[clang] [clang] Cover CWG issues about `export template` (PR #94876)
https://github.com/Endilll closed https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94876 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[clang] [clang] Cover CWG issues about `export template` (PR #94876)
https://github.com/cor3ntin approved this pull request. I think as a follow up we should get rid of the "exported templates are unsupported" warning which makes no sense whatsoever and either use the c++20 error in all language modes or just a generic "unexpected 'export' keyword here" diagnostic https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94876 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[clang] [clang] Cover CWG issues about `export template` (PR #94876)
https://github.com/Endilll updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94876
>From e4028ec6e70f6d86325393a8d03e407404643bc0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2024 00:59:09 +0300
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] [clang] Cover CWG issues about `export template`
---
clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg2xx.cpp | 2 +-
clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg3xx.cpp | 4 ++--
clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg8xx.cpp | 7 +++
clang/www/cxx_dr_status.html | 20
4 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg2xx.cpp b/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg2xx.cpp
index 99916dea9a912..926cb19596026 100644
--- a/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg2xx.cpp
+++ b/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg2xx.cpp
@@ -41,7 +41,7 @@ namespace cwg202 { // cwg202: 3.1
template struct X;
}
-// FIXME (export) cwg204: no
+// cwg204: sup 820
namespace cwg206 { // cwg206: yes
struct S; // #cwg206-S
diff --git a/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg3xx.cpp b/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg3xx.cpp
index 94227dc031c6a..a10ed95941ba4 100644
--- a/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg3xx.cpp
+++ b/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg3xx.cpp
@@ -377,7 +377,7 @@ namespace cwg322 { // cwg322: 2.8
int &s = a;
}
-// cwg323: no
+// cwg323: sup 820
namespace cwg324 { // cwg324: 3.6
struct S { int n : 1; } s; // #cwg324-n
@@ -587,7 +587,7 @@ namespace cwg334 { // cwg334: yes
template void f();
}
-// cwg335: no
+// cwg335: sup 820
namespace cwg336 { // cwg336: yes
namespace Pre {
diff --git a/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg8xx.cpp b/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg8xx.cpp
index eba601300584d..28fa8083d8e6a 100644
--- a/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg8xx.cpp
+++ b/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg8xx.cpp
@@ -10,6 +10,13 @@
// expected-no-diagnostics
#endif
+namespace cwg820 { // cwg820: 2.7
+export template struct B {};
+// expected-warning@-1 {{exported templates are unsupported}}
+export template void f() {}
+// expected-warning@-1 {{exported templates are unsupported}}
+}
+
namespace cwg873 { // cwg873: 3.0
#if __cplusplus >= 201103L
template void f(T &&);
diff --git a/clang/www/cxx_dr_status.html b/clang/www/cxx_dr_status.html
index 43857447d83b1..3fdf6bae0a3d5 100755
--- a/clang/www/cxx_dr_status.html
+++ b/clang/www/cxx_dr_status.html
@@ -1262,7 +1262,7 @@ C++ defect report implementation
status
https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/204.html";>204
CD1
Exported class templates
-No
+Superseded by 820
https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/205.html";>205
@@ -1978,7 +1978,7 @@ C++ defect report implementation
status
https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/323.html";>323
CD1
Where must export appear?
-No
+Superseded by 820
https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/324.html";>324
@@ -2050,7 +2050,7 @@ C++ defect report implementation
status
https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/335.html";>335
CD1
Allowing export on template members of nontemplate
classes
-No
+Superseded by 820
https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/336.html";>336
@@ -4914,7 +4914,7 @@ C++ defect report implementation
status
https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/820.html";>820
CD2
Deprecation of export
-Unknown
+Clang 2.7
https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/822.html";>822
@@ -17186,6 +17186,18 @@ C++ defect report implementation
status
open
Template argument deduction involving exception specifications
Not resolved
+
+
+https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/2897.html";>2897
+open
+Copying potentially-overlapping union subobjects
+Not resolved
+
+
+https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/2898.html";>2898
+open
+Clarify implicit conversion sequence from cv T to
T
+Not resolved
>From bce3e35289aa977e828f6cd76c05e594ff32596b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2024 01:31:36 +0300
Subject: [PATCH 2/3] Add directives for C++20
---
clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg8xx.cpp | 24 +++-
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
diff --git a/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg8xx.cpp b/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg8xx.cpp
index 28fa8083d8e6a..c8cbdfcee3f4d 100644
--- a/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg8xx.cpp
+++ b/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg8xx.cpp
@@ -1,20 +1,18 @@
-// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++98 -triple x86_64-unknown-unknown %s
-verify=expected -fexceptions -fcxx-exceptions -pedantic-errors
-// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++11 -triple x86_64-unknown-unknown %s
-verify=expected,since-cxx11 -fexceptions -fcxx-exceptions -pedantic-errors
-// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++14 -triple x86_64-unknown-unknown %s
-verify=expected,since-cxx11 -fexceptions -fcxx-exceptions -pedantic-errors
-// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++17 -triple x86_64-unknown-unknown %s
-verify=expected,since-cxx11 -fexceptions -fcxx-exceptions -pedantic-errors
-// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++20 -triple x86_64-unknown-unknown %s
-verify=expected,since-cxx11 -fexceptions -fcxx-exceptions -pedantic-errors
-// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++23 -triple x86_64-u
[clang] [clang] Cover CWG issues about `export template` (PR #94876)
https://github.com/shafik commented: LGTM after addressing coloring issues. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94876 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[clang] [clang] Cover CWG issues about `export template` (PR #94876)
Endilll wrote: Thank you for chiming in! > It might be fine to give a different color to superseded, but I would guess > we'd want that to be a lighter form version of whatever the superseding issue > is colored. e.g., given that conforming = green and non-conforming = red, if > we have a superseded issue we conform to, it would be light green, and if we > didn't conform it would be pink. WDYT? I'm thinking of reducing opacity of the color instead of picking exact shades, but yeah, we can definitely do something of this sort. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94876 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[clang] [clang] Cover CWG issues about `export template` (PR #94876)
AaronBallman wrote: The goal of the status page is to convey implementation status to our users, and so from that perspective I think N/A provides the least information to users because it basically says "this entry doesn't apply to us". So in these kinds of cases, `sup` conveys more information because the DRs would apply to us, except another DR superseded the need for making the changes. In terms of the color used, we want green to mean "we're behaving in a conforming way" so users can tell at a glance where the edge cases are. This case is a bit weird because "conform" means we *don't* implement something rather than we *do* implement it, but I still think green is appropriate because we're following the standard. It might be fine to give a different color to superseded, but I would guess we'd want that to be a lighter form version of whatever the superseding issue is colored. e.g., given that conforming = green and non-conforming = red, if we have a superseded issue we conform to, it would be light green, and if we didn't conform it would be pink. WDYT? https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94876 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[clang] [clang] Cover CWG issues about `export template` (PR #94876)
Endilll wrote: Me and Corentin discussed this offline. Two points emerged there: 1) He's more concerned with the fact that 204 and other Core issues are highlighted green, inheriting the status of the issue that superseded them, than with the fact that they are marked as superseded. Styles we use in `cxx_dr_status.html` can be changed in a subsequent PR. 2) In previous discussions on this topic, I remember that we together with @AaronBallman agreed that statuses on our page should follow the official statuses. This PR goes against it, because I know from experience that the current CWG chair is not interested in revisiting Core issues that were closed long ago, and mark them as superseded where appropriate. We might need to revisit out previous consensus in the light of this PR and aforementioned experience talking to Core. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94876 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[clang] [clang] Cover CWG issues about `export template` (PR #94876)
Endilll wrote: > We never implemented export template - and no one did, therefore we are not > affected by changes to it (no one did except for EDG, i don't even know if > they shipped it) When I said "wording changes that do not affect implementations", I meant a hypothetical conforming implementation. In other words, `N/A` is for wording changes that can't be exhibited by writing programs and feeding them into the compiler. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94876 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[clang] [clang] Cover CWG issues about `export template` (PR #94876)
cor3ntin wrote: We never implemented `export template` - and no one did, therefore we are not affected by changes to it (no one did except for EDG, i don't even know if they shipped it) It is perfectly reasonable not to have tests whatsoever for that either (although I find the pre-c++20 diagnostic funny, we would be better of saying that modules are a c++20 feature). https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94876 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[clang] [clang] Cover CWG issues about `export template` (PR #94876)
Endilll wrote: Using `N/A` for 204, 323, and 335 would be novel, because at the moment it's used for wording changes that do not affect implementations. Those Core issues clearly affected the implementations back when they were resolved. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94876 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[clang] [clang] Cover CWG issues about `export template` (PR #94876)
cor3ntin wrote: I would prefer we say `N/A` rather than pretend we support something that was never implemented (to the extend i think it might be better to have an error about modules rather than exported templates in older language modes) https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94876 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[clang] [clang] Cover CWG issues about `export template` (PR #94876)
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang
Author: Vlad Serebrennikov (Endilll)
Changes
This PR covers the following Core issues:
[CWG204](https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/204.html) "Exported class
templates"
[CWG323](https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/323.html) "Where must `export`
appear?"
[CWG335](https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/335.html) "Allowing `export` on
template members of nontemplate classes"
[CWG820](https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/820.html) "Deprecation of
`export`"
I believe the list above is entirety of Core issues that are dedicated solely
to `export template`.
I believe we have two main points of view here, which command what this PR
should do:
1. (easy) Removal of `export template` was done as a defect report in CWG820,
and the rest are effectively superseded by it, because we apply defect reports
retroactively.
2. (harder) Those Core issues are testable individually, so we should test them
for the behavior Core wanted at the time.
This PR implements the first option, making our C++ DR status page greener.
I think I can be persuaded to go with the second option, if reviewers have
strong preference for it.
---
Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94876.diff
4 Files Affected:
- (modified) clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg2xx.cpp (+1-1)
- (modified) clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg3xx.cpp (+2-2)
- (modified) clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg8xx.cpp (+15-10)
- (modified) clang/www/cxx_dr_status.html (+4-4)
``diff
diff --git a/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg2xx.cpp b/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg2xx.cpp
index 99916dea9a912..926cb19596026 100644
--- a/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg2xx.cpp
+++ b/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg2xx.cpp
@@ -41,7 +41,7 @@ namespace cwg202 { // cwg202: 3.1
template struct X;
}
-// FIXME (export) cwg204: no
+// cwg204: sup 820
namespace cwg206 { // cwg206: yes
struct S; // #cwg206-S
diff --git a/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg3xx.cpp b/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg3xx.cpp
index 94227dc031c6a..a10ed95941ba4 100644
--- a/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg3xx.cpp
+++ b/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg3xx.cpp
@@ -377,7 +377,7 @@ namespace cwg322 { // cwg322: 2.8
int &s = a;
}
-// cwg323: no
+// cwg323: sup 820
namespace cwg324 { // cwg324: 3.6
struct S { int n : 1; } s; // #cwg324-n
@@ -587,7 +587,7 @@ namespace cwg334 { // cwg334: yes
template void f();
}
-// cwg335: no
+// cwg335: sup 820
namespace cwg336 { // cwg336: yes
namespace Pre {
diff --git a/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg8xx.cpp b/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg8xx.cpp
index eba601300584d..c8cbdfcee3f4d 100644
--- a/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg8xx.cpp
+++ b/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg8xx.cpp
@@ -1,14 +1,19 @@
-// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++98 -triple x86_64-unknown-unknown %s
-verify=expected -fexceptions -fcxx-exceptions -pedantic-errors
-// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++11 -triple x86_64-unknown-unknown %s
-verify=expected,since-cxx11 -fexceptions -fcxx-exceptions -pedantic-errors
-// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++14 -triple x86_64-unknown-unknown %s
-verify=expected,since-cxx11 -fexceptions -fcxx-exceptions -pedantic-errors
-// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++17 -triple x86_64-unknown-unknown %s
-verify=expected,since-cxx11 -fexceptions -fcxx-exceptions -pedantic-errors
-// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++20 -triple x86_64-unknown-unknown %s
-verify=expected,since-cxx11 -fexceptions -fcxx-exceptions -pedantic-errors
-// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++23 -triple x86_64-unknown-unknown %s
-verify=expected,since-cxx11 -fexceptions -fcxx-exceptions -pedantic-errors
-// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++2c -triple x86_64-unknown-unknown %s
-verify=expected,since-cxx11 -fexceptions -fcxx-exceptions -pedantic-errors
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++98 -triple x86_64-unknown-unknown %s
-verify=expected,cxx98-17 -fexceptions -fcxx-exceptions -pedantic-errors
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++11 -triple x86_64-unknown-unknown %s
-verify=expected,cxx98-17,since-cxx11 -fexceptions -fcxx-exceptions
-pedantic-errors
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++14 -triple x86_64-unknown-unknown %s
-verify=expected,cxx98-17,since-cxx11 -fexceptions -fcxx-exceptions
-pedantic-errors
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++17 -triple x86_64-unknown-unknown %s
-verify=expected,cxx98-17,since-cxx11 -fexceptions -fcxx-exceptions
-pedantic-errors
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++20 -triple x86_64-unknown-unknown %s
-verify=expected,since-cxx20,since-cxx11 -fexceptions -fcxx-exceptions
-pedantic-errors
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++23 -triple x86_64-unknown-unknown %s
-verify=expected,since-cxx20,since-cxx11 -fexceptions -fcxx-exceptions
-pedantic-errors
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++2c -triple x86_64-unknown-unknown %s
-verify=expected,since-cxx20,since-cxx11 -fexceptions -fcxx-exceptions
-pedantic-errors
-#if __cplusplus == 199711L
-// expected-no-diagnostics
-#endif
+namespace cwg820 { // cwg820: 2.7
+export template struct B {};
+// cxx98-17-warning@-1 {{exported templates are unsupported}}
+// since-cxx20-error@-2 {{export declaration can only be used within a module
purview}}
+export template void f() {}
+// cxx
[clang] [clang] Cover CWG issues about `export template` (PR #94876)
https://github.com/Endilll created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94876
This PR covers the following Core issues:
[CWG204](https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/204.html) "Exported class
templates"
[CWG323](https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/323.html) "Where must `export`
appear?"
[CWG335](https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/335.html) "Allowing `export` on
template members of nontemplate classes"
[CWG820](https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/820.html) "Deprecation of
`export`"
I believe the list above is entirety of Core issues that are dedicated solely
to `export template`.
I believe we have two main points of view here, which command what this PR
should do:
1. (easy) Removal of `export template` was done as a defect report in CWG820,
and the rest are effectively superseded by it, because we apply defect reports
retroactively.
2. (harder) Those Core issues are testable individually, so we should test them
for the behavior Core wanted at the time.
This PR implements the first option, making our C++ DR status page greener.
I think I can be persuaded to go with the second option, if reviewers have
strong preference for it.
>From e4028ec6e70f6d86325393a8d03e407404643bc0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2024 00:59:09 +0300
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [clang] Cover CWG issues about `export template`
---
clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg2xx.cpp | 2 +-
clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg3xx.cpp | 4 ++--
clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg8xx.cpp | 7 +++
clang/www/cxx_dr_status.html | 20
4 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg2xx.cpp b/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg2xx.cpp
index 99916dea9a912..926cb19596026 100644
--- a/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg2xx.cpp
+++ b/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg2xx.cpp
@@ -41,7 +41,7 @@ namespace cwg202 { // cwg202: 3.1
template struct X;
}
-// FIXME (export) cwg204: no
+// cwg204: sup 820
namespace cwg206 { // cwg206: yes
struct S; // #cwg206-S
diff --git a/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg3xx.cpp b/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg3xx.cpp
index 94227dc031c6a..a10ed95941ba4 100644
--- a/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg3xx.cpp
+++ b/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg3xx.cpp
@@ -377,7 +377,7 @@ namespace cwg322 { // cwg322: 2.8
int &s = a;
}
-// cwg323: no
+// cwg323: sup 820
namespace cwg324 { // cwg324: 3.6
struct S { int n : 1; } s; // #cwg324-n
@@ -587,7 +587,7 @@ namespace cwg334 { // cwg334: yes
template void f();
}
-// cwg335: no
+// cwg335: sup 820
namespace cwg336 { // cwg336: yes
namespace Pre {
diff --git a/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg8xx.cpp b/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg8xx.cpp
index eba601300584d..28fa8083d8e6a 100644
--- a/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg8xx.cpp
+++ b/clang/test/CXX/drs/cwg8xx.cpp
@@ -10,6 +10,13 @@
// expected-no-diagnostics
#endif
+namespace cwg820 { // cwg820: 2.7
+export template struct B {};
+// expected-warning@-1 {{exported templates are unsupported}}
+export template void f() {}
+// expected-warning@-1 {{exported templates are unsupported}}
+}
+
namespace cwg873 { // cwg873: 3.0
#if __cplusplus >= 201103L
template void f(T &&);
diff --git a/clang/www/cxx_dr_status.html b/clang/www/cxx_dr_status.html
index 43857447d83b1..3fdf6bae0a3d5 100755
--- a/clang/www/cxx_dr_status.html
+++ b/clang/www/cxx_dr_status.html
@@ -1262,7 +1262,7 @@ C++ defect report implementation
status
https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/204.html";>204
CD1
Exported class templates
-No
+Superseded by 820
https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/205.html";>205
@@ -1978,7 +1978,7 @@ C++ defect report implementation
status
https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/323.html";>323
CD1
Where must export appear?
-No
+Superseded by 820
https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/324.html";>324
@@ -2050,7 +2050,7 @@ C++ defect report implementation
status
https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/335.html";>335
CD1
Allowing export on template members of nontemplate
classes
-No
+Superseded by 820
https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/336.html";>336
@@ -4914,7 +4914,7 @@ C++ defect report implementation
status
https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/820.html";>820
CD2
Deprecation of export
-Unknown
+Clang 2.7
https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/822.html";>822
@@ -17186,6 +17186,18 @@ C++ defect report implementation
status
open
Template argument deduction involving exception specifications
Not resolved
+
+
+https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/2897.html";>2897
+open
+Copying potentially-overlapping union subobjects
+Not resolved
+
+
+https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/2898.html";>2898
+open
+Clarify implicit conversion sequence from cv T to
T
+Not resolved
>From bce3e35289aa977e828f6cd76c05e594ff32596b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2024 01:31:36 +0300
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] Add
