@@ -17389,6 +17389,19 @@ Sema::ActOnTag(Scope *S, unsigned TagSpec, TagUseKind
TUK, SourceLocation KWLoc,
Previous.clear();
}
+ // I think DC check should be DC->isStdNamespace()?
+ // Also these guards are questionable - it's possible to get incorrect
+ // codegen w
@@ -0,0 +1,73 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify %s -std=c++2c
-fcxx-type-aware-allocators -fexceptions
+
+namespace std {
+ template struct type_identity {};
+ enum class align_val_t : __SIZE_TYPE__ {};
+ struct destroying_delete_t { explicit destroying_delete_t()
@@ -17389,6 +17389,19 @@ Sema::ActOnTag(Scope *S, unsigned TagSpec, TagUseKind
TUK, SourceLocation KWLoc,
Previous.clear();
}
+ // I think DC check should be DC->isStdNamespace()?
erichkeane wrote:
Should it?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull
@@ -0,0 +1,95 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify %s -std=c++17
-fcxx-type-aware-allocators
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify %s -DNO_TAA -std=c++17
-fno-cxx-type-aware-allocators
+
+namespace std {
+ template struct type_identity {};
+ enum class al
@@ -0,0 +1,302 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify %s-std=c++2c
-fcxx-type-aware-allocators -fexceptions
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify %s -DTADD -std=c++2c
-fcxx-type-aware-allocators -fcxx-type-aware-destroying-delete -fexceptions
+
+namespace std {
@@ -2474,19 +2474,46 @@ bool CXXMethodDecl::isUsualDeallocationFunction(
getOverloadedOperator() != OO_Array_Delete)
return false;
+ auto NumParams = getNumParams();
+ bool IsTypeAware = IsTypeAwareOperatorNewOrDelete();
+
// C++ [basic.stc.dynamic.deallocation]
@@ -2474,19 +2474,46 @@ bool CXXMethodDecl::isUsualDeallocationFunction(
getOverloadedOperator() != OO_Array_Delete)
return false;
+ auto NumParams = getNumParams();
+ bool IsTypeAware = IsTypeAwareOperatorNewOrDelete();
+
// C++ [basic.stc.dynamic.deallocation]
@@ -2474,19 +2474,46 @@ bool CXXMethodDecl::isUsualDeallocationFunction(
getOverloadedOperator() != OO_Array_Delete)
return false;
+ auto NumParams = getNumParams();
+ bool IsTypeAware = IsTypeAwareOperatorNewOrDelete();
+
// C++ [basic.stc.dynamic.deallocation]
@@ -3358,6 +3358,12 @@ bool FunctionDecl::isReservedGlobalPlacementOperator()
const {
return false;
const auto *proto = getType()->castAs();
+ if (proto->getNumParams() < 2)
+return false;
+ bool IsTypeAwareAllocator =
erichkeane wrote:
is this b
@@ -8126,7 +8143,7 @@ class Sema final : public SemaBase {
/// The scope in which to find allocation functions.
enum AllocationFunctionScope {
-/// Only look for allocation functions in the global scope.
+/// Only look for allocation functions in the global scope
-
https://github.com/erichkeane commented:
I cant find my comment, but I see the args structure isn't actually stored
anywhere except as params, so feel free to disregard that comment.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/113510
___
cfe-commits mai
@@ -4749,6 +4753,15 @@ class Sema final : public SemaBase {
CXXRecordDecl *getStdBadAlloc() const;
EnumDecl *getStdAlignValT() const;
+ ClassTemplateDecl *getStdTypeIdentity() const;
+ std::optional InstantiateSpecializedTypeIdentity(QualType Subject);
e
@@ -2474,19 +2474,46 @@ bool CXXMethodDecl::isUsualDeallocationFunction(
getOverloadedOperator() != OO_Array_Delete)
return false;
+ auto NumParams = getNumParams();
+ bool IsTypeAware = IsTypeAwareOperatorNewOrDelete();
+
// C++ [basic.stc.dynamic.deallocation]
@@ -2474,19 +2474,46 @@ bool CXXMethodDecl::isUsualDeallocationFunction(
getOverloadedOperator() != OO_Array_Delete)
return false;
+ auto NumParams = getNumParams();
erichkeane wrote:
Don't use auto here, only when the type is on the RHS per coding
@@ -2234,6 +2234,17 @@ enum class CXXNewInitializationStyle {
Braces
};
+struct ImplicitAllocationParameters {
+ bool PassTypeIdentity;
erichkeane wrote:
minor preference for all of these being bitfields, or perhaps make this an
`enum` type that we can us
https://github.com/erichkeane edited
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
@@ -307,6 +307,10 @@ EXTENSION(datasizeof, LangOpts.CPlusPlus)
FEATURE(cxx_abi_relative_vtable, LangOpts.CPlusPlus &&
LangOpts.RelativeCXXABIVTables)
+// Type aware allocators
+FEATURE(cxx_type_aware_allocators, LangOpts.TypeAwareAllocators)
erichkeane wrote
@@ -1,6 +1,9 @@
// RUN: %clang_cc1 -triple x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu -std=c++20 -O2 \
// RUN:-Wno-coroutine-missing-unhandled-exception -emit-llvm %s -o -
-disable-llvm-passes \
// RUN: | FileCheck %s
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -triple x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu -std=c++20 -O2 \
+
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang-static-analyzer-1
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang-modules
Author: Oliver Hunt (ojhunt)
Changes
This is a basic implementation of P2719: "Type-aware allocation and
deallocation functions" described at http://wg21.link/P2719
The proposal includes some m
https://github.com/cor3ntin ready_for_review
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
ojhunt wrote:
@cor3ntin oh yeah, I know, I'm also there :D
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
cor3ntin wrote:
Thanks for working on this.
FYI most reviewers at the LLVM conference, do not expect a lot of feedback this
week
We will need to call consensus on
https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-typed-allocator-support/79720 first in any case
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/113510
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 2deb3a26fa47a4640962489e5473726d7a8bf12b
2da55a9d9db62e80cddd83f86e26d31537e571b5 --e
23 matches
Mail list logo
