https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/112612
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -39,7 +39,8 @@ bool Sema::SetMemberAccessSpecifier(NamedDecl *MemberDecl,
AccessSpecifier LexicalAS) {
if (!PrevMemberDecl) {
// Use the lexical access specifier.
-MemberDecl->setAccess(LexicalAS);
shafik wrote:
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/113437
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -3702,20 +3702,32 @@ user-declared functions. For example:
.. code-block:: c++
+#include
+#include
+
+using namespace std::literals;
+
// Returns m[key] if key is present, or default_value if not.
template
const U &get_or_default(const std::map
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
LGTM, other than the minor comment.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/113437
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commi
shafik wrote:
So this is the commit that introduced this 06e41ae5c77c6
and it looks like code like this:
```objc
id x(id(0));
```
we are trying to differentiate a protocol Vs the next parameter?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/109298
___
c
@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify %s
+
+a() {struct b c (sizeof(b * [({ {tree->d* next)} 0
+
+// expected-error@3 {{a type specifier is required for all declarations}}
+// expected-error@3 {{use of undeclared identifier 'tree'; did you mean
'true'?}}
+//
https://github.com/shafik commented:
So I think on my last comment, using `break` as opposed to `continue` makes
sense. Agree @cor3ntin
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/109298
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://l
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/114071
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/114781
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
shafik wrote:
This crash looks linked to this change:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/115004
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/79
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/li
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
Assuming it passes the test LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/112424
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/114217
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Thank you for the fix, I think this makes sense. Please add the tests I
commented on and a release note.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/114217
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http
@@ -74,7 +74,7 @@ int test13(int *a) {
}
int test14(int *a, int b) {
- a = (int *)__builtin_assume_aligned(b, 32); // expected-error {{incompatible
integer to pointer conversion passing 'int' to parameter of type 'const void *}}
+ a = (int *)__builtin_assume_aligned(b, 32);
@@ -17957,6 +17957,8 @@ Sema::ActOnTag(Scope *S, unsigned TagSpec, TagUseKind
TUK, SourceLocation KWLoc,
<< Name;
Invalid = true;
}
+ if (TUK == TagUseKind::Declaration && Name)
shafik wrote:
Why do we need to check `Name` as we
https://github.com/shafik commented:
The fix looks good to me but I guess everyone needs to be happy w/ the test
first.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/112111
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi
shafik wrote:
ping
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84146
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
In case I don't get a chance to look at this in more detail right away can you
please reference specific CWG issues in the summary and in comments in the
code? Thank you.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/109208
_
@@ -0,0 +1,43 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++23 -fsyntax-only -verify %s
+
+struct A {
shafik wrote:
We should also test this case:
```cpp
struct A {
union {
int n;
int m=0;
};
};
const A a;
```
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96301
_
shafik wrote:
Next time please provide a better summary for your PR. This is super important
for downstream folks debugging build breaks. In general this is important for
reviews to compare what they expect with the actual diff.
In this case something like "replace the use of conditional opera
@@ -115,7 +115,7 @@ C++ Language Changes
- Allow single element access of GCC vector/ext_vector_type object to be
constant expression. Supports the `V.xyzw` syntax and other tidbits
as seen in OpenCL. Selecting multiple elements is left as a future work.
-- Implement `CWG18
https://github.com/shafik commented:
The link you gave for the regression is not a llvm commit, is that the correct
commit you meant to point to?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/109470
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
shafik wrote:
CC @tbaederr this does not look like equivalent code to me based on your
original isue but maybe I am confused.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/109298
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.o
@@ -3149,9 +3156,15 @@ struct ExpandPackedTypeConstraints
assert(SemaRef.ArgumentPackSubstitutionIndex != -1);
+TemplateArgument Arg = TemplateArgs(T->getDepth(), T->getIndex());
+
+std::optional PackIndex;
+if (Arg.getKind() == TemplateArgument::Pack)
+
shafik wrote:
It looks like this change caused a regression:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/115000
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/111333
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mai
https://github.com/shafik commented:
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/112612
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/112708
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
shafik wrote:
This is linked to the following regression:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/111293
Please investigate.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84146
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llv
@@ -180,7 +180,7 @@ namespace {
bool HandleTopLevelDecl(DeclGroupRef DG) override {
// FIXME: Why not return false and abort parsing?
- if (Diags.hasErrorOccurred())
+ if (Diags.hasUnrecoverableErrorOccurred())
shafik wrote:
Is this really
shafik wrote:
Just wanted to ping on this and see how it was going.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/113049
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
shafik wrote:
Looks like this PR was the cause of this regression:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/116440
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/78060
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bi
Alejandro =?utf-8?q?=C3=81lvarez_Ayll=C3=B3n?=,
Alejandro =?utf-8?q?=C3=81lvarez_Ayll=C3=B3n?=
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108021
___
cfe-commits mailin
shafik wrote:
Note paper [Remove Deprecated Array Comparisons from
C++26](https://wg21.link/p2865) although the lastest version is not public yet.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/118031
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.or
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/118031
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
This looks good but I want agreement on the diagnostic message.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/118031
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinf
@@ -15,15 +15,15 @@ void test(const char *d) {
if (NULL == "/")
return;
if ("/" != DELIM) // expected-warning {{result of comparison against a
string literal is unspecified (use an explicit string comparison function
instead)}}
-return;
+return; // cxx
@@ -15,15 +15,15 @@ void test(const char *d) {
if (NULL == "/")
return;
if ("/" != DELIM) // expected-warning {{result of comparison against a
string literal is unspecified (use an explicit string comparison function
instead)}}
-return;
+return; // cxx
@@ -10264,6 +10264,11 @@ def warn_depr_array_comparison : Warning<
"to compare array addresses, use unary '+' to decay operands to pointers">,
InGroup;
+def warn_array_comparison : Warning<
+ "comparison between two arrays; "
shafik wrote:
Maybe "Compari
@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify -fcxx-exceptions
-Wno-unevaluated-expression -std=c++20 %s
shafik wrote:
We already have
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/clang/test/CXX/expr/expr.unary/expr.unary.noexcept/sema.cpp
mayb
shafik wrote:
Looks like this caused a regression:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/117975
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/112521
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listi
@@ -1615,22 +1615,24 @@ QualType CallExpr::getCallReturnType(const ASTContext
&Ctx) const {
return FnType->getReturnType();
}
-const Attr *CallExpr::getUnusedResultAttr(const ASTContext &Ctx) const {
+std::pair
+CallExpr::getUnusedResultAttr(const ASTContext &Ctx) const {
+
@@ -33,23 +33,22 @@ Two goo __attribute__((init_priority(2,3))) ( 5, 6 ); //
expected-error {{'init_
Two coo[2] __attribute__((init_priority(100)));
#if !defined(SYSTEM)
- // expected-error@-2 {{'init_priority' attribute requires integer constant
between 101 and 65535 incl
shafik wrote:
This crash looks linked to this change:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/121980
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/79
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/li
https://github.com/shafik commented:
nitpick, I don't think this is an NFC change. It would require some thought to
really convince myself this did not have subtle behavior changes even if
unintended.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/122029
___
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Apologies, if I am missing it but I don't see a test emitting the diagnostic
`err_drv_mix_offload` anywhere.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125556
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
@@ -248,4 +248,16 @@ __attribute__((optnone)) T func_22(T x, T y) {
float func_23(float x, float y) {
return func_22(x, y);
-}
\ No newline at end of file
+}
+
+// CHECK-LABEL: FunctionDecl {{.*}} func_24 'vector2float (vector2double)'
+// CHECK: CompoundStmt {{.*}}
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Can we also add a summary, explaining your implementation e.g. "added
TrailingObjects to `ConvertVectorExpr` containing "
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125522
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commi
@@ -237,8 +237,17 @@ static_assert(__is_same(decltype(s.t), int));
// explicit deduction guide.
Foo(int) -> Foo;
AFoo s2{i};
-// FIXME: the type should be X because of the above explicit deduction guide.
-static_assert(__is_same(decltype(s2.t), int));
+static_assert(__is_same(d
@@ -30220,6 +30220,11 @@ const char* cases[][2] = {
{"_ZZNH3Foo3fooES_iENK4Foo24foo2Ev", "Foo::foo(this Foo,
int)::Foo2::foo2() const" },
{"_ZNH3FooclERKS_", "Foo::operator()(this Foo const&)"},
+
+// C++26 pack indexing
shafik wrote:
We should a
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/124920
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -53,3 +53,14 @@ alignas(4) auto PR19252 = 0;
// Check the diagnostic message
class alignas(void) AlignasVoid {}; // expected-error {{invalid application of
'alignas' to an incomplete type 'void'}}
+
+namespace GH108819 {
+void a([[maybe_unused]] void) {} //
https://github.com/shafik commented:
This makes sense but we should have been coverage in testing.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/124920
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/
@@ -124,6 +125,14 @@ void lambda_capture() {
[&x...] { (void)sum(x...); }();
}
+struct S2 {
+int a, b, c;
+};
+
+auto X = [] () {
shafik wrote:
I feel like there are a bunch of varieties on this case we can test as well:
https://godbolt.org/z/r9zxxfoW
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125394
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/124920
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
I think I would like to see some more test coverage.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125394
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commi
https://github.com/shafik commented:
I see the test references https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/124715
but you don't mention it in the summary and you don't have a release note. Does
the test exercise the crash?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/126206
__
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Should this have a release note?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125671
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -188,3 +188,19 @@ void other_main() {
static_assert(f() == 2);
}
} // namespace
+
+
+namespace GH125165 {
+
+template
+auto f(auto t) {
+const auto& [...pack] = t;
+// expected-error@-1 {{cannot decompose non-class, non-array type 'char
const'}}
+(pack, ...)
https://github.com/shafik commented:
When possible we should always add tests, I think the right place would be:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/clang/test/SemaCXX/warn-unsafe-buffer-usage-libc-functions.cpp
CC @ziqingluo-90
Do we need a release note or is this feature clang-20
@@ -5828,6 +5822,15 @@ void CXXNameMangler::mangleExpression(const Expr *E,
unsigned Arity,
break;
}
+ case Expr::PackIndexingExprClass: {
+auto *PE = cast(E);
+NotPrimaryExpr();
shafik wrote:
I am looking at the test cases and I don't see the
https://github.com/shafik commented:
This makes sense but let's make sure we cover all the added branches in the
test suite.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/123513
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.or
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/123513
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
shafik wrote:
This PR is linked to the following regression:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/125225
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/114684
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mai
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Adding to the current comments.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/123495
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/123495
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -159,12 +160,13 @@ void test() {
// expected-note@-3 {{cannot use initializer list at the beginning of a
macro argument}}
}
-// CHECK: fix-it:"{{.*}}macro_with_initializer_list.cpp":{145:11-145:11}:"("
-// CHECK: fix-it:"{{.*}}macro_with_initializer_list.cpp":{145:23-145
@@ -180,3 +182,11 @@ void test2() {
// expected-error@-3 {{use of undeclared identifier}}
// expected-note@-4 {{cannot use initializer list at the beginning of a
macro argument}}
}
+
+#define LIM() 10
+// expected-note@-1 {{'LIM' is defined here as a function-like macro;
shafik wrote:
ping on this we have another regression linked to the original change:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/120086
We really should land a fix ASAP, this is now three regression linked to the
same change.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/114217
_
https://github.com/shafik commented:
This should have a release note.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/119908
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
shafik wrote:
Just merged in main since it has been so long in prep for updates
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/95474
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/95474
>From 69b09ea5b0f0a1c5419c488ade29b6fedc6de773 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Shafik Yaghmour
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2024 14:20:50 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/6] [Clang] Implement P2280R4 Using unknown pointers and
refere
https://github.com/shafik commented:
I guess there are no release notes or manual b/c this is not ready to be used
by general users on the command line and that will come via another PR?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/76261
___
cfe-commits
@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
+// RUN: %clang_tysan -O0 %s -o %t && %run %t >%t.out 2>&1
+// RUN: FileCheck %s < %t.out
+
+#include
+
+// CHECK-NOT: ERROR: TypeSanitizer: type-aliasing-violation
+
+int main() {
+ union {
+int i;
+short s;
+ } u;
+
+ u.i = 42;
+ u.s = 1;
+
+ print
@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+// RUN: %clang_tysan -O0 %s -o %t && %run %t 10 >%t.out.0 2>&1
+// RUN: FileCheck %s < %t.out.0
+// RUN: %clang_tysan -O2 %s -o %t && %run %t 10 >%t.out 2>&1
+// RUN: FileCheck %s < %t.out
+
+#include
+#include
+#include
+
+void __attribute__((noinline)) add_f
Alejandro =?utf-8?q?=C3=81lvarez_Ayll=C3=B3n?=,
Alejandro =?utf-8?q?=C3=81lvarez_Ayll=C3=B3n?=
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
https://github.com/shafik commented:
This will eventually need a release note.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/119711
__
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Thank you for the fix. Please add a more detailed summary, these are important
since they go into the git log and can be important for debugging downstream
breaks.
Something like "Fix by adding check in ActOnGCCAsmStmt that the domains of the
input and out
shafik wrote:
I just realized it was already merged
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/119098
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/95474
>From 69b09ea5b0f0a1c5419c488ade29b6fedc6de773 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Shafik Yaghmour
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2024 14:20:50 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/7] [Clang] Implement P2280R4 Using unknown pointers and
refere
https://github.com/shafik updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/95474
>From 69b09ea5b0f0a1c5419c488ade29b6fedc6de773 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Shafik Yaghmour
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2024 14:20:50 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/8] [Clang] Implement P2280R4 Using unknown pointers and
refere
shafik wrote:
We have a new crash on new code introduced since I last worked on this, I am
guessing it just requires some additional checks.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/95474
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https:
https://github.com/shafik updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/95474
>From 69b09ea5b0f0a1c5419c488ade29b6fedc6de773 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Shafik Yaghmour
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2024 14:20:50 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/9] [Clang] Implement P2280R4 Using unknown pointers and
refere
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Please add more details to the summary, especially a note that there
theoretically could be false negatives but it fixes the overall issue and the
tradeoff good.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/120233
__
@@ -3703,8 +3703,14 @@ void Parser::ParseDeclarationSpecifiers(
// We reject AT_LifetimeBound and AT_AnyX86NoCfCheck, even though
they
// are type attributes, because we historically haven't allowed these
// to be used as type attributes in C++11
https://github.com/shafik updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/95474
>From 69b09ea5b0f0a1c5419c488ade29b6fedc6de773 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Shafik Yaghmour
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2024 14:20:50 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 01/12] [Clang] Implement P2280R4 Using unknown pointers and
refe
https://github.com/shafik updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/95474
>From 69b09ea5b0f0a1c5419c488ade29b6fedc6de773 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Shafik Yaghmour
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2024 14:20:50 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 01/11] [Clang] Implement P2280R4 Using unknown pointers and
refe
@@ -8612,7 +8612,11 @@ static void HandleLifetimeBoundAttr(TypeProcessingState
&State,
CurType = State.getAttributedType(
createSimpleAttr(State.getSema().Context, Attr),
CurType, CurType);
+return;
}
+ State.getSema().Diag(Attr.getLoc(), diag::err_
https://github.com/shafik updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/95474
>From 69b09ea5b0f0a1c5419c488ade29b6fedc6de773 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Shafik Yaghmour
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2024 14:20:50 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 01/10] [Clang] Implement P2280R4 Using unknown pointers and
refe
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Thank you for your contribution, please add a more detailed summary to your PR.
Your summary should if your title describes the problem sufficiently describe
how you will fix the problem.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/118186
@@ -3190,19 +3190,27 @@ static void GenerateHeaderSearchArgs(const
HeaderSearchOptions &Opts,
auto It = Opts.UserEntries.begin();
auto End = Opts.UserEntries.end();
- // Add -I... and -F... options in order.
- for (; It < End && Matches(*It, {frontend::Angled}, std::nul
https://github.com/shafik commented:
nitpick
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/105738
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/105738
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -40,7 +40,11 @@ static_assert(
"Type is insufficiently aligned");
APValue::LValueBase::LValueBase(const ValueDecl *P, unsigned I, unsigned V)
-: Ptr(P ? cast(P->getCanonicalDecl()) : nullptr), Local{I, V} {}
+: Ptr(P ? cast(P->getCanonicalDecl()->isInvalidDecl()
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Looks good, looking forward to the follow-up PR.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/118031
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Timm =?utf-8?q?Bäder?= ,
Timm =?utf-8?q?Bäder?=
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Am I missing something, it seems like several of the new diagnostics don't have
tests that cover them.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/118475
__
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/123417
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/123417
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
quick questions
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/123417
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -216,11 +244,18 @@ int compareit(float a, float b) {
// no-inf-no-nan-warning@+2 {{use of infinity is undefined behavior due to the
currently enabled floating-point options}}
// no-inf-warning@+1 {{use of infinity is undefined behavior due to the
currently enabled floatin
701 - 800 of 1024 matches
Mail list logo
