================
@@ -7353,6 +7354,69 @@ void Sema::CheckCompletedCXXClass(Scope *S,
CXXRecordDecl *Record) {
else if (Record->hasAttr<CUDADeviceBuiltinTextureTypeAttr>())
checkCUDADeviceBuiltinTextureClassTemplate(*this, Record);
}
+
+ llvm::SmallVector<const FunctionDecl *, 2> TypeAwareNewDecls;
+ llvm::SmallVector<const FunctionDecl *, 2> TypeAwareDeleteDecls;
+ llvm::SmallVector<const FunctionDecl *, 2> TypeAwareArrayNewDecls;
+ llvm::SmallVector<const FunctionDecl *, 2> TypeAwareArrayDeleteDecls;
+
+ for (auto *D : Record->decls()) {
+ const FunctionDecl *FnDecl = nullptr;
+ if (auto *FTD = dyn_cast<FunctionTemplateDecl>(D))
+ FnDecl = FTD->getTemplatedDecl();
+ else if (auto *FD = dyn_cast<FunctionDecl>(D))
+ FnDecl = FD;
+ if (!FnDecl || !FnDecl->isTypeAwareOperatorNewOrDelete())
+ continue;
+ switch (FnDecl->getOverloadedOperator()) {
+ case OO_New:
+ TypeAwareNewDecls.push_back(FnDecl);
+ break;
+ case OO_Array_New:
+ TypeAwareArrayNewDecls.push_back(FnDecl);
+ break;
+ case OO_Delete:
+ TypeAwareDeleteDecls.push_back(FnDecl);
+ break;
+ case OO_Array_Delete:
+ TypeAwareArrayDeleteDecls.push_back(FnDecl);
+ break;
+ default:
+ continue;
+ }
+ }
+ auto CheckMismatchedTypeAwareAllocators =
+ [this,
+ Record](OverloadedOperatorKind NewKind,
+ const llvm::SmallVector<const FunctionDecl *, 2> &NewDecls,
+ OverloadedOperatorKind DeleteKind,
+ const llvm::SmallVector<const FunctionDecl *, 2> &DeleteDecls) {
+ if (NewDecls.empty() == DeleteDecls.empty())
+ return;
+ DeclarationName FoundOperator =
+ Context.DeclarationNames.getCXXOperatorName(
+ NewDecls.empty() ? DeleteKind : NewKind);
+ DeclarationName MissingOperator =
+ Context.DeclarationNames.getCXXOperatorName(
+ NewDecls.empty() ? NewKind : DeleteKind);
+ Diag(Record->getLocation(),
+ diag::err_type_aware_allocator_missing_matching_operator)
+ << FoundOperator << Context.getRecordType(Record)
+ << MissingOperator;
----------------
mizvekov wrote:
Right, that makes sense.
On one hand, your diagnostic could be something like: 'declaration of type
aware %0 in **this class** must have matching type aware %2'
But if you want to talk about the class, you might as well say it by name,
instead of 'this class'.
If you pass a bare CXXRecordType, then the class name will be printed fully
qualified, which might not be needed in this case since you are already
pointing to it after all. If you pass the Decl, it should print just its quoted
identifier.
Is it possible to get here with an anonymous class? If so, then you might need
a 'this class' fallback as well.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/113510
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
