================
Comment at: include/clang/AST/Decl.h:312
@@ -310,1 +311,3 @@
LabelStmt *TheStmt;
+ SmallString<16> MSAsmName;
+ bool MSAsmNameResolved;
----------------
rnk wrote:
> ehsan wrote:
> > rnk wrote:
> > > This will cause a memory leak for names > 16 chars. When the ASTContext
> > > is destroyed, it doesn't actually call destructors of individual AST
> > > nodes, it merely frees the memory. This should be a StringRef that points
> > > to memory from 'new (Context, 1) char[Len]', probably.
> > Oh, I didn't know that! What's this 'new (Contex, 1) char[Len]' trick?
> > I'm not familiar with it, I don't think...
> It's an operator new overload declared in ASTContext.h. Basically, it's
> equivalent to 'new char[Len]', except it goes calls the 'void* operator
> new(size_t Bytes, ASTContext &Context, size_t Alignment)' overload.
Hmm, who is responsible for freeing this memory? The comments in ASTContext.h
seem to suggest that I should call ASTContext::Deallocate on the pointer, but
I'm not sure when I should do that if the destructor is not invoked. Looking
at other parts of the code base, it seems like nobody worries about deleting
memory allocated this way...
================
Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaStmt.cpp:2357-2358
@@ +2356,4 @@
+ if (TheDecl->isMSAsmLabel()) {
+ // TODO Move this diagnostic elsewhere so that we get to examine the goto
+ // statements after we've seen all of the body of the current scope.
+ StmtResult error(StmtError(Diag(GotoLoc, diag::err_goto_ms_asm_label)
----------------
rnk wrote:
> ehsan wrote:
> > rnk wrote:
> > > Does it help if you issue the same diagnostic when processing 'foo:' in
> > > this example?
> > > void f() {
> > > goto foo;
> > > __asm {
> > > foo:
> > > nop
> > > }
> > > }
> > >
> > > After issuing the diagnostic, you can avoid the "undeclared label"
> > > knock-on errors by pretending that you did in fact define the label.
> > I cannot issue the diagnostic there because I will not have a GotoStmt
> > pointer when processing `foo:`. That's really the main issue.
> >
> > What I would ideally do would be to not issue any diagnostics in
> > ActOnGotoStmt, and wait until the scope is fully processed, then visit all
> > of the GotoStmts in the scope, check their LabelDecls to see if they're asm
> > labels and issue the diagnostic there. But I don't know where I would hook
> > into in order to be able to visit all of the GotoStmts at the end of a
> > scope.
> Looks like we have JumpDiagnostics.cpp for this purpose... See if you can
> work it in there?
Sure.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D4589
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
