aaron.ballman added a comment. In D123167#3434289 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D123167#3434289>, @beanz wrote:
> In D123167#3434023 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D123167#3434023>, @aaron.ballman > wrote: > >> I think you're going to need semantic restrictions as well as parsing >> restrictions because of type deduction. Even if you don't support templates >> (yet), there's still `auto`, `decltype`, `__typeof__`, and `__auto_type` (I >> probably missed some, lol) to worry about. > > Thankfully HLSL is like C++98-based... I don't think we support any of those > cases. Oh, were compilers that easy... https://godbolt.org/z/EMasKrdh3 >> Also... can HLSL be combined with Objective-C mode (do we have to worry >> about their pointers as well)? > > Oh god... Now you're giving me nightmares. I feel like implementing > objc_msgsend on a GPU might be a bridge (or ten) too far... Heh, good. Can you make sure we reject that situation loudly in the frontend (in another patch, on another day, no rush)? ================ Comment at: clang/test/ParserHLSL/parse_pointer.hlsl:23 + return F->X; +} ---------------- beanz wrote: > aaron.ballman wrote: > > Here are a few more fun test cases (which may require semantic tests > > instead of parsing tests): > > ``` > > void func(); > > > > void devilish_language(auto look_ma_no_pointers); // templates get you the > > same effects as well > > > > void test() { > > int x; > > devilish_language(&x); // I presume we want this to be diagnosed > > devilish_language(func); // I think you wanted this to not be diagnosed? > > devilish_language("oh no, not array decay!"); // Same here as function > > decay? > > > > auto but_but_but = "please, stop Aaron!" + 0; // Uhhh... is the addition > > okay but the declaration bad? > > > > int array[2]; > > *(&array[0] + 1) = 12; // Maaaayybbbe this is fine? > > } > > ``` > > (Thing for you to double-check: do any targets predefine macros that expand > > to a pointer? I checked InitPreprocessor.cpp and things looked fine there, > > but I didn't check targets.) > I am in awe of your gift for finding ways to trip things up :) > > I think most of these we can't hit because of `auto`. Eyeballing that lat > case we _might_ handle it. I'll double check. I am broken for writing decent code after spending so many years in Core thinking about edge cases. :-D Btw, here's another one to try: ``` int i = *(int *)0; // Check that pointer types used in expressions are caught, same for reference ``` Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D123167/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D123167 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
