[PATCH] D35061: [ObjC] Avoid the -Wunguarded-availability warnings for protocol requirements in protocol/class/category declarations

[Alex Lorenz via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

arphaman created this revision.

The unguarded availability warnings in the protocol requirements of a 
protocol/class/category declaration can be avoided. This matches the behaviour 
of Swift's diagnostics.


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D35061

Files:
  include/clang/Sema/Sema.h
  lib/Sema/SemaDeclObjC.cpp
  lib/Sema/SemaExpr.cpp
  test/SemaObjC/unguarded-availability.m

Index: test/SemaObjC/unguarded-availability.m
===
--- test/SemaObjC/unguarded-availability.m
+++ test/SemaObjC/unguarded-availability.m
@@ -263,3 +263,27 @@
 new_int x; // expected-warning{{'new_int' is partial}}
   };
 }
+
+// rdar://33156429:
+// Avoid the warning on protocol requirements.
+
+AVAILABLE_10_12
+@protocol NewProtocol // expected-note {{'NewProtocol' has been explicitly marked partial here}}
+@end
+
+@protocol ProtocolWithNewProtocolRequirement  // expected-note {{annotate 'ProtocolWithNewProtocolRequirement' with an availability attribute to silence}}
+
+@property(copy) id prop; // expected-warning {{'NewProtocol' is partial: introduced in macOS 10.12}}
+
+@end
+
+@interface BaseClass
+@end
+
+@interface ClassWithNewProtocolRequirement : BaseClass 
+
+@end
+
+@interface BaseClass (CategoryWithNewProtocolRequirement) 
+
+@end
Index: lib/Sema/SemaExpr.cpp
===
--- lib/Sema/SemaExpr.cpp
+++ lib/Sema/SemaExpr.cpp
@@ -128,7 +128,8 @@
 static void
 DiagnoseAvailabilityOfDecl(Sema &S, NamedDecl *D, SourceLocation Loc,
const ObjCInterfaceDecl *UnknownObjCClass,
-   bool ObjCPropertyAccess) {
+   bool ObjCPropertyAccess,
+   bool AvoidAvailabilityChecks = false) {
   std::string Message;
   AvailabilityResult Result;
   const NamedDecl* OffendingDecl;
@@ -138,6 +139,8 @@
 return;
 
   if (Result == AR_NotYetIntroduced) {
+if (AvoidAvailabilityChecks)
+  return;
 if (S.getCurFunctionOrMethodDecl()) {
   S.getEnclosingFunction()->HasPotentialAvailabilityViolations = true;
   return;
@@ -275,7 +278,8 @@
 ///
 bool Sema::DiagnoseUseOfDecl(NamedDecl *D, SourceLocation Loc,
  const ObjCInterfaceDecl *UnknownObjCClass,
- bool ObjCPropertyAccess) {
+ bool ObjCPropertyAccess,
+ bool AvoidAvailabilityChecks) {
   if (getLangOpts().CPlusPlus && isa(D)) {
 // If there were any diagnostics suppressed by template argument deduction,
 // emit them now.
@@ -360,7 +364,7 @@
   }
 
   DiagnoseAvailabilityOfDecl(*this, D, Loc, UnknownObjCClass,
- ObjCPropertyAccess);
+ ObjCPropertyAccess, AvoidAvailabilityChecks);
 
   DiagnoseUnusedOfDecl(*this, D, Loc);
 
Index: lib/Sema/SemaDeclObjC.cpp
===
--- lib/Sema/SemaDeclObjC.cpp
+++ lib/Sema/SemaDeclObjC.cpp
@@ -458,7 +458,10 @@
   // Diagnose availability in the context of the ObjC container.
   Sema::ContextRAII SavedContext(TheSema, CD);
   for (unsigned i = 0; i < NumProtoRefs; ++i) {
-(void)TheSema.DiagnoseUseOfDecl(ProtoRefs[i], ProtoLocs[i]);
+(void)TheSema.DiagnoseUseOfDecl(ProtoRefs[i], ProtoLocs[i],
+/*UnknownObjCClass=*/nullptr,
+/*ObjCPropertyAccess=*/false,
+/*AvoidAvailabilityChecks=*/true);
   }
 }
 
Index: include/clang/Sema/Sema.h
===
--- include/clang/Sema/Sema.h
+++ include/clang/Sema/Sema.h
@@ -3900,8 +3900,9 @@
 
   bool CanUseDecl(NamedDecl *D, bool TreatUnavailableAsInvalid);
   bool DiagnoseUseOfDecl(NamedDecl *D, SourceLocation Loc,
- const ObjCInterfaceDecl *UnknownObjCClass=nullptr,
- bool ObjCPropertyAccess=false);
+ const ObjCInterfaceDecl *UnknownObjCClass = nullptr,
+ bool ObjCPropertyAccess = false,
+ bool AvoidAvailabilityChecks = false);
   void NoteDeletedFunction(FunctionDecl *FD);
   void NoteDeletedInheritingConstructor(CXXConstructorDecl *CD);
   std::string getDeletedOrUnavailableSuffix(const FunctionDecl *FD);
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D35061: [ObjC] Avoid the -Wunguarded-availability warnings for protocol requirements in protocol/class/category declarations

[Erik Pilkington via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

erik.pilkington added inline comments.



Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaExpr.cpp:142
   if (Result == AR_NotYetIntroduced) {
+if (AvoidAvailabilityChecks)
+  return;

Why are we doing this just for partials? Doesn't this also apply to 
unavailable/deprecated?


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D35061



___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D35061: [ObjC] Avoid the -Wunguarded-availability warnings for protocol requirements in protocol/class/category declarations

[Alex Lorenz via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

arphaman added inline comments.



Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaExpr.cpp:142
   if (Result == AR_NotYetIntroduced) {
+if (AvoidAvailabilityChecks)
+  return;

erik.pilkington wrote:
> Why are we doing this just for partials? Doesn't this also apply to 
> unavailable/deprecated?
We warned about the unavailable/deprecated protocols previously, so we should 
probably keep these warnings. The unguarded availability one is new, so we can 
drop it.


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D35061



___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D35061: [ObjC] Avoid the -Wunguarded-availability warnings for protocol requirements in protocol/class/category declarations

[Erik Pilkington via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

erik.pilkington added inline comments.



Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaExpr.cpp:142
   if (Result == AR_NotYetIntroduced) {
+if (AvoidAvailabilityChecks)
+  return;

arphaman wrote:
> erik.pilkington wrote:
> > Why are we doing this just for partials? Doesn't this also apply to 
> > unavailable/deprecated?
> We warned about the unavailable/deprecated protocols previously, so we should 
> probably keep these warnings. The unguarded availability one is new, so we 
> can drop it.
But this is strictly less diagnostics, dropping diagnostics for unavail/depr 
here won't break anything outside of clang tests. So if they don't make sense 
to emit, then there isn't any reason to keep them around.


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D35061



___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D35061: [ObjC] Avoid the -Wunguarded-availability warnings for protocol requirements in protocol/class/category declarations

[Alex Lorenz via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

arphaman added inline comments.



Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaExpr.cpp:142
   if (Result == AR_NotYetIntroduced) {
+if (AvoidAvailabilityChecks)
+  return;

erik.pilkington wrote:
> arphaman wrote:
> > erik.pilkington wrote:
> > > Why are we doing this just for partials? Doesn't this also apply to 
> > > unavailable/deprecated?
> > We warned about the unavailable/deprecated protocols previously, so we 
> > should probably keep these warnings. The unguarded availability one is new, 
> > so we can drop it.
> But this is strictly less diagnostics, dropping diagnostics for unavail/depr 
> here won't break anything outside of clang tests. So if they don't make sense 
> to emit, then there isn't any reason to keep them around.
Swift emits warnings about deprecated/unavailable protocols even in the list of 
protocol requirements. I'd prefer it if we had the same behaviour.


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D35061



___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D35061: [ObjC] Avoid the -Wunguarded-availability warnings for protocol requirements in protocol/class/category declarations

[Erik Pilkington via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

erik.pilkington accepted this revision.
erik.pilkington added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.

LGTM, thanks!




Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaExpr.cpp:132
+   bool ObjCPropertyAccess,
+   bool AvoidAvailabilityChecks = false) {
   std::string Message;

`AvoidPartialAvailabilityChecks`?



Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaExpr.cpp:142
   if (Result == AR_NotYetIntroduced) {
+if (AvoidAvailabilityChecks)
+  return;

arphaman wrote:
> erik.pilkington wrote:
> > arphaman wrote:
> > > erik.pilkington wrote:
> > > > Why are we doing this just for partials? Doesn't this also apply to 
> > > > unavailable/deprecated?
> > > We warned about the unavailable/deprecated protocols previously, so we 
> > > should probably keep these warnings. The unguarded availability one is 
> > > new, so we can drop it.
> > But this is strictly less diagnostics, dropping diagnostics for 
> > unavail/depr here won't break anything outside of clang tests. So if they 
> > don't make sense to emit, then there isn't any reason to keep them around.
> Swift emits warnings about deprecated/unavailable protocols even in the list 
> of protocol requirements. I'd prefer it if we had the same behaviour.
OK, I agree that we should conform to what swift does here.


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D35061



___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D35061: [ObjC] Avoid the -Wunguarded-availability warnings for protocol requirements in protocol/class/category declarations

[Alex Lorenz via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
arphaman marked an inline comment as done.
Closed by commit rL307368: [ObjC] Avoid the -Wunguarded-availability warnings 
for protocol (authored by arphaman).

Changed prior to commit:
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D35061?vs=105442&id=105601#toc

Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D35061

Files:
  cfe/trunk/include/clang/Sema/Sema.h
  cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaDeclObjC.cpp
  cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaExpr.cpp
  cfe/trunk/test/SemaObjC/unguarded-availability.m

Index: cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaExpr.cpp
===
--- cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaExpr.cpp
+++ cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaExpr.cpp
@@ -128,7 +128,8 @@
 static void
 DiagnoseAvailabilityOfDecl(Sema &S, NamedDecl *D, SourceLocation Loc,
const ObjCInterfaceDecl *UnknownObjCClass,
-   bool ObjCPropertyAccess) {
+   bool ObjCPropertyAccess,
+   bool AvoidPartialAvailabilityChecks = false) {
   std::string Message;
   AvailabilityResult Result;
   const NamedDecl* OffendingDecl;
@@ -138,6 +139,8 @@
 return;
 
   if (Result == AR_NotYetIntroduced) {
+if (AvoidPartialAvailabilityChecks)
+  return;
 if (S.getCurFunctionOrMethodDecl()) {
   S.getEnclosingFunction()->HasPotentialAvailabilityViolations = true;
   return;
@@ -275,7 +278,8 @@
 ///
 bool Sema::DiagnoseUseOfDecl(NamedDecl *D, SourceLocation Loc,
  const ObjCInterfaceDecl *UnknownObjCClass,
- bool ObjCPropertyAccess) {
+ bool ObjCPropertyAccess,
+ bool AvoidPartialAvailabilityChecks) {
   if (getLangOpts().CPlusPlus && isa(D)) {
 // If there were any diagnostics suppressed by template argument deduction,
 // emit them now.
@@ -360,7 +364,8 @@
   }
 
   DiagnoseAvailabilityOfDecl(*this, D, Loc, UnknownObjCClass,
- ObjCPropertyAccess);
+ ObjCPropertyAccess,
+ AvoidPartialAvailabilityChecks);
 
   DiagnoseUnusedOfDecl(*this, D, Loc);
 
Index: cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaDeclObjC.cpp
===
--- cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaDeclObjC.cpp
+++ cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaDeclObjC.cpp
@@ -458,7 +458,10 @@
   // Diagnose availability in the context of the ObjC container.
   Sema::ContextRAII SavedContext(TheSema, CD);
   for (unsigned i = 0; i < NumProtoRefs; ++i) {
-(void)TheSema.DiagnoseUseOfDecl(ProtoRefs[i], ProtoLocs[i]);
+(void)TheSema.DiagnoseUseOfDecl(ProtoRefs[i], ProtoLocs[i],
+/*UnknownObjCClass=*/nullptr,
+/*ObjCPropertyAccess=*/false,
+/*AvoidPartialAvailabilityChecks=*/true);
   }
 }
 
Index: cfe/trunk/include/clang/Sema/Sema.h
===
--- cfe/trunk/include/clang/Sema/Sema.h
+++ cfe/trunk/include/clang/Sema/Sema.h
@@ -3900,8 +3900,9 @@
 
   bool CanUseDecl(NamedDecl *D, bool TreatUnavailableAsInvalid);
   bool DiagnoseUseOfDecl(NamedDecl *D, SourceLocation Loc,
- const ObjCInterfaceDecl *UnknownObjCClass=nullptr,
- bool ObjCPropertyAccess=false);
+ const ObjCInterfaceDecl *UnknownObjCClass = nullptr,
+ bool ObjCPropertyAccess = false,
+ bool AvoidPartialAvailabilityChecks = false);
   void NoteDeletedFunction(FunctionDecl *FD);
   void NoteDeletedInheritingConstructor(CXXConstructorDecl *CD);
   std::string getDeletedOrUnavailableSuffix(const FunctionDecl *FD);
Index: cfe/trunk/test/SemaObjC/unguarded-availability.m
===
--- cfe/trunk/test/SemaObjC/unguarded-availability.m
+++ cfe/trunk/test/SemaObjC/unguarded-availability.m
@@ -263,3 +263,27 @@
 new_int x; // expected-warning{{'new_int' is partial}}
   };
 }
+
+// rdar://33156429:
+// Avoid the warning on protocol requirements.
+
+AVAILABLE_10_12
+@protocol NewProtocol // expected-note {{'NewProtocol' has been explicitly marked partial here}}
+@end
+
+@protocol ProtocolWithNewProtocolRequirement  // expected-note {{annotate 'ProtocolWithNewProtocolRequirement' with an availability attribute to silence}}
+
+@property(copy) id prop; // expected-warning {{'NewProtocol' is partial: introduced in macOS 10.12}}
+
+@end
+
+@interface BaseClass
+@end
+
+@interface ClassWithNewProtocolRequirement : BaseClass 
+
+@end
+
+@interface BaseClass (CategoryWithNewProtocolRequirement) 
+
+@end
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits