================ @@ -5910,6 +5910,30 @@ static void handleBuiltinAliasAttr(Sema &S, Decl *D, D->addAttr(::new (S.Context) BuiltinAliasAttr(S.Context, AL, Ident)); } +static void handleDebugInfoTypeAttr(Sema &S, Decl *D, const ParsedAttr &AL) { + if (!AL.hasParsedType()) { + S.Diag(AL.getLoc(), diag::err_attribute_wrong_number_arguments) << AL << 1; + return; + } + + TypeSourceInfo *ParmTSI = nullptr; + QualType type = S.GetTypeFromParser(AL.getTypeArg(), &ParmTSI); + assert(ParmTSI && "no type source info for attribute argument"); + + if (type->isEnumeralType()) { + QualType BitfieldType = llvm::cast<FieldDecl>(D)->getType(); + QualType EnumUnderlyingType = + type->getAs<EnumType>()->getDecl()->getIntegerType(); + if (EnumUnderlyingType != BitfieldType) { ---------------- AaronBallman wrote:
A few things -- I think we should look at the canonical type so that we don't run into issues with typedefs. e.g., ``` enum E { Zero, One }; typedef int Foo; struct S { [[clang::debug_info_type(E) Foo field : 1; }; ``` where the enum's underlying type is `int` but the bit-field's type is a typedef. Another case we should consider would be whether we want to allow signed unsigned mismatches, as in: ``` enum E { Invalid = -1, ValidValue, OtherValidValue, YetAnotherValidValue }; struct S { [[clang::debug_info_type(E) unsigned field : 3; }; ``` and only prevent situations where the specified type is not an enumeration or integral type. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/69104 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits