DenisGZM wrote:
> At a glance this _does_ seem like the right place to do this, but this is
> still missing a release note.
>
> It seems like GCC allows e.g. `__attribute__(()) alignas(16) int x` in any
> case, so I don’t see why we shouldn’t allow this too. Can you also add some
> tests that use `__attribute__(())` directly and which aren’t CUDA-specific?
>
> Oh, and can you add solmething like this as a test as well:
>
> ```c++
> struct S { __attribute__((deprecated)) alignas(16) int x; };
> ```
Actually this test doesn't work with this patch...
In this case all attributes are processed in `ParseDeclarationSpecifiers`,
which in my first view was the right place to fix, but has way more complicated
logic and easy to break diagnostics.
In `ParseDeclarationSpecifiers` we parse kw__attributes and other CXX11
Attributes and set bool AttrsLastTime = true to check that last parsed piece
was attr. Later this block prohibit attributes with AttrsLastTime = false,
```
DoneWithDeclSpec:
if (!AttrsLastTime)
ProhibitAttributes(attrs);
```
And AttrsLastTime is always false in declarations of the form: <attributes>
<type> <identifier>
Another approach i tried is to add processing alignas-cxx11 just like it is
done for C: kw__Alignas and kw_alignas (c23).
Well, it do the parsing but later it skips CXX11 attributes when correcting
declaration type (assumed that attributes must have been processed before)
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133107
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
