pogo59 wrote:
I wonder if a lot of the new target-specific headers don't need to be in
clang/include. That subtree is for headers that declare the exported interface
(exported to other libs/layers); if the target-specific headers are just there
for splitting up the module, they can stay in cl
https://github.com/Endilll closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93966
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/AaronBallman edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93966
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/AaronBallman approved this pull request.
LGTM!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93966
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Endilll wrote:
> Would it make sense to add a new header (SemaUtils.h? SemaTargetUtils.h?) to
> move most of the exposed templated helpers to instead of Sema.h?
That's what `Sema/Attr.h` does, and those helpers for attribute handling went
there.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93966
RKSimon wrote:
Would it make sense to add a new header (SemaUtils.h? SemaTargetUtils.h?) to
move most of the exposed templated helpers to instead of Sema.h?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93966
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists
@@ -14,9 +14,11 @@
#define LLVM_CLANG_SEMA_SEMASYCL_H
#include "clang/AST/Decl.h"
+#include "clang/AST/DeclBase.h"
bader wrote:
I'm okay with that.
It just looks strange to add forward declaration for `Decl` class when full
declaration is included with `#inc
https://github.com/Endilll edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93966
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -14,9 +14,11 @@
#define LLVM_CLANG_SEMA_SEMASYCL_H
#include "clang/AST/Decl.h"
+#include "clang/AST/DeclBase.h"
Endilll wrote:
We definitely can, but can I leave it for a follow-up? It wasn't introduced in
this pathc, and I have a significant amount of cl
@@ -14,9 +14,11 @@
#define LLVM_CLANG_SEMA_SEMASYCL_H
#include "clang/AST/Decl.h"
+#include "clang/AST/DeclBase.h"
bader wrote:
> This one should be fixed as well now.
Can we drop `#include "clang/AST/Decl.h"` as well?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/p
@@ -32,5 +36,87 @@ inline bool isFunctionOrMethodOrBlockForAttrSubject(const
Decl *D) {
return isFuncOrMethodForAttrSubject(D) || llvm::isa(D);
}
+/// Return true if the given decl has a declarator that should have
+/// been processed by Sema::GetTypeForDeclarator.
+inline
@@ -32,5 +36,87 @@ inline bool isFunctionOrMethodOrBlockForAttrSubject(const
Decl *D) {
return isFuncOrMethodForAttrSubject(D) || llvm::isa(D);
}
+/// Return true if the given decl has a declarator that should have
+/// been processed by Sema::GetTypeForDeclarator.
+inline
@@ -14,9 +14,11 @@
#define LLVM_CLANG_SEMA_SEMASYCL_H
#include "clang/AST/Decl.h"
+#include "clang/AST/DeclBase.h"
Endilll wrote:
This one should be fixed as well now.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93966
__
@@ -3825,6 +3843,115 @@ class Sema final : public SemaBase {
void redelayDiagnostics(sema::DelayedDiagnosticPool &pool);
+ /// Diagnose mutually exclusive attributes when present on a given
Endilll wrote:
Making functions accept reference to `SemaBase` is
github-actions[bot] wrote:
:warning: C/C++ code formatter, clang-format found issues in your code.
:warning:
You can test this locally with the following command:
``bash
git-clang-format --diff c5fdb5c34e0dc3f5f3c0db19cf704b30a778cd0e
b7d132f0a9d2b6acc67c227af6ce86eeeb394b82 --
@@ -0,0 +1,57 @@
+//===- SemaSwift.h --- Swift language-specific routines ---*- C++
-*---===//
+//
+// Part of the LLVM Project, under the Apache License v2.0 with LLVM
Exceptions.
+// See https://llvm.org/LICENSE.txt for license information.
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: Apa
@@ -32,6 +32,7 @@
#include "clang/Basic/Specifiers.h"
#include "clang/Sema/DeclSpec.h"
#include "clang/Sema/Ownership.h"
+#include "clang/Sema/ParsedAttr.h"
Endilll wrote:
Yeah, I totally forgot about forward decls while preparing this PR. I fixed
that for th
@@ -32,5 +36,87 @@ inline bool isFunctionOrMethodOrBlockForAttrSubject(const
Decl *D) {
return isFuncOrMethodForAttrSubject(D) || llvm::isa(D);
}
+/// Return true if the given decl has a declarator that should have
+/// been processed by Sema::GetTypeForDeclarator.
+inline
https://github.com/AaronBallman edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93966
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -32,5 +36,87 @@ inline bool isFunctionOrMethodOrBlockForAttrSubject(const
Decl *D) {
return isFuncOrMethodForAttrSubject(D) || llvm::isa(D);
}
+/// Return true if the given decl has a declarator that should have
+/// been processed by Sema::GetTypeForDeclarator.
+inline
https://github.com/AaronBallman commented:
Precommit CI failures seem relevant.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93966
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/erichkeane edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93966
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -14,9 +14,11 @@
#define LLVM_CLANG_SEMA_SEMASYCL_H
#include "clang/AST/Decl.h"
+#include "clang/AST/DeclBase.h"
erichkeane wrote:
Wonder same about declbase as well, probably a bit of work on a few of these
includes to do that sort of analysis.
https://g
@@ -18,6 +18,7 @@
#include "clang/AST/Type.h"
#include "clang/Basic/SourceLocation.h"
#include "clang/Basic/TargetInfo.h"
+#include "clang/Sema/ParsedAttr.h"
erichkeane wrote:
Same question here.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93966
___
@@ -3825,6 +3843,115 @@ class Sema final : public SemaBase {
void redelayDiagnostics(sema::DelayedDiagnosticPool &pool);
+ /// Diagnose mutually exclusive attributes when present on a given
erichkeane wrote:
Where did this section of stuff come from? At
@@ -0,0 +1,57 @@
+//===- SemaSwift.h --- Swift language-specific routines ---*- C++
-*---===//
+//
+// Part of the LLVM Project, under the Apache License v2.0 with LLVM
Exceptions.
+// See https://llvm.org/LICENSE.txt for license information.
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: Apa
@@ -32,6 +32,7 @@
#include "clang/Basic/Specifiers.h"
#include "clang/Sema/DeclSpec.h"
#include "clang/Sema/Ownership.h"
+#include "clang/Sema/ParsedAttr.h"
erichkeane wrote:
Could this be a forward decl?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93966
__
https://github.com/erichkeane commented:
I didn't take a close look at the individual .cpp files, I assume that is
mostly just Copy & paste.
I would like us to be a little more forward-decl aggressive in the headers
however, and perhpas try to minimize what gets pushed up to Sema.h.
https://
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-backend-aarch64
Author: Vlad Serebrennikov (Endilll)
Changes
This patch moves language- and target-specific functions out of
`SemaDeclAttr.cpp`. As a consequence, `SemaAVR`, `SemaM68k`, `SemaMSP430`,
`SemaOpenCL`, `SemaSwift` were created (but they are
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang
Author: Vlad Serebrennikov (Endilll)
Changes
This patch moves language- and target-specific functions out of
`SemaDeclAttr.cpp`. As a consequence, `SemaAVR`, `SemaM68k`, `SemaMSP430`,
`SemaOpenCL`, `SemaSwift` were created (but they are not the o
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-backend-x86
Author: Vlad Serebrennikov (Endilll)
Changes
This patch moves language- and target-specific functions out of
`SemaDeclAttr.cpp`. As a consequence, `SemaAVR`, `SemaM68k`, `SemaMSP430`,
`SemaOpenCL`, `SemaSwift` were created (but they are not
31 matches
Mail list logo
