Typz added inline comments.
Comment at: lib/Format/FormatTokenLexer.cpp:642
tok::pp_define) &&
-std::find(ForEachMacros.begin(), ForEachMacros.end(),
- FormatTok->Tok.getIdentifierInfo()) != ForEachMacros.end()) {
- FormatTok->Type = T
Typz updated this revision to Diff 115801.
Typz marked 5 inline comments as done.
Typz added a comment.
Add tests.
Replace sorted list with hashtable.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D33440
Files:
include/clang/Format/Format.h
lib/Format/Format.cpp
lib/Format/FormatToken.h
lib/Format/FormatTok
Typz updated this revision to Diff 115802.
Typz added a comment.
rebase
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37813
Files:
include/clang/Format/Format.h
lib/Format/Format.cpp
lib/Format/FormatToken.h
lib/Format/FormatTokenLexer.cpp
lib/Format/NamespaceEndCommentsFixer.cpp
lib/Format/TokenAnnota
On 16 August 2017 at 02:49, Richard Smith via cfe-commits
wrote:
> + /// \brief \c true if a defaulted destructor for this class would be
> deleted.
> + bool defaultedDestructorIsDeleted() const {
> +return !data().DefaultedDestructorIsDeleted;
> + }
Is the ! intentional?
--
Malcolm Pa
klimek added a comment.
So we actually didn't need to change the UnwrappedLineParser? I assume we still
incorrectly assume the structured bindings are labmdas then?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D35743
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm
curdeius added a comment.
There is one big missing thing here: `PointerAlignment`. Actually only
`PAS_Left` is taken into account.
There are 3 possible options:
Left: `auto& [a, b] = f();`
Middle: `auto & [a, b] = f();`
Right: `auto &[a, b] = f();`
https://reviews.llvm.org/D35743
___
curdeius updated this revision to Diff 115814.
curdeius added a comment.
Minor: use `FormatToken::isNot` instead of `!FormatToken::is`.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37980
Files:
lib/Format/UnwrappedLineParser.cpp
lib/Format/UnwrappedLineParser.h
unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp
Index: unitte
Author: klimek
Date: Tue Sep 19 02:59:30 2017
New Revision: 313622
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=313622&view=rev
Log:
Fix formatting of lambda introducers with initializers.
Most of the work was already done when we introduced a look-behind based
lambda introducer detection.
This
klimek added a comment.
Thanks for the patch and the discussion around this. I fixed this in r313622 in
what I think is a more principled approach that also works for nested lambdas
(and gets rid of a lot of now-obsolete code).
The big problem with this code was that it evolved a bit to the poin
ilya-biryukov created this revision.
Calls to onDiagnosticsReady were done concurrently before. This sometimes
led to older versions of diagnostics being reported to the user after
the newer versions.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D38032
Files:
clangd/ClangdServer.cpp
clangd/ClangdServer.h
cla
alexfh added a comment.
As discussed offline, the sorting should also be stable to avoid no-op
replacements for identical using declarations and randomizing the order of
using declarations differing only in case (not that I'd expect this to be a
frequent thing, but it's better to handle it prop
ilya-biryukov updated this revision to Diff 115818.
ilya-biryukov added a comment.
- Replaced JSONOutput in Protocol.h/Protocol.cpp with Logger.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37972
Files:
clangd/CMakeLists.txt
clangd/ClangdLSPServer.cpp
clangd/ClangdServer.cpp
clangd/ClangdServer.h
clangd
ilya-biryukov updated this revision to Diff 115821.
ilya-biryukov added a comment.
- Removed an incidental `Mutex.unlock()`, a leftover from previous drafts.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D38032
Files:
clangd/ClangdServer.cpp
clangd/ClangdServer.h
clangd/DraftStore.h
unittests/clangd/ClangdT
Author: jina.nahias
Date: Tue Sep 19 04:00:27 2017
New Revision: 313624
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=313624&view=rev
Log:
Lowering Mask Set1 intrinsics to LLVM IR
This patch, together with a matching llvm patch
(https://reviews.llvm.org/D37669), implements the lowering of X86 mas
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rL313624: Lowering Mask Set1 intrinsics to LLVM IR (authored
by jina.nahias).
Changed prior to commit:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37668?vs=115622&id=115823#toc
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.
bjope accepted this revision.
bjope added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
Nobody else seems to bother. At least no objections, so I think we can land
this now.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37254
___
cfe-commits mailing list
Typz added a comment.
For one thing, we need to update the state to store the "decision" of the
reflowing mode, which is performed only in DryRun=true mode, to avoid doing the
computation multiple times.
Apart from this, the decision is conceptually internal to
breakProtrudingToken(). But the
djasper added a comment.
I think doing the computation twice is fine. Or at least, I'd need a test case
where it actually shows substantial overhead before doing what you are doing
here. Understand that creating more States and making the State object itself
larger also has cost and that cost o
werbitt updated this revision to Diff 115827.
werbitt added a comment.
Clean up call-process-region
- Quote call-process-region with #', this will cause a compile time error if
call-process-region is undefined
- Pass positional arguments normally (exclude from the list)
- Instead of using append
werbitt added a comment.
Hi,
Thank you very much for your feedback.
I submitted a bug here:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34667
I made the changes you suggested, but I left the assume-filename optional
argument for now.
My current use-case is that when I'm editing a source block in an
Typz added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D33589#875039, @djasper wrote:
> I think doing the computation twice is fine. Or at least, I'd need a test
> case where it actually shows substantial overhead before doing what you are
> doing here. Understand that creating more States and makin
Typz added a comment.
> I am still trying to get to the bottom of this assertion, any hint where to
> look for?
OK, got it. The issue is that we will actually need to run the wrapping 3 times
when DryRun = false : call reflowProtrudingToken() twice with DryRun=true to
find out the better optio
malaperle accepted this revision.
malaperle added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
Look good. Thank you!
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37972
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin
Typz updated this revision to Diff 115830.
Typz added a comment.
Remove `Reflow` from LineState, and perform the decision again during
reconstruction phase.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D33589
Files:
lib/Format/ContinuationIndenter.cpp
lib/Format/ContinuationIndenter.h
unittests/Format/Forma
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rL313628: [Sema] Disallow assigning record lvalues with nested
const-qualified fields. (authored by bjope).
Changed prior to commit:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37254?vs=114340&id=115831#toc
Repository:
Author: bjope
Date: Tue Sep 19 06:10:30 2017
New Revision: 313628
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=313628&view=rev
Log:
[Sema] Disallow assigning record lvalues with nested const-qualified fields.
Summary:
According to C99 6.3.2.1p1, structs and unions with nested
const-qualified fiel
phst added inline comments.
Comment at: tools/clang-format/clang-format.el:125
If called interactively uses the region or the current statement if there
is no active region. If no style is given uses `clang-format-style'."
(interactive
Please document the A
klimek added a comment.
I find the current semantics of the functions a bit surprising, specifically:
... reflowProtrudingToken(..., bool Reflow)
is really confusing me :)
I'd have expected something like this where we currently call
breakProtrudingToken():
if (CanBreak) {
ReflowPenalty =
phst accepted this revision.
phst added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
Your use case sounds good to me. Please be sure to document the new parameter,
though.
Comment at: tools/clang-format/clang-format.el:154
+ `("-outpu
mclow.lists requested changes to this revision.
mclow.lists added a comment.
This revision now requires changes to proceed.
When I applied this patch locally, some of the other tests started failing.
Specifically:
Assertion failed: (!std::regex_match(s, m, std::regex("^[a-f]$",
std::regex_cons
curdeius abandoned this revision.
curdeius added a comment.
Ok. Nice patch. You can close https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19986 now.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37980
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/
zibi updated this revision to Diff 115838.
zibi added a comment.
original + review changes
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37861
Files:
include/clang/Lex/PPCallbacks.h
lib/Frontend/PrintPreprocessedOutput.cpp
lib/Lex/Pragma.cpp
test/Preprocessor/pragma_assume_nonnull.c
Index: test/Preprocess
zibi added a comment.
Please be aware that I don't have the commit permission yet since this is my
first patch. I will rely on somebody to push it to the trunk.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37861
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
mibintc added a comment.
Hey @jyknight I heard from @erichkeane that you may want a couple more changes
to this patch. Please let me know if you have some changes to recommend.
@joerg thought this was OK for submission. Thanks --Melanie
https://reviews.llvm.org/D34158
_
Alexander-Shukaev added a comment.
Mark, just wanted to check if the review is still somewhere on your radar.
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D15465
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bi
curdeius added a comment.
I confirm what I observed before: when invoking tests in
`unittests/Format/NamespaceEndCommentsFixerTest.cpp`, the `const AnnotatedLine
*line` parameter in `getNamespaceToken` gets one big line that includes both
`namespace` and `{` (something like `namespace\n{\n...`,
Rakete updated this revision to Diff 115842.
Rakete added a project: clang.
Rakete added a comment.
Added the tests to the existing test file for fold operators that I didn't
notice before :)
https://reviews.llvm.org/D36101
Files:
lib/Parse/ParseExpr.cpp
test/Parser/cxx1z-fold-
klimek added a comment.
Ok, we still need to fix structured bindings in the UnwrappedLineParser.
Unfortunately isCppStructuredBinding requires a "previous token" function,
which we don't really have in the UnwrappedLineParser. /me goes thinking more
about that part of the problem. That should b
gtbercea created this revision.
Test for checking if the mapping is performed correctly. This is a test
initially included in Patch https://reviews.llvm.org/D29905
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D38040
Files:
test/OpenMP/target_map_codegen.cpp
Index: test/OpenMP/target_map
Rakete updated this revision to Diff 115846.
Rakete added a comment.
Used the correct return type, even if it doesn't really matter to the compiler.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D36101
Files:
lib/Parse/ParseExpr.cpp
test/Parser/cxx1z-fold-expressions.cpp
Index: test/Parser/cxx1z-fold-
vlad.tsyrklevich updated this revision to Diff 115849.
vlad.tsyrklevich added a comment.
- Refactor to make compile() not virtual again
- Refactor a confusing use of ASanMask into individual uses of
SanitizerKind::{Address,KernelAddress}
- 'Sections' -> 'Section names'
https://reviews.llvm.org/
Anastasia added inline comments.
Comment at: lib/CodeGen/CGExpr.cpp:957
-return Builder.CreateBitCast(Addr, ConvertType(E->getType()));
+return Builder.CreatePointerBitCastOrAddrSpaceCast(
+Addr, ConvertType(E->getType()));
Anastasia
vlad.tsyrklevich marked an inline comment as done.
vlad.tsyrklevich added inline comments.
Comment at: docs/SanitizerSpecialCaseList.rst:57
+
+Sections are regular expressions written in square brackets that denote which
+sanitizer the following entries apply to. For example, ``[
timshen created this revision.
Herald added a subscriber: sanjoy.
Herald added a reviewer: EricWF.
The tests don't pass on linux-gnu. Move them out, so that the others
don't have to be XFAIL.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D38041
Files:
libcxx/test/std/re/re.alg/re.alg.match/basic.pass.cpp
libcxx
timshen updated this revision to Diff 115851.
timshen added a comment.
Fixed.
Those tests were XFAILing on linux-gnu. I also created
https://reviews.llvm.org/D38041 to XFAIL only on the failing ones.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37955
Files:
libcxx/include/regex
libcxx/test/std/re/re.alg/re.
aprantl created this revision.
This patch fixes a regression introduced by r290392
(https://reviews.llvm.org/D28047 — Make '-disable-llvm-optzns' an alias for
'-disable-llvm-passes'.)
After r290392, CodeGenOpts.DisableLLVMOpts implicitly disables
CodeGenOpts.VerifyModule, because the Verifier
tra added inline comments.
Comment at: lib/Driver/ToolChains/Cuda.cpp:255-257
CudaArch gpu_arch = StringToCudaArch(GPUArchName);
- assert(gpu_arch != CudaArch::UNKNOWN &&
+ assert((gpu_arch != CudaArch::UNKNOWN ||
+ Args.hasArg(options::OPT_nocudalib)) &&
--
Author: zturner
Date: Tue Sep 19 10:19:10 2017
New Revision: 313643
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=313643&view=rev
Log:
Resubmit "Fix llvm-lit script generation in libcxx."
After speaking with the libcxx owners, they agreed that this is
a bug in the bot that needs to be fixed by the
ahatanak added a comment.
ping
https://reviews.llvm.org/D36915
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
tra added inline comments.
Comment at: lib/Driver/ToolChains/Cuda.cpp:441
-SmallString<256> Name = llvm::sys::path::filename(II.getFilename());
+SmallString<256> Name = StringRef(II.getFilename());
llvm::sys::path::replace_extension(Name, "cubin");
chandlerc added a comment.
But, the verifier itself will just "crash". It won't print a stack trace, but I
don't see why that's much better? And this flag is supposed to be a developer
option and not a user facing one, so I'm somewhat confused at what the intent
is here...
https://reviews.llv
lebedev.ri added a comment.
Ping, would be really nice to get this going :)
Would unblock me for working on the second half of the fix for
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34147
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37629
___
cfe-co
tra added a comment.
LGTM in general.
Comment at: test/OpenMP/target_map_codegen.cpp:4845
+///==///
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -DCK30 -std=c++11 -fopenmp -S -emit-llvm -fopenmp
-fopenmp-targets=nvptx64-nvidia-cud
aprantl added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D38042#875303, @chandlerc wrote:
> But, the verifier itself will just "crash". It won't print a stack trace, but
> I don't see why that's much better? And this flag is supposed to be a
> developer option and not a user facing one, so I'm some
chandlerc added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D38042#875328, @aprantl wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D38042#875303, @chandlerc wrote:
>
> > But, the verifier itself will just "crash". It won't print a stack trace,
> > but I don't see why that's much better? And this flag is suppos
Author: anemet
Date: Tue Sep 19 10:59:40 2017
New Revision: 313653
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=313653&view=rev
Log:
Fix ClangDiagnosticHandler::is*RemarkEnabled members
Apparently these weren't really working. I added test coverage and fixed the
typo in the name and the parameter
NoQ added a comment.
The overall idea makes sense to me. I'd like you to join the effort with Peter
who during his work on loop widening came up with a matcher-based procedure for
finding out if a variable is changed anywhere; it currently lives in
`LoopUnrolling.cpp` and we need only once impl
aaron.ballman added inline comments.
Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaChecking.cpp:8593
- bool Match = true;
+ // is this a tautological comparison? if yes, than contains the always-result
+ llvm::Optional Result;
Comments should be complete sentences with capitaliz
aprantl added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D38042#875334, @chandlerc wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D38042#875328, @aprantl wrote:
>
> > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D38042#875303, @chandlerc wrote:
> >
> > > But, the verifier itself will just "crash". It won't print a stack trace,
chandlerc added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D38042#875412, @aprantl wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D38042#875334, @chandlerc wrote:
>
> > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D38042#875328, @aprantl wrote:
> >
> > > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D38042#875303, @chandlerc wrote:
> > >
> > >
rwols created this revision.
Makes clangd respond to a client's "textDocument/signatureHelp" request by
presenting function/method overloads.
Still need to add tests.
Also, there is duplicate code in clangd::codeComplete and clangd::signatureHelp
now, maybe refactor this to a common function?
ht
aprantl added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D38042#875412, @aprantl wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D38042#875334, @chandlerc wrote:
>
> > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D38042#875328, @aprantl wrote:
> >
> > > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D38042#875303, @chandlerc wrote:
> > >
> > > >
werbitt updated this revision to Diff 115875.
werbitt edited the summary of this revision.
werbitt added a comment.
Rename assume-file to assume-file-name and update documentation
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37903
Files:
tools/clang-format/clang-format.el
Index: tools/clang-format/clang-forma
lebedev.ri updated this revision to Diff 115877.
lebedev.ri added a comment.
1. Correctly added `TautologicalUnsignedEnumZeroCompare` to
`TautologicalCompare` group (sigh)
2. Hopefully fixed spelling of the comments and added a bit better comments
3. Fixed variable names to comply with the coding
rnk accepted this revision.
rnk added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
lgtm, thanks!
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37413
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-
rnk added inline comments.
Comment at: test/CodeGen/ms-inline-asm.cpp:37-38
- int lvar = 10;
- __asm mov eax, offset Foo::ptr
- __asm mov eax, offset Foo::Bar::ptr
-// CHECK-LABEL: define void @_Z2t2v()
These don't seem tested anywhere now
Repository:
rL L
aprantl added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D38042#875418, @chandlerc wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D38042#875412, @aprantl wrote:
>
> > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D38042#875334, @chandlerc wrote:
> >
> > > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D38042#875328, @aprantl wrote:
> > >
> > > >
vsk updated this revision to Diff 115879.
vsk added a comment.
- Use a better test case. This one was lifted from an actual example in
X86CallingConv.h:86.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37544
Files:
lib/CodeGen/CGExpr.cpp
test/CodeGenCXX/ubsan-suppress-checks.cpp
Index: test/CodeGenCXX/ubsan
rcraik created this revision.
When the value specified for //n// in ordered(//n//) is larger than the number
of loops a segmentation fault can occur in one of two ways when attempting to
print out a diagnostic for an associated depend(sink : //vec//):
1. The iteration vector //vec// contains le
Rakete updated this revision to Diff 115881.
Rakete added a project: clang.
Rakete added a comment.
Used better diagnostic id.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D36357
Files:
include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticParseKinds.td
lib/Parse/ParseExprCXX.cpp
test/Parser/cxx0x-lambda-expressions.cpp
mclow.lists accepted this revision.
mclow.lists added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
All the tests pass now (on Mac OS) Thanks!
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37955
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http
aaron.ballman added inline comments.
Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaChecking.cpp:8605
- return Match;
+ const char *Cmp; // Simplified, pretty-printed comparison string
+ // Similar to E->getOpcodeStr(), but with extra 0 on either LHS or RHS
I'd drop this comment
ABataev accepted this revision.
ABataev added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
LG
https://reviews.llvm.org/D38049
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-c
Author: akaylor
Date: Tue Sep 19 13:26:40 2017
New Revision: 313666
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=313666&view=rev
Log:
Teach clang to tolerate the 'p = nullptr + n' idiom used by glibc
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37042
Added:
cfe/trunk/test/CodeGen/nullpt
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rL313666: Teach clang to tolerate the 'p = nullptr + n' idiom
used by glibc (authored by akaylor).
Changed prior to commit:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37042?vs=115262&id=115889#toc
Repository:
rL LLVM
lebedev.ri updated this revision to Diff 115890.
lebedev.ri added a comment.
Simplify `CheckTautologicalComparisonWithZero()` as per review notes.
Less LOC.
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37629
Files:
include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticGroups.td
include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSe
weimingz updated this revision to Diff 115891.
weimingz added a comment.
Moved the inclusion from stdexcept.cpp into refstring.h
For exception.cpp and new.cpp, I think it's better to keep the inclusion there.
Those files include new_handler_fallback.ipp, exception_fallback.ipp, which
need the
rsmith accepted this revision.
rsmith added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D37881#871556, @vsapsai wrote:
> I don't like name `SavePendingDelayedStateRAII` as too vague. Hope you'll be
> able to suggest something better or I'll have better
aaron.ballman accepted this revision.
aaron.ballman added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
LGTM!
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37629
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.l
Author: rcraik
Date: Tue Sep 19 14:04:23 2017
New Revision: 313675
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=313675&view=rev
Log:
[OpenMP] fix seg-faults printing diagnostics with invalid ordered(n) values
When the value specified for n in ordered(n) is larger than the number of loops
a segme
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rL313675: [OpenMP] fix seg-faults printing diagnostics with
invalid ordered(n) values (authored by rcraik).
Changed prior to commit:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D38049?vs=115876&id=115901#toc
Repository:
Author: lebedevri
Date: Tue Sep 19 14:11:35 2017
New Revision: 313677
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=313677&view=rev
Log:
[Sema] Move some stuff into -Wtautological-unsigned-enum-zero-compare
Summary:
As requested by Sam McCall:
> Enums (not new I guess). Typical case: if (enum < 0
On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 7:10 PM, Roman Lebedev wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 3:26 PM, Roman Lebedev wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 2:48 PM, Sam McCall wrote:
>> Hi.
>>
>>> Nice fix!
>> Thank you!
>>
>>> It catches a lot of new cases on our codebase, all technically
>>> correct so far.
>>>
>>>
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rL313677: [Sema] Move some stuff into
-Wtautological-unsigned-enum-zero-compare (authored by lebedevri).
Changed prior to commit:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37629?vs=115890&id=115903#toc
Repository:
rL
andrew.w.kaylor added a comment.
This is breaking buildbots for 32-bit targets because the offset in 'nullptr +
int8_t_N' is being implicitly cast to an int. That makes the sizeof(offset) ==
sizeof(ptr) check turn out differently than my tests were assuming.
I can get the buildbots green quick
Nebiroth added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D36150#867971, @ilya-biryukov wrote:
> Overall looks good, but still needs at least a few tests.
I have a test for this commit that uses included source and header files, would
that be okay to do or should I generate files dynamically? If s
Author: lebedevri
Date: Tue Sep 19 14:40:41 2017
New Revision: 313683
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=313683&view=rev
Log:
Revert "[Sema] Move some stuff into -Wtautological-unsigned-enum-zero-compare"
This reverts commit r313677.
Buildbots fail with assertion failure
Failing Tests
Author: akaylor
Date: Tue Sep 19 14:43:01 2017
New Revision: 313684
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=313684&view=rev
Log:
Fix 32-bit buildbots by removing tests that are dependent on pointer-size
comparisons.
The recently behavior in the code that these tests were meant to be checkin
lebedev.ri reopened this revision.
lebedev.ri added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
Reverted due to buildbot failures.
Need to investigate.
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37629
___
cfe-commits mailing li
EricWF accepted this revision.
EricWF added inline comments.
Comment at: src/include/atomic_support.h:153
+_ValueType old;
+old = *__target;
+*__target = __value;
Initialize `old` on the same line it's declared on.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D35235
efriedma added a comment.
I agree, it doesn't add much value.
Either way, though, please make sure you address the buildbot failures quickly.
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37042
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm
efriedma added a comment.
I would rather not make ARM baremetal do something different from every other
target...
On Linux, for most targets, we don't add the uwtable attribute by default;
without the uwtable attribute, non-ARM backends (e.g. aarch64) only emit tables
for functions which might
thakis added a comment.
I think for depfile generation, we generally try to be gcc-compatible (I can
link to prior changes in this spirit), so I think this seems like a good thing
to do to me. gcc only does this for system headers, yes?
Does gcc support the non-negated spelling of this flag
(-
Author: anemet
Date: Tue Sep 19 16:00:59 2017
New Revision: 313693
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=313693&view=rev
Log:
Add override for ClangDiagnosticHandler::isAnyRemarkEnabled()
This is used by the new closure-based variant of
OptimizationRemarkEmitter::emit().
Modified:
cfe
bruno added inline comments.
Comment at: lib/CodeGen/CGExprScalar.cpp:1042
+}
+
+assert(SrcElementTy->isFloatingPointTy() &&
What happens if the SrcElementTy is float and DstElementTy isn't? Seems like it
will hit the assertion below.
chandlerc added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D38042#875441, @aprantl wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D38042#875418, @chandlerc wrote:
>
> > Absolutely. I think the verifier should never, under any circumstances,
> > mutate the IR. Think about it, with the current design if a pass
weimingz updated this revision to Diff 115918.
weimingz added a comment.
minor change
https://reviews.llvm.org/D35235
Files:
src/exception.cpp
src/include/atomic_support.h
src/include/refstring.h
src/locale.cpp
src/new.cpp
src/support/runtime/exception_fallback.ipp
src/support/run
dlj created this revision.
Herald added a subscriber: sanjoy.
Even though the base typedef is private, it still participates in lookup. For
example:
void base() {}
struct X : private std::list {
X() { base(); }
};
https://reviews.llvm.org/D38059
Files:
include/list
Index: include
Author: weimingz
Date: Tue Sep 19 16:18:03 2017
New Revision: 313694
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=313694&view=rev
Log:
[libc++] Replace __sync_* functions with __libcpp_atomic_* functions
Summary:
This patch replaces __sync_* with __libcpp_atomic_* and adds a wrapper
function for
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rL313694: [libc++] Replace __sync_* functions with
__libcpp_atomic_* functions (authored by weimingz).
Changed prior to commit:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D35235?vs=115918&id=115922#toc
Repository:
rL LL
1 - 100 of 126 matches
Mail list logo