00
340941dc16
Don't ignore linkage when ignoring visibility in the instantiation of a
...
function template.
llvm-svn: 157480
2012-05-25 16:41:35 +00:00
a28bf63d9a
Consider the linkage for member class templates even when we have to ignore
...
the visibility.
llvm-svn: 157475
2012-05-25 15:51:26 +00:00
0cf10ac9ab
When ignoring visibility in an instantiation, still consider the linkage.
...
Similar fixes for function and member template to follow as I write the
testcases.
llvm-svn: 157470
2012-05-25 14:47:05 +00:00
96dcb8d4bb
Function template version of the previous patch.
...
llvm-svn: 157207
2012-05-21 20:31:27 +00:00
93c289c28a
Produce a hidden symbol for zed in
...
struct HIDDEN foo {
};
template <class P>
struct bar {
};
template <>
struct HIDDEN bar<foo> {
DEFAULT static void zed();
};
void bar<foo>::zed() {
}
Before we would produce a hidden symbol in
struct HIDDEN foo {
};
template <class P>
struct bar {
};
template <>
struct bar<foo> {
DEFAULT static void zed();
};
void bar<foo>::zed() {
}
But adding HIDDEN to the specialization would cause us to produce a default
symbol.
llvm-svn: 157206
2012-05-21 20:15:56 +00:00
85e91ba6f5
Test and document a difference from gcc in the handling of visibility
...
attributes.
llvm-svn: 157186
2012-05-21 14:22:37 +00:00
96e6824c31
Fix the visibility of instantiations of static data members.
...
Fixes pr12835.
llvm-svn: 156897
2012-05-16 02:10:38 +00:00
7f90b7d4c2
Fix our handling of visibility in explicit template instantiations.
...
* Don't copy the visibility attribute during instantiations. We have to be able
to distinguish
struct HIDDEN foo {};
template<class T>
DEFAULT void bar() {}
template DEFAULT void bar<foo>();
from
struct HIDDEN foo {};
template<class T>
DEFAULT void bar() {}
template void bar<foo>();
* If an instantiation has an attribute, it takes precedence over an attribute
in the template.
* With instantiation attributes handled with the above logic, we can now
select the minimum visibility when looking at template arguments.
llvm-svn: 156821
2012-05-15 14:09:55 +00:00
b522a5f246
Fix visibility when we have two types with explicit visibility in a template
...
argument list.
llvm-svn: 155368
2012-04-23 17:51:55 +00:00
23fd21d4ee
Add another testcase that was not being covered.
...
llvm-svn: 155351
2012-04-23 14:02:53 +00:00
cba4879534
Add a testcase that we already get right but was not being tested. Found
...
by a chrome build on OS X. Thanks to Nico Weber for testing a patch and
providing the .ii file.
llvm-svn: 155326
2012-04-22 22:31:25 +00:00
1e762442c7
Cleanup testcase.
...
llvm-svn: 155317
2012-04-22 16:03:00 +00:00
bbc5cbc410
An attribute in a explicit template installation should take precedence over
...
the tempale arguments in deciding the visibility.
This agrees with gcc 4.7.
Found by trying to build chrome with component=shared_library with 155314
reverted.
llvm-svn: 155316
2012-04-22 15:31:59 +00:00
6b6e879221
Revert 155102 but add a fixme while I debug what is wrong with chrome's
...
components build.
llvm-svn: 155314
2012-04-22 12:37:27 +00:00
fae3f908d8
Add another missing testcase.
...
llvm-svn: 155304
2012-04-22 02:41:22 +00:00
4304101fb2
Add a testcase we were already getting right, but were not testing for.
...
llvm-svn: 155302
2012-04-22 01:22:25 +00:00
8add48ec9e
Fix handling of template parameters. Found by inspection. GCC 4.7 agrees
...
with this testcase.
llvm-svn: 155301
2012-04-22 00:43:48 +00:00
53cf219367
In mergeVisibility, if we already have an explicit visibility, keep it.
...
This fixes the included testcase and lets us simplify the code a bit. It
does require using mergeWithMin when merging class information to its
members. Expand the comments to explain why that works.
llvm-svn: 155103
2012-04-19 05:50:08 +00:00
1280fe6245
In mergeVisibilityWithMin, let an implicit hidden symbol take precedence over
...
an explicit default one. This means that with -fvisibility hidden we
now produce a hidden symbol for
template <typename T>
class DEFAULT foo {
void bar() {}
};
class zed {};
template class foo<zed>;
This matches the behaviour of gcc 4.7.
llvm-svn: 155102
2012-04-19 05:34:51 +00:00
78158af59c
Revert r154749 for now at John McCall's request.
...
llvm-svn: 154846
2012-04-16 18:46:26 +00:00
0aec8ece52
Consider visibility attributes last, so that they take precedence.
...
I am working on a cleaner fix, but this gets the case in PR12552 passing.
llvm-svn: 154749
2012-04-14 15:21:19 +00:00
1f71a23985
The type of a definition should not increase its visibility. Fixes PR12221.
...
llvm-svn: 152493
2012-03-10 13:01:40 +00:00
8093fdfab1
Two fixes to how we compute visibility:
...
* Handle some situations where we should never make a decl more visible,
even when merging in an explicit visibility.
* Handle attributes in members of classes that are explicitly specialized.
Thanks Nico for the report and testing, Eric for the initial review, and dgregor
for the awesome test27 :-)
llvm-svn: 151236
2012-02-23 04:17:32 +00:00
2f869a3f4f
Remember if a type has its visibility set explicitly or implicitly.
...
With that, centralize the way we merge visibility, always preferring explicit over
implicit and then picking the most restrictive one.
Fixes pr10113 and pr11690.
llvm-svn: 148163
2012-01-14 00:30:36 +00:00
2aa7acfadb
Process attributes in explicit function template instantiations. Fixes part of
...
PR11690.
llvm-svn: 147523
2012-01-04 05:40:59 +00:00
0b0620776a
Process attributes in explicit template instatiation definitions. Fixes PR11690.
...
llvm-svn: 147441
2012-01-03 06:04:21 +00:00
eeb9d9fef6
Small cosmetic cleanups in code I will change anyway.
...
llvm-svn: 147424
2012-01-02 06:26:22 +00:00
0f960a0a5a
Consider visibility attributes in namespaces as being explicit. I.e., they
...
take precedence over command line options. Fixes PR10113.
llvm-svn: 147405
2012-01-01 18:06:40 +00:00
e321795c60
Remove a non-gcc-compatible extension that would apply attributes on declarations without a declarator to structs. Add a warning for ignored attributes. Patch by Michael Han.
...
llvm-svn: 146796
2011-12-17 00:36:09 +00:00
71c26936a0
Remove CodeGenVTables::ComputeVTableRelatedInformation dependency on CodeGen
...
llvm-svn: 140503
2011-09-26 01:56:36 +00:00
b8c604abfd
Don't factor in visibility for templates and template arguments
...
for explicit specializations with their own explicit visibility.
llvm-svn: 133958
2011-06-27 23:06:04 +00:00
8bc6d5b919
Don't consider visibility from template parameter lists if we're
...
computing for a nested decl with explicit visibility. This is all part
of the general philosophy of explicit visibility attributes, where
any information that was obviously available at the attribute site
should probably be ignored. Fixes PR9371.
llvm-svn: 126992
2011-03-04 10:39:25 +00:00
571e2ad042
Mark VTables and RTTI data linkonce_odr instead of weak_odr, with the exception of explicit template instantiations, which have to be weak_odr.
...
This fixes PR6996.
llvm-svn: 124089
2011-01-24 00:46:19 +00:00
facb7d0ade
Also set unnamed_addr on declarations.
...
llvm-svn: 123531
2011-01-15 08:23:14 +00:00
d09776b945
Only add unnamed_addr to definitions.
...
llvm-svn: 123354
2011-01-13 01:12:55 +00:00
bb7f7686c5
Set unnamed_addr in VTTs.
...
llvm-svn: 123280
2011-01-11 22:29:55 +00:00
5674c644cf
Add unnamed_addr to vtables.
...
llvm-svn: 123272
2011-01-11 21:10:26 +00:00
ec00cd9713
Fix test. I added one last test and then forget to re-check.
...
llvm-svn: 122137
2010-12-18 03:52:04 +00:00
659a337c74
Apply attributes to explicit specializations. Specializations which
...
don't provide their own explicit visibility attributes should get them
from the template. Fixes rdar://problem/8778497.
llvm-svn: 122136
2010-12-18 03:30:47 +00:00
Rafael Espindola