@@ -337,6 +343,8 @@ Parser::ParseConceptDefinition(const ParsedTemplateInfo
&TemplateInfo,
ExprResult ConstraintExprResult =
Actions.CorrectDelayedTyposInExpr(ParseConstraintExpression());
if (ConstraintExprResult.isInvalid()) {
+if (AddedToScope)
---
@@ -115,7 +115,7 @@ C++ Language Changes
- Allow single element access of GCC vector/ext_vector_type object to be
constant expression. Supports the `V.xyzw` syntax and other tidbits
as seen in OpenCL. Selecting multiple elements is left as a future work.
-- Implement `CWG18
shafik wrote:
Next time please provide a better summary for your PR. This is super important
for downstream folks debugging build breaks. In general this is important for
reviews to compare what they expect with the actual diff.
In this case something like "replace the use of conditional opera
@@ -0,0 +1,43 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++23 -fsyntax-only -verify %s
+
+struct A {
shafik wrote:
We should also test this case:
```cpp
struct A {
union {
int n;
int m=0;
};
};
const A a;
```
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96301
_
shafik wrote:
CC @tbaederr this does not look like equivalent code to me based on your
original isue but maybe I am confused.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/109298
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.o
https://github.com/shafik commented:
The link you gave for the regression is not a llvm commit, is that the correct
commit you meant to point to?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/109470
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://github.com/shafik commented:
In case I don't get a chance to look at this in more detail right away can you
please reference specific CWG issues in the summary and in comments in the
code? Thank you.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/109208
_
Alejandro =?utf-8?q?=C3=81lvarez_Ayll=C3=B3n?=,
Alejandro =?utf-8?q?=C3=81lvarez_Ayll=C3=B3n?=
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108021
___
cfe-commits mailin
@@ -9868,7 +9868,12 @@ static bool tryVectorConvertAndSplat(Sema &S, ExprResult
*scalar,
// if necessary.
CastKind scalarCast = CK_NoOp;
- if (vectorEltTy->isIntegralType(S.Context)) {
+ if (vectorEltTy->isBooleanType()) {
+if (scalarTy->isIntegralType(S.Context))
+
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Please add more details to the summary to explain what the fix actually does.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108657
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/m
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108657
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
You need to add more details to the summary something like: the fix was to
handle `CK_UserDefinedConversion` in `ComplexExprEvaluator::VisitCastExpr` as
opposed to treating it as an error.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108758
__
shafik wrote:
> LGTM but it would be nice to do the other changes to cxx_dr_status as a
> separate (NFC) commit
We should always strive to keep unrelated changes separate. There are a lot of
good reasons for this. The most basic is that if we have to revert then we lose
both set of changes bu
@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify -std=c++11 %s
shafik wrote:
I think this test should go in `clang/test/Sema/conditional-expr.c` and we
should add a section of the GNU extension there.
I am also a bit concerned that we don't have a spe
shafik wrote:
> > So this looks like a regression: https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/h6GexT18E
>
> @shafik https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/Ebvnjrc8e
Interesting it crashes in trunk w/o `c++20`:
https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/h9xa8eaqo but the backtrace looks the same.
We should test this in C++20 and C++23 as w
https://github.com/shafik requested changes to this pull request.
So this looks like a regression: https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/h6GexT18E
Can we figure out which PR this regression came from and make sure the code
change makes sense in light of that PR?
Also please add a more detailed summary to
shafik wrote:
So this looks like a regression: https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/h6GexT18E
Can we figure out which PR this regression came from and make sure the code
change makes sense in light of that PR?
Also please add a more detailed summary to this PR, describing why the crash
happens and the
https://github.com/shafik commented:
What about `module`, `import` and `export`?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/107982
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Thank you for the fix.
Is this from a bug report, if so it should be mentioned in the summary.
The summary itself could be a big clearer, maybe a small code example could
help.
I think this also needs a release note.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/p
@@ -446,7 +446,12 @@ static bool tryDiagnoseOverloadedCast(Sema &S, CastType CT,
: InitializationKind::CreateCast(/*type range?*/ range);
InitializationSequence sequence(S, entity, initKind, src);
- assert(sequence.Failed() && "initialization succeeded on second try?");
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108021
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -1243,12 +1247,19 @@ bool
ASTUnit::Parse(std::shared_ptr PCHContainerOps,
}
std::unique_ptr Act(
- new TopLevelDeclTrackerAction(*this));
+ new TopLevelDeclTrackerAction(*this, true));
shafik wrote:
We should use
[bugprone-argument-comment]
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Can you add some more details to the summary e.g. "The fix adds an additional
check in isGSLOwner() for Owner attribute" or something along those lines.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108280
___
cfe-comm
@@ -6298,6 +6298,15 @@ class Sema final : public SemaBase {
using ImmediateInvocationCandidate = llvm::PointerIntPair;
+ enum class LifetimeExtendingContext {
+None, // Not in a lifetime extending context.
+FlagOnly, // A flag indicating whether we are in l
shafik wrote:
I am not sure I see all the examples from:
https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/1696.html
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/97308
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https:
https://github.com/shafik edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/97308
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -5578,19 +5579,35 @@ ExprResult Sema::BuildCXXDefaultInitExpr(SourceLocation
Loc, FieldDecl *Field) {
ImmediateCallVisitor V(getASTContext());
if (!NestedDefaultChecking)
V.TraverseDecl(Field);
- if (V.HasImmediateCalls) {
+
+ // CWG1815
+ // Support lifetime ext
https://github.com/shafik commented:
I think I need a second run through
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/97308
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -652,14 +647,14 @@ bool Parser::ParseTopLevelDecl(DeclGroupPtrTy &Result,
// Recognize context-sensitive C++20 'export module' and 'export import'
// declarations.
case tok::identifier: {
- IdentifierInfo *II = NextToken().getIdentifierInfo();
- if ((II
@@ -4558,6 +4574,12 @@ bool Lexer::LexDependencyDirectiveToken(Token &Result) {
Result.setRawIdentifierData(TokPtr);
if (!isLexingRawMode()) {
const IdentifierInfo *II = PP->LookUpIdentifierInfo(Result);
+ if (Result.isModuleContextualKeyword()) {
+//
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Minor comments, I agree with @cor3ntin that you should split this into two PRs.
It will be much better to review in smaller form.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/102135
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-co
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/102135
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -5443,11 +5443,24 @@ struct EnsureImmediateInvocationInDefaultArgs
// Rewrite to source location to refer to the context in which they are used.
ExprResult TransformSourceLocExpr(SourceLocExpr *E) {
-if (E->getParentContext() == SemaRef.CurContext)
+DeclContext
@@ -97,3 +97,29 @@ void foo() {
}
#endif
+
+#if __cplusplus >= 202002L
+void GH107048() {
+ constexpr int x{};
+ const int y{};
+ auto b = []{};
+ using A = decltype([]{});
+
+ int z; // expected-note {{'z' declared here}}
+ auto c = []{
+// expected-error@-1 {{no ma
https://github.com/shafik commented:
@tbaederr I am not confident this is the right approach.
If we compare the non-statement-expression case: https://godbolt.org/z/vseWeh5jP
We don't have the same issue as the original case:
https://godbolt.org/z/Gh13WcMEz
So I suspect there is something abo
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Can you add more details to the summary explaining why the fix is necessary.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106552
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/ma
@@ -8819,8 +8822,8 @@ Expr *OpenMPIterationSpaceChecker::buildNumIterations(
NewSize, Type->hasSignedIntegerRepresentation() ||
C.getTypeSize(Type) < NewSize);
if (!SemaRef.Context.hasSameType(Diff.get()->getType(), NewType)) {
-Di
@@ -9469,7 +9473,8 @@ static ExprResult buildCounterUpdate(
if (!SemaRef.Context.hasSameType(Update.get()->getType(),
VarRef.get()->getType())) {
Update = SemaRef.PerformImplicitConversion(
- Update.get(), VarRef.get()->ge
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106453
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -9491,8 +9496,8 @@ static ExprResult widenIterationCount(unsigned Bits, Expr
*E, Sema &SemaRef) {
return ExprResult(E);
// OK to convert to signed, because new type has more bits than old.
QualType NewType = C.getIntTypeForBitwidth(Bits, /*Signed=*/true);
- return
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
LGTM except for nitpicks
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106453
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
shafik wrote:
Looks like this is linked to a clang-19 regression:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/106182
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/95202
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Thank you for the fix, can you add more details to the summary, in this case
some details on the fix and why it works would be helpful.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/105727
___
cfe-commits mailing list
https://github.com/shafik commented:
This make sense to me, @dwblaikie wdyt?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106033
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
I don't think the test failures look related to the changes can you push and
empty change to see if rerunning the tests comes up clean?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96301
___
cfe-commits mailing list
c
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/105821
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -3139,6 +3139,19 @@ Parser::DeclGroupPtrTy
Parser::ParseCXXClassMemberDeclaration(
return Actions.BuildDeclaratorGroup(Decls);
}
+ // Befriending a concept is invalid and would already fail if
+ // we did nothing here, but this allows us to issue a more
+ // helpf
shafik wrote:
Can we add more context to the summary i.e. "cppcheck
comparisonOfBoolWithBoolError flagged the use of ..."
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/102948
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/
shafik wrote:
Can you please add more details in your summary about the problem and how the
PR will fix the problem.
Having detailed summaries for got log is important. Also for the code reviewer
as well, I should get a good snapshot of the problem and fix from the summary.
https://github.com
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/104829
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -20,3 +19,29 @@ struct S : HasVT {
HasD<> v;
};
+// Ensure we don't get infinite recursion from the check, however. See GH104802
+namespace GH104802 {
+class foo { // expected-note {{definition of 'GH104802::foo' is not
complete until the closing '}'}}
+ foo a;
@@ -20,3 +19,15 @@ struct S : HasVT {
HasD<> v;
};
+// Ensure we don't get infinite recursion from the check, however. See GH104802
+namespace GH104802 {
+class foo { // expected-note {{definition of 'GH104802::foo' is not
complete until the closing '}'}}
+ foo a;
shafik wrote:
For future reference the summary here is not really sufficient. Since this what
usually goes in the git log they should be enough details for folks reading the
git log to understand what the change was.
The summary should explain the problem and provide a summary of the fix as we
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101426
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -9267,14 +9267,14 @@ bool Sema::RequireLiteralType(SourceLocation Loc,
QualType T,
if (!RT)
return true;
- const CXXRecordDecl *RD = cast(RT->getDecl());
-
// A partially-defined class type can't be a literal type, because a literal
// class type must have a t
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101426
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
This looks good but you need to add a bit more details to your summary, more
specifically what case caused the bug to emerge.
I am also curious why this does not show up in C++, we obtain a similar
diagnostic but no crash.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-pro
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Thank you for working to get this PR finished up. I see at least two comments
from the previous PR not addressed here. Please, let's try and get those
addressed.
@AaronBallman wanted a test to make sure we reject `&V[0]` which I don't see:
https://github.c
@@ -442,6 +446,16 @@ namespace {
MostDerivedArraySize = 2;
MostDerivedPathLength = Entries.size();
}
+
+void addVectorElementUnchecked(QualType EltTy, uint64_t Size,
+ uint64_t Idx) {
+ Entries.push_back(PathEntry::Arra
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101126
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -75,7 +75,7 @@ bool Qualifiers::isStrictSupersetOf(Qualifiers Other) const {
const IdentifierInfo* QualType::getBaseTypeIdentifier() const {
const Type* ty = getTypePtr();
NamedDecl *ND = nullptr;
- if (ty->isPointerType() || ty->isReferenceType())
+ if (ty->isPointerO
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101206
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101206
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
shafik wrote:
> Another PR would fix the crash when this one is landed.
Can you land the fix for the crash first? If the other PR gets reverted it
creates a lot of churn, so it would preferable to land that first. Assuming it
is not somehow dependent on this fix.
https://github.com/llvm/llv
@@ -314,53 +316,69 @@ class APValue {
DataType Data;
public:
- APValue() : Kind(None) {}
- explicit APValue(APSInt I) : Kind(None) {
+ bool allowConstexprUnknown() const { return AllowConstexprUnknown; }
+
+ void setConstexprUnknown() { AllowConstexprUnknown = true; }
--
@@ -314,53 +316,69 @@ class APValue {
DataType Data;
public:
- APValue() : Kind(None) {}
- explicit APValue(APSInt I) : Kind(None) {
+ bool allowConstexprUnknown() const { return AllowConstexprUnknown; }
+
+ void setConstexprUnknown() { AllowConstexprUnknown = true; }
+
@@ -1917,6 +1929,16 @@ APValue &CallStackFrame::createTemporary(const KeyT
*Key, QualType T,
return createLocal(Base, Key, T, Scope);
}
+APValue &
+CallStackFrame::createConstexprUnknownAPValues(const VarDecl *Key,
+ APValue::LV
https://github.com/shafik updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/95474
>From 69b09ea5b0f0a1c5419c488ade29b6fedc6de773 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Shafik Yaghmour
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2024 14:20:50 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/5] [Clang] Implement P2280R4 Using unknown pointers and
refere
https://github.com/shafik updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/95474
>From 69b09ea5b0f0a1c5419c488ade29b6fedc6de773 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Shafik Yaghmour
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2024 14:20:50 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/4] [Clang] Implement P2280R4 Using unknown pointers and
refere
https://github.com/shafik updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/95474
>From 69b09ea5b0f0a1c5419c488ade29b6fedc6de773 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Shafik Yaghmour
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2024 14:20:50 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [Clang] Implement P2280R4 Using unknown pointers and
refere
@@ -1579,11 +1579,11 @@ void JSONNodeDumper::VisitMaterializeTemporaryExpr(
}
void JSONNodeDumper::VisitCXXDefaultArgExpr(const CXXDefaultArgExpr *Node) {
- attributeOnlyIfTrue("hasRewrittenInit", Node->hasRewrittenInit());
+ JOS.attribute("hasRewrittenInit", Node->hasRewrit
https://github.com/shafik edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/99748
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
The code mostly makes sense, can we update the summary to clarify the goal of
this change? This is what goes in the git log and it is important this is
detailed enough to understand the change w/o looking at the details of the
change itself.
https://github
https://github.com/shafik commented:
I would like @AaronBallman to review this before committing.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/99833
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/c
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Thank you for submitting a potential fix.
First of all this needs a reproducer, one to verify the existing issue and two
because we need to add a test to insure we fix and three we need the rest to
make sure we don't regress the fix in later releases.
The
@@ -14578,21 +14578,51 @@ ExprResult Sema::CreateBuiltinBinOp(SourceLocation
OpLoc,
BinaryOperatorKind Opc,
Expr *LHSExpr, Expr *RHSExpr) {
if (getLangOpts().CPlusPlus11 && isa(RHSExpr)) {
-// The sy
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Seems sensible @cor3ntin wdyt?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100142
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Thank you for this PR, could please put a little more detail in the summary
since that is what will be seen by folks using git log.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100351
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-
shafik wrote:
> The structure of the AST is not stable but whoever change is would have to
> fix the code anyway as it's all the same project so it's a non-issue (as long
> as you add sufficient test coverage)
I agree relying on the AST is fine w/ sufficient testing.
https://github.com/llvm/
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Can you please add a reference to
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/100095 in the summary so folks just
reading the git log have more context w/o going to the commit itself.
I would like to see a more flushed out long-term plan for fixing this pro
https://github.com/shafik closed https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/98965
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
shafik wrote:
> There's some existing coverage of the affected diagnostics, which shows we
> continue to produce those diagnostics... but I added a few more tests for
> in-class static member variables.
Thank you!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/99579
___
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/98965
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Thank you for the additional tests, so I am not sure if the coverage is
sufficient I see changed under the following diagnostic:
note_constexpr_negative_shift
note_constexpr_large_shift
note_constexpr_lshift_of_negative
note_constexpr_lshift_discards
but I
https://github.com/shafik commented:
I think I am bit surprised more tests are not affected by this change
considering you modified the handling in several places. It seems we should be
adding more test coverage with this change.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/99579
@@ -1519,7 +1519,8 @@ bool Sema::IsAtLeastAsConstrained(NamedDecl *D1,
auto IsExpectedEntity = [](const FunctionDecl *FD) {
FunctionDecl::TemplatedKind Kind = FD->getTemplatedKind();
return Kind == FunctionDecl::TK_NonTemplate ||
- Kind == FunctionDe
@@ -931,7 +931,9 @@ def O : Joined<["-"], "O">, Group,
def O_flag : Flag<["-"], "O">, Visibility<[ClangOption, CC1Option, FC1Option]>,
Alias, AliasArgs<["1"]>;
def Ofast : Joined<["-"], "Ofast">, Group,
- Visibility<[ClangOption, CC1Option, FlangOption]>;
+ Visibility<[Clan
@@ -11846,19 +11854,21 @@ static void DiagnoseFailedEnableIfAttr(Sema &S,
OverloadCandidate *Cand) {
}
static void DiagnoseFailedExplicitSpec(Sema &S, OverloadCandidate *Cand) {
- ExplicitSpecifier ES = ExplicitSpecifier::getFromDecl(Cand->Function);
+ assert(Cand->Function
https://github.com/shafik edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/98965
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik requested changes to this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/98965
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -9994,8 +9995,9 @@
Sema::AddArgumentDependentLookupCandidates(DeclarationName Name,
CandEnd = CandidateSet.end();
Cand != CandEnd; ++Cand)
if (Cand->Function) {
- Fns.erase(Cand->Function);
- if (FunctionTemplateDecl *
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
Thank you for this refactor, just a couple of minor comments but otherwise
looks good. Please fix first and then merge after it passes tests, if you need
someone to merge for you please let me know.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull
@@ -11846,19 +11854,21 @@ static void DiagnoseFailedEnableIfAttr(Sema &S,
OverloadCandidate *Cand) {
}
static void DiagnoseFailedExplicitSpec(Sema &S, OverloadCandidate *Cand) {
- ExplicitSpecifier ES = ExplicitSpecifier::getFromDecl(Cand->Function);
+ assert(Cand->Function
https://github.com/shafik edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/98965
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/95474
>From 69b09ea5b0f0a1c5419c488ade29b6fedc6de773 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Shafik Yaghmour
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2024 14:20:50 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] [Clang] Implement P2280R4 Using unknown pointers and
references
@@ -1284,16 +1294,26 @@ void checkExprLifetime(Sema &SemaRef, const
InitializedEntity &Entity,
auto LTResult = getEntityLifetime(&Entity);
LifetimeKind LK = LTResult.getInt();
const InitializedEntity *ExtendingEntity = LTResult.getPointer();
- checkExprLifetimeImpl(Sema
@@ -1722,10 +1722,12 @@ void Preprocessor::ExpandBuiltinMacro(Token &Tok) {
// MSVC, ICC, GCC, VisualAge C++ extension. The generated string should be
// of the form "Ddd Mmm dd hh::mm::ss ", which is returned by asctime.
const char *Result;
+char TimeStrin
https://github.com/shafik edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/98699
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
This LGTM but when someone blocks you should wait for approval before landing
the change.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/98699
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.o
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Quick drive by comment
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/98788
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
1 - 100 of 693 matches
Mail list logo
