- This is an ABI incompatiblity, but this is not likely to be a huge
deal in practice. For now we at least generate self consistent code
instead of crashing.
- <rdar://problem/6657601> x86-32 ABI: Bitfields in small structures
are not passed correctly
llvm-svn: 66713
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
definitions. We were rejecting tentative definitions of incomplete
(which is bad), and now we don't.
This fix is partial because we don't do the end-of-translation-unit
initialization for tentative definitions that don't ever have any
initializers specified.
llvm-svn: 66584
context of a template-id for which we need to instantiate default
template arguments.
In the TextDiagnosticPrinter, don't suppress the caret diagnostic if
we are producing a non-note diagnostic that follows a note diagnostic
with the same location, because notes are (conceptually) a part of the
warning or error that comes before them.
llvm-svn: 66572
only print the template instantiation backtrace for the first error.
Also, if a base class has failed to type-check during instantiation,
just drop that base class and continue on to check other base classes.
llvm-svn: 66563
'struct A<double, int>'
In the "template instantiation depth exceeded" message, print
"-ftemplate-depth-N" rather than "-ftemplate-depth=N".
An unnamed tag type that is declared with a typedef, e.g.,
typedef struct { int x, y; } Point;
can be used as a template argument. Allow this, and check that we get
sensible pretty-printing for such things.
llvm-svn: 66560
to a diagnostic that will be invoked after the diagnostic (if it is
not suppressed). The hooks are allowed to produce additional
diagnostics (typically notes) that provide more information. We should
be able to use this to help diagnostic clients link notes back to the
diagnostic they clarify. Comments welcome; I'll write up documentation
and convert other clients (e.g., overload resolution failures) if
there are no screams of protest.
As the first client of post-diagnostic hooks, we now produce a
template instantiation backtrace when a failure occurs during template
instantiation. There's still more work to do to make this output
pretty, if that's even possible.
llvm-svn: 66557
done in sema, and is reflected by the existing PR3258. In the meantime,
fix PR3682 by disabling a bogus assertion (which doesn't account for +
operands).
llvm-svn: 66533
(default: 99). Beyond this limit, produce an error and consider the
current template instantiation a failure.
The stack we're building to track the instantiations will, eventually,
be used to produce instantiation backtraces from diagnostics within
template instantiation. However, we're not quite there yet.
This adds a new Clang driver option -ftemplate-depth=NNN, which should
eventually be generated from the GCC command-line operation
-ftemplate-depth-NNN (note the '-' rather than the '='!). I did not
make the driver changes to do this mapping.
llvm-svn: 66513
such as replacing 'T' in vector<T>. There are a few aspects to this:
- Extend TemplateArgument to allow arbitrary expressions (an
Expr*), and switch ClassTemplateSpecializationType to store
TemplateArguments rather than it's own type-or-expression
representation.
- ClassTemplateSpecializationType can now store dependent types. In
that case, the canonical type is another
ClassTemplateSpecializationType (with default template arguments
expanded) rather than a declaration (we don't build Decls for
dependent types).
- Split ActOnClassTemplateId into ActOnClassTemplateId (called from
the parser) and CheckClassTemplateId (called from
ActOnClassTemplateId and InstantiateType). They're smart enough to
handle dependent types, now.
llvm-svn: 66509
a warning and then threw away the AST. While I'm in there, tighten up the
code to actually reject completely bogus cases (sending a message to a
struct). We still allow sending a message to an int, which doesn't make
sense but GCC allows it and is easy to support.
llvm-svn: 66468
Douglas Gregor