@@ -132,6 +142,36 @@ namespace dr2126 { // dr2126: 12
#endif
}
+namespace dr2137 { // dr2137: 18
+#if __cplusplus >= 201103L
+ struct Q {
+Q();
+Q(Q&&);
+Q(std::initializer_list) = delete; // expected-note 2 {{has been
explicitly marked deleted here}}
+ };
+
+
https://github.com/Endilll requested changes to this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/77768
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -349,8 +349,8 @@ namespace dr1684 { // dr1684: 3.6
};
constexpr int f(NonLiteral &) { return 0; }
constexpr int f(NonLiteral) { return 0; }
- // since-cxx11-error@-1 {{constexpr function's 1st parameter type
'NonLiteral' is not a literal type}}
- //
@@ -410,11 +410,11 @@ namespace dr1358 { // dr1358: 3.1
struct B : Virt {
int member;
constexpr B(NonLit u) : member(u) {}
-// since-cxx11-error@-1 {{constexpr constructor's 1st parameter type
'NonLit' is not a literal type}}
-//
@@ -423,13 +423,13 @@ namespace dr1359 { // dr1359: 3.5
#if __cplusplus >= 201103L
union A { constexpr A() = default; };
union B { constexpr B() = default; int a; }; // #dr1359-B
- // cxx11-17-error@-1 {{defaulted definition of default constructor is not
constexpr}}
+
@@ -584,8 +584,8 @@ namespace dr647 { // dr647: 3.1
struct C {
constexpr C(NonLiteral);
constexpr C(NonLiteral, int) {}
-// since-cxx11-error@-1 {{constexpr constructor's 1st parameter type
'NonLiteral' is not a literal type}}
-//
@@ -410,11 +410,11 @@ namespace dr1358 { // dr1358: 3.1
struct B : Virt {
int member;
constexpr B(NonLit u) : member(u) {}
-// since-cxx11-error@-1 {{constexpr constructor's 1st parameter type
'NonLit' is not a literal type}}
-//
@@ -153,16 +153,16 @@ namespace dr1460 { // dr1460: 3.5
namespace Defaulted {
union A { constexpr A() = default; };
union B { int n; constexpr B() = default; };
-// cxx11-17-error@-1 {{defaulted definition of default constructor is not
constexpr}}
+//
https://github.com/Endilll edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/77753
___
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 checked changes to DR tests, as that's the only part of this PR I'm competent
enough for.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/77753
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
Endilll wrote:
> In the proposed resolution, i do not understand why B* bp = n2p; should be
> ill-formed by virtue of being declared in P2
@cor3ntin Do you understand why http://eel.is/c++draft/class.protected#1 is
there? (I'm trying to pick the best point to start explanation from)
https://github.com/Endilll updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/67948
>From ad0df2131e12c59e57b603b955626e27e3067505 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2023 08:12:56 +0300
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [clang] Add test for CWG472
---
https://github.com/Endilll updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/67948
>From ad0df2131e12c59e57b603b955626e27e3067505 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2023 08:12:56 +0300
Subject: [PATCH] [clang] Add test for CWG472
---
https://github.com/Endilll closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/77670
___
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/77637
>From 545ee4900e48b186e1c9fff93dc62a459ee19754 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2024 20:27:53 +0300
Subject: [PATCH 1/4] [clang] Add test for CWG1807
The test checks that
@@ -0,0 +1,31 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++98 %s -triple x86_64-linux-gnu -emit-llvm -o -
-fexceptions -fcxx-exceptions -pedantic-errors | llvm-cxxfilt -n | FileCheck %s
--check-prefixes CHECK,CXX98
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++11 %s -triple x86_64-linux-gnu -emit-llvm -o -
@@ -164,6 +164,8 @@ void A::C::f4() {
}
} // namespace dr1804
+// dr1807 is in separate file
Endilll wrote:
Addressed in the last update.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/77637
___
cfe-commits mailing
Endilll wrote:
This PR is created to check it against CI
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/77670
___
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/77670
Previously, we've been mentioning tests that were placed in their own files in
corresponding `drNNxx.cpp` file. This patch makes sure we do this consistently,
and improves upon existing practice by specifying
https://github.com/Endilll updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/77444
>From 1cbf8eec15112cd6871fcfb69425c62f08c8f681 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2024 14:17:21 +0300
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] [clang] Add tests for DRs about complete-class context
https://github.com/Endilll updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/77637
>From 545ee4900e48b186e1c9fff93dc62a459ee19754 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2024 20:27:53 +0300
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] [clang] Add test for CWG1807
The test checks that
https://github.com/Endilll updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/77637
>From 545ee4900e48b186e1c9fff93dc62a459ee19754 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2024 20:27:53 +0300
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [clang] Add test for CWG1807
The test checks that
@@ -0,0 +1,31 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++98 %s -triple x86_64-linux-gnu -emit-llvm -o -
-fexceptions -fcxx-exceptions -pedantic-errors | llvm-cxxfilt -n | FileCheck %s
--check-prefixes CHECK,CXX98
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++11 %s -triple x86_64-linux-gnu -emit-llvm -o -
Endilll wrote:
@erichkeane Defect report reads
> The test should also validate the non-catch case! The destruction order is
> also relevant for the 'try' block's cleanup as well. So there is probably two
> different 'check' sections here that need to happen.
So I think while both your points
Endilll wrote:
Our C++ DR test suite has little codegen tests (around 3 or 4, depending on how
you count). This rather simple DR about order of destruction of stack unwinding
aims to establish a precedent for how such test should be written. Specific
points I'd like to highlight:
1. Use of
https://github.com/Endilll created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/77637
The test checks that objects in arrays are destructed in reverse order during
stack unwinding.
>From 545ee4900e48b186e1c9fff93dc62a459ee19754 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: Wed, 10 Jan
https://github.com/Endilll updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/77444
>From 1cbf8eec15112cd6871fcfb69425c62f08c8f681 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2024 14:17:21 +0300
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [clang] Add tests for DRs about complete-class context
https://github.com/Endilll edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/77444
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -42,6 +42,28 @@ namespace dr1611 { // dr1611: dup 1658
C c;
}
+namespace dr1626 { // dr1626: no open
+// FIXME: current consensus for CWG2335 is that the examples are well-formed.
Endilll wrote:
Intent expressed in P1787 in PR description seems rather
https://github.com/Endilll closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/77509
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -1,16 +1,169 @@
-// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++98 -triple x86_64-unknown-unknown %s
-verify=expected,cxx98 -fexceptions -Wno-deprecated-builtins -fcxx-exceptions
-pedantic-errors
-// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++11 -triple x86_64-unknown-unknown %s
@@ -1,16 +1,169 @@
-// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++98 -triple x86_64-unknown-unknown %s
-verify=expected,cxx98 -fexceptions -Wno-deprecated-builtins -fcxx-exceptions
-pedantic-errors
-// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++11 -triple x86_64-unknown-unknown %s
https://github.com/Endilll updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/77509
>From d3cb62eba8e2109e44083bd8b9e89a453acad754 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2024 21:51:00 +0300
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [clang] Add tests for CWG1800-1804
Covers C++ core
Endilll wrote:
This PR also updates status for CWG437, which is a follow-up to #77372.
Nothing wrong with the tooling, just my mistake separating output of
make_cxx_dr_status from changes I already had for complete-class context DRs.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/77509
https://github.com/Endilll created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/77509
Covers C++ core issues 1800, 1801, 1802, 1803, 1804.
>From d3cb62eba8e2109e44083bd8b9e89a453acad754 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2024 21:51:00 +0300
Subject: [PATCH]
https://github.com/Endilll edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/77444
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Endilll wrote:
This PR has been migrated from https://reviews.llvm.org/D148433.
I made non-functional changes to `expected` directives to match the rest of the
DR test suite.
I also moved CWG2335 test in a dedicated file in order to avoid issues with
test isolation. Clang can stop
https://github.com/Endilll created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/77444
[P1787](https://wg21.link/p1787): The intent for CWG2335 (contra those of the
older CWG1890, CWG1626, CWG1255, and CWG287) is supported by retaining the
unrestricted forward lookup in complete-class contexts
Endilll wrote:
> Can you modify the commit message to reference the issue list version (113)
> and maybe link to it ?
I referenced issue list version, but I haven't found a link to this particular
version. https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_index.html always
points to the most
https://github.com/Endilll closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/77372
___
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/77372
This patch updates cxx_dr_status.html with the latest changes from CWG, while
also changing status of tests written for unresolved issues. The latter part
requires review from their author.
>From
@@ -0,0 +1,42 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 %s -fsyntax-only -Wextra -verify
+
+
+int t(int array[static 12]);
+int u(int i);
+const int v(int i); /* expected-warning {{'const' type qualifier on return
type has no effec}} */
+int x(long);
+
+typedef int (f1)(long);
+typedef int
@@ -0,0 +1,42 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 %s -fsyntax-only -Wextra -verify
Endilll wrote:
Yes, more `RUN` lines with different `-std=` options, and potentially more
`expected` directives tailored for particular language mode. We have an example
of this in C++
https://github.com/Endilll edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/77178
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -0,0 +1,42 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 %s -fsyntax-only -Wextra -verify
Endilll wrote:
As written, tests checks only default language mode for C (which is `gnu99`
AFAIK). Maybe we want to check other modes as well?
@@ -0,0 +1,42 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 %s -fsyntax-only -Wextra -verify
+
+
+int t(int array[static 12]);
+int u(int i);
+const int v(int i); /* expected-warning {{'const' type qualifier on return
type has no effec}} */
+int x(long);
+
+typedef int (f1)(long);
+typedef int
https://github.com/Endilll commented:
I think this PR moves things in the right direction, but I'm not well-versed in
C enough to approve.
> This should have a release note and I think this is a potentially breaking
> change since folks using Wextra may get this diagnostic now.
I agree that
@@ -0,0 +1,42 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 %s -fsyntax-only -Wextra -verify
+
+
+int t(int array[static 12]);
+int u(int i);
+const int v(int i); /* expected-warning {{'const' type qualifier on return
type has no effec}} */
Endilll wrote:
```suggestion
const int
https://github.com/Endilll edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/77178
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -130,27 +137,24 @@ C &&()(C&) = std::move; // #8 expected-note
{{instantiation of}}
C &&()(C&) = std::forward; // #9 expected-note {{instantiation of}}
int ()(B, B) = std::move;
-#if __cplusplus <= 201703L
-// expected-warning@#1 {{non-addressable}}
-//
@@ -163,6 +170,40 @@ void attribute_const() {
std::as_const(n); // expected-warning {{ignoring return value}}
}
+struct D {
+ void* operator new(__SIZE_TYPE__, D&&(*)(D&));
+ void* operator new(__SIZE_TYPE__, D*(*)(D&));
+ void* operator new(__SIZE_TYPE__, const
@@ -379,6 +379,18 @@ namespace dr1347 { // dr1347: 3.1
#endif
}
+namespace dr1351 { // dr1351: 1
Endilll wrote:
I guess you intended `// dr1351: 18`.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/76248
___
cfe-commits
https://github.com/Endilll requested changes to this pull request.
You need to run `clang/www/make_cxx_drs` script in order to make
`cxx_dr_status.html` reflect that CWG1351 is now implemented.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/76248
___
https://github.com/Endilll edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/76248
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Pol Marcet =?utf-8?q?Sardà?= ,
Pol Marcet =?utf-8?q?Sardà?= ,Pol M
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
Endilll wrote:
@Destroyerrrocket We'll merge as soon as you deem it ready and provide commit
description. PR description doesn't seem a good fit for a commit description to
me.
Pol Marcet =?utf-8?q?Sard=C3=A0?=
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
@@ -70,8 +71,15 @@ class ClangASTNodesEmitter {
std::pair EmitNode(raw_ostream& OS, ASTNode Base);
public:
explicit ClangASTNodesEmitter(RecordKeeper , const std::string ,
-const
Pol Marcet =?utf-8?q?Sard=C3=A0?=
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
https://github.com/Endilll approved this pull request.
LGTM, but you should wait for more approvals before merging.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/76825
___
cfe-commits mailing
Pol Marcet =?utf-8?q?Sardà?=
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
@@ -95,8 +103,23 @@ std::pair
ClangASTNodesEmitter::EmitNode(raw_ostream ,
if (!Base.isAbstract())
First = Last = Base;
+ auto comp = [this](ASTNode LHS, ASTNode RHS) {
+auto LHSPriorized =
Pol Marcet =?utf-8?q?Sardà?=
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
https://github.com/Endilll edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/76825
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
@@ -95,8 +103,31 @@ std::pair
ClangASTNodesEmitter::EmitNode(raw_ostream ,
if (!Base.isAbstract())
First = Last = Base;
+ class Comp {
Endilll wrote:
This class looks like a hand-written lambda closure type. Do we really need it
in this form?
@@ -196,8 +227,20 @@ void ClangASTNodesEmitter::run(raw_ostream ) {
}
void clang::EmitClangASTNodes(RecordKeeper , raw_ostream ,
- const std::string , const std::string ) {
- ClangASTNodesEmitter(RK, N, S).run(OS);
+
https://github.com/Endilll commented:
Core idea of removing `DECL_CONTEXT_BASE` and range checks for `DeclContext`
nodes seems correct to me, as all this machinery wasn't intended for
`DeclContext` in the first place. This is apparent from TableGen definition,
which lacks any base parameter:
@@ -210,38 +253,26 @@ void clang::EmitClangDeclContext(RecordKeeper ,
raw_ostream ) {
OS << "#ifndef DECL_CONTEXT\n";
OS << "# define DECL_CONTEXT(DECL)\n";
OS << "#endif\n";
-
- OS << "#ifndef DECL_CONTEXT_BASE\n";
- OS << "# define DECL_CONTEXT_BASE(DECL)
https://github.com/Endilll edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/76825
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -2644,6 +2644,49 @@ bool QualType::isTriviallyCopyableType(const ASTContext
) const {
return false;
}
+bool QualType::isTriviallyCopyConstructibleType(
Endilll wrote:
Go ahead, but it would be nice if we don't regress performance along the way
(by
Endilll wrote:
> Sure I can , I have also tested the code that was giving erroneous warnings,
> so should I add that example as well??
Yes. Clang has a special mode which check which diagnostics are emitted:
https://clang.llvm.org/docs/InternalsManual.html#verifying-diagnostics
Endilll wrote:
Can you add some tests?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/76680
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Endilll wrote:
DR test changes look good to me, but wait for another reviewer.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/75001
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
+// RUN: %clang --target=wasm32 -mmultivalue -Xclang -target-abi -Xclang
experimental-mv %s -S -Xclang -verify
+
+float crealf() { return 0;} // expected-no-diagnostics
Endilll wrote:
Sorry, I actually meant that you can do like
@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
+// RUN: %clang --target=wasm32 -mmultivalue -Xclang -target-abi -Xclang
experimental-mv %s -S -Xclang -verify
+
+float crealf() { return 0;} // expected-no-diagnostics
Endilll wrote:
Single `expected-no-diagnostics` is sufficient for the whole
Endilll wrote:
Can you add a test for this?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/70496
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
-// RUN: %clang_cc1 -triple x86_64-linux -std=c++98 %s -O3 -disable-llvm-passes
-pedantic-errors -emit-llvm -o - | FileCheck %s
Endilll wrote:
Can you explain why `-disable-llvm-passes` is there, and why is can be removed
now?
https://github.com/Endilll converted_to_draft
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/74935
___
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/74935
>From 4e8f48947d59474e07e08cdc98e4a6fb2e3c80c1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: Sat, 9 Dec 2023 17:21:35 +0300
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [llvm][Support] Enable `TimeTraceProfiler` to accept
https://github.com/Endilll closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/74932
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/Endilll approved this pull request.
LGTM, but let's wait for CI to pass.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/74932
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://github.com/Endilll commented:
Some bots are not happy with one of the tests. I contacted you on Discord about
your next steps.
I'll have to revert the patch if I won't hear from you soon.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/71300
___
https://github.com/Endilll edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/71300
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fms-compatibility -fms-compatibility-version=19.33
-std=c++20 -verify=supported %s
Endilll wrote:
Judging by the failure
https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/60/builds/15037, you might want to
test for specific
https://github.com/Endilll closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/71300
___
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/74921
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/Endilll approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/74893
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Endilll wrote:
Yeah, I shouldn't have annotated this bit-field. Nice catch!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/74893
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Endilll wrote:
This PR is created to check the patch against CI.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/74921
___
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/74921
This patch continues the work started with
ea5b1ef016d020c37f903d6c7d4f623be975dab8. See that commit and its corresponding
PR for details.
>From 436502773b1720e0511f4371c7a04079e7d38215 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
Author: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: 2023-12-09T11:12:54+03:00
New Revision: 57eb2054e308da7fb394375dedf8d7b627d1b528
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/57eb2054e308da7fb394375dedf8d7b627d1b528
DIFF:
https://github.com/Endilll closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/74767
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Endilll wrote:
This PR is created to check the patch against CI.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/74767
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Author: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: 2023-12-08T00:38:42+03:00
New Revision: c79f94d85121347d28f894d837f173f90f368e92
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/c79f94d85121347d28f894d837f173f90f368e92
DIFF:
@@ -498,3 +498,137 @@
CodeGenTBAA::mergeTBAAInfoForMemoryTransfer(TBAAAccessInfo DestInfo,
// access type regardless of their base types.
return TBAAAccessInfo::getMayAliasInfo();
}
+
+// Determine the aliasing kind bit-converting from type Src to type Dst.
@@ -37,6 +38,27 @@ class ASTConsumer {
friend class SemaConsumer;
+public:
+ /// Allow type-based aliasing information to be interrogated by the AST
+ /// producer (for diagnostics).
+ class TypeAliasing {
Endilll wrote:
Sorry I didn't make myself
@@ -498,3 +498,137 @@
CodeGenTBAA::mergeTBAAInfoForMemoryTransfer(TBAAAccessInfo DestInfo,
// access type regardless of their base types.
return TBAAAccessInfo::getMayAliasInfo();
}
+
+// Determine the aliasing kind bit-converting from type Src to type Dst.
Endilll wrote:
It would also be nice to fix the link to full `-verify` docs in
https://clang.llvm.org/docs/InternalsManual.html#the-diagnosticconsumer-interface
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/73694
___
cfe-commits mailing list
Endilll wrote:
@AaronBallman After moving the docs, none of the code blocks are rendering:
https://clang.llvm.org/docs/InternalsManual.html#verifying-diagnostics
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/73694
___
cfe-commits mailing list
https://github.com/Endilll closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/74477
___
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/74477
>From 12cc446ecd55936518cb3e8b13c4840bc008d2c8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2023 17:14:37 +0300
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] [clang][NFC] Refactor expected directives in C++ DRs
https://github.com/Endilll updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/74477
>From 12cc446ecd55936518cb3e8b13c4840bc008d2c8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2023 17:14:37 +0300
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [clang][NFC] Refactor expected directives in C++ DRs
Endilll wrote:
This PR is created to check the patch against CI.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/74477
___
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/74477
[clang][NFC] Refactor expected directives in C++ DRs 600-699
This patch continues the work started with
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/ea5b1ef016d020c37f903d6c7d4f623be975dab8.
See that commit and
Author: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: 2023-12-05T17:16:10+03:00
New Revision: 94708fbc0fa06b18c9b263ecb78d20a95a194e7f
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/94708fbc0fa06b18c9b263ecb78d20a95a194e7f
DIFF:
801 - 900 of 1245 matches
Mail list logo
