@@ -48,24 +48,49 @@ namespace std __attribute__((__visibility__("default"))) {
isnan(double __x);
bool
isnan(long double __x);
-bool
+ bool
isfinite(float __x);
bool
isfinite(double __x);
bool
isfinte(long double __x);
- bool
+ bool
isunordered(float _
shafik wrote:
I would like to see some more compelling motivation for an extension here.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/91070
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commit
@@ -1155,7 +1156,7 @@ namespace {
if (CTSD->isInStdNamespace() && ClassII &&
ClassII->isStr("allocator") && TAL.size() >= 1 &&
TAL[0].getKind() == TemplateArgument::Type)
- return {Call->Index, TAL[0].getAsType()};
+ return {Cal
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/123744
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Thanks, this would be an improvement but I have one concern with this change.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/123744
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/m
@@ -2290,18 +2290,21 @@ CXXDeductionGuideDecl *CXXDeductionGuideDecl::Create(
ASTContext &C, DeclContext *DC, SourceLocation StartLoc,
ExplicitSpecifier ES, const DeclarationNameInfo &NameInfo, QualType T,
TypeSourceInfo *TInfo, SourceLocation EndLocation, CXXConstr
@@ -8147,6 +8149,26 @@ TEST_P(ImportFunctions, CTADWithLocalTypedef) {
ASSERT_TRUE(ToD);
}
+TEST_P(ImportFunctions, CTADAliasTemplate) {
+ Decl *TU = getTuDecl(
+ R"(
+ template struct A {
+A(T);
+ };
+ template
+ using B = A;
+ B b{(i
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/123875
___
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 know you have approvals but you should expand the tests first.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/123875
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listin
https://github.com/shafik commented:
when the discussion is eventually resolved please add a more detailed summary
explaining how the fix is implemented and why.
These go in the git log and it is important for relevant details to show up
there w/o the need for git show etc
https://github.com/
https://github.com/shafik requested changes to this pull request.
Please add a more detailed summary to this PR. I have asked this on several PRs
and I believe the confusion reflected in the comments is very much attributed
to not explaining why you believe your fix works. It may be incorrect b
@@ -13464,6 +13464,14 @@ Decl *Sema::ActOnAliasDeclaration(Scope *S,
AccessSpecifier AS,
}
TemplateParameterList *TemplateParams = TemplateParamLists[0];
+// Check shadowing of a template parameter name
+for (NamedDecl *TP : TemplateParams->asArray()) {
+
https://github.com/shafik commented:
I see a lot of diagnostics were updated to `DefaultError` but I don't see
matching tests that demonstrate the now error. We should be testing each
diagnostic.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/123470
___
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Shouldn't this have some sort of Release not maybe under the X86 section?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/120670
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailm
https://github.com/shafik commented:
LGTM but I will let @cor3ntin give the accept
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/121056
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++2c -verify -fsyntax-only %s
+
+template
+void decompose_array() {
+ int arr[4] = {1, 2, 3, 5};
+ auto [x, ... // #1
+rest, ...more_rest] = arr; // expected-error{{multiple packs in structured
binding declaration}}
+
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Thank you for the PR, small comments.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/121417
___
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/121417
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -0,0 +1,117 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -std=c++26 %s -verify
shafik wrote:
+1 we should always cover all the examples from the proposal.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/121417
___
cfe-commits mai
shafik wrote:
> > I see a lot of diagnostics were updated to `DefaultError` but I don't see
> > matching tests that demonstrate the now error. We should be testing each
> > diagnostic.
>
> #123464 also added `-Werror=return-type` to some tests; we can remove those
> now, which should cover at
https://github.com/shafik commented:
I feel like matching gcc's behavior makes sense for users but I am not sure
about the timing for clang-20. This seems like the change in behavior could be
impactful.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/122486
__
shafik wrote:
ping, is this still a problem?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/118480
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Alejandro =?utf-8?q?=C3=81lvarez_Ayll=C3=B3n?=,
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 looks about right to me but I would like another set of eyes.
https://github.com/llv
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Flagging what looks like a bug
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101469
___
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/101469
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -1212,6 +1212,14 @@ static void handlePreferredName(Sema &S, Decl *D, const
ParsedAttr &AL) {
<< TT->getDecl();
}
+static void handleNoSpecializations(Sema &S, Decl *D, const ParsedAttr &AL) {
+ StringRef Message;
+ if (AL.getNumArgs() != 0)
+S.checkStringLit
https://github.com/shafik closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/124478
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
shafik wrote:
First failure looks like a flaky build issue:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/124485
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/124478
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mail
https://github.com/shafik created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/124478
When implmenting P2280R4 here: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/95474
When creating the APValue to store and constexprUnknown value I used an offset
of CharUnits::One() but it should have been CharUnits
shafik wrote:
No Release notes b/c this is a fix for
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/95474 which has its own release note.
Tests for this fix will be added by
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/124476
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/124478
__
=?utf-8?q?André?= Brand ,
=?utf-8?q?André?= Brand
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
shafik wrote:
> @cor3ntin Thanks! I just added some details to the GitHub description. I hope
> it's not too verbose. And I rebased the branch to resolve the conflict in the
> release notes.
Terse summaries are reall
@@ -528,3 +528,21 @@ D d(0); // expected-note {{in implicit initialization for
inherited constructor
// expected-error@-1 {{call to immediate function 'GH112677::D::SimpleCtor' is
not a constant expression}}
}
+
+namespace GH123405 {
+
+consteval void fn() {}
+
+template
+c
https://github.com/shafik commented:
In my comment here, it really looks like a clang-17 regression:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/124161#event-16079402729
>From what I can tell you also address the simplified version, so I believe a
>release note is probably warrented.
Are ther
https://github.com/shafik commented:
I second that we need to document how values outside of zero and one are
handled.
I would like also really want to see a test that demonstrates the behavior we
are expecting to support with comments explaining the result and why we expect
it.
After seei
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/116708
___
cfe-commits mailing list
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Apologies if I somehow missed it but it looks like we are not really covering
the diagnostics fully and we need to in
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
@@ -10134,6 +10137,24 @@ def note_format_fix_specifier : Note<"did you mean to
use '%0'?">;
def note_printf_c_str: Note<"did you mean to
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
@@ -10134,6 +10137,24 @@ def note_format_fix_specifier : Note<"did you mean to
use '%0'?">;
def note_printf_c_str: Note<"did you mean to
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
@@ -10134,6 +10137,24 @@ def note_format_fix_specifier : Note<"did you mean to
use '%0'?">;
def note_printf_c_str: Note<"did you mean to
shafik wrote:
ping, any chance we can make progress here?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/112111
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -4861,8 +4861,9 @@ static void TryListInitialization(Sema &S,
S.Context.hasSameUnqualifiedType(SubInit[0]->getType(), DestType)
&&
"Deduced to other type?");
TryArrayCopy(S,
- InitializationKind::CreateCopy(Kind.getLocatio
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Definitely makes sense. Definitely we need a test, I think the right test to
add an example to is `ast-dump-decl.cpp`.
Could you also put a few more details in the summary, basically explain you are
modifying `TextNodeDumper::VisitEnumDecl` to be more consi
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Please add a summary to your PR something like `Enables continuous PGO mode
where profile counter updates are continuously synced to a file.` seems ok.
This is what will show up in the git log and it useful to have more than a
title in the log.
https://gi
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Thank you for the fix.
Please add a more detailed summary, the title feels sufficient to describe the
problem but you should outline the solution in the summary, at least briefly.
e.g. adding `checkMethodPointerType` which will called during to verify
@@ -96,3 +96,13 @@ namespace PR38286 {
template struct C; // expected-note {{non-type declaration found}}
template C::~C() {} // expected-error {{identifier 'C' after
'~' in destructor name does not name a type}}
}
+
+namespace GH121706 {
+struct S {
+ *S(); // expected-
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/122621
___
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.
At a first glance this seems to make sense to me, I added some more reviewers.
Please add a release note.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/121854
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-c
https://github.com/shafik commented:
I would love to see tests that highlight any differences between C and C++ in
this area.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/121950
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.o
@@ -284,11 +284,26 @@ void f(_Atomic(int) *i, const _Atomic(int) *ci,
const volatile int flag_k = 0;
volatile int flag = 0;
- (void)(int)__atomic_test_and_set(&flag_k, memory_order_seq_cst); //
expected-warning {{passing 'const volatile int *' to parameter of type
'vola
@@ -1969,7 +1970,7 @@ void
ASTDeclWriter::VisitTemplateTypeParmDecl(TemplateTypeParmDecl *D) {
if (OwnsDefaultArg)
Record.AddTemplateArgumentLoc(D->getDefaultArgument());
- if (!TC && !OwnsDefaultArg &&
+ if (!D->hasTypeConstraint() && !OwnsDefaultArg &&
-
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/122065
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
After commit review.
Thank you for the fix.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/122065
___
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/123060
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
`Lexer::findNextToken` has an additional check:
`if (!Lexer::isAtEndOfMacroExpansion(Loc, SM, LangOpts, &Loc))`
Does this not change behavior in the case we are replacing? I imagine folks
just copied from `Lexer::findNextToken` and purposely left this out,
@@ -118,47 +118,19 @@ findMembersUsedInInitExpr(const CXXCtorInitializer
*Initializer,
return Results;
}
-/// Returns the next token after `Loc` (including comment tokens).
-static std::optional getTokenAfter(SourceLocation Loc,
shafik wrote:
This looks li
@@ -47,6 +49,10 @@ template void f() {
}(), ...);
}(1, 2);
+ [](Is...) {
+([] { using T = ElementType; }(), ...);
shafik wrote:
Out of curiosity were applying the `getCanonicalType` to `T` and getting `int`
while we really wanted `ElementType`?
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
LGTM
Assuming no objections from @tbaederr
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125522
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/
@@ -1648,8 +1648,11 @@ SourceLocation CallExpr::getBeginLoc() const {
if (const auto *Method =
dyn_cast_if_present(getCalleeDecl());
Method && Method->isExplicitObjectMemberFunction()) {
-assert(getNumArgs() > 0 && getArg(0));
-return getArg(0)->getBeg
shafik wrote:
Can we please add more details in the summary about e.g. "This fixes a crash
when ... and the fix is ..."
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/126868
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cg
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier
Message-ID
=?utf-8?q?F=C3=A9lix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?F=C3=A9lix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?F=C3=A9lix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?F=C3=A9lix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?F=C3=A9lix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?F=C3=A9lix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?F=C3=A9lix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?F=C3=A9lix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?F=C3=A9lix?= Clou
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Thank you for improving the summary. @erichkeane mentioned that templates are a
special case for the diagnostics with your original approach. Can we add a test
that deal w/ templates to verify that the diagnostic works in those case
properly? It still looks
@@ -3107,8 +3107,12 @@ Sema::PerformObjectMemberConversion(Expr *From,
/*IgnoreAccess=*/true))
return ExprError();
- return ImpCastExprToType(From, DestType, CK_UncheckedDerivedToBase,
- VK, &BasePath);
+ Quali
https://github.com/shafik commented:
It seems like for gcc at least, IIUC, `cc` does a bit more than `c` so while we
are supporting `cc` for compatibility we are not fully supporting it?
Specifically:
`except try harder to print it with no punctuation`
Perhaps we should document that in the c
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/127824
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Please provide more details than a link to the github issue. The summary is
what goes in the git log and folks downstream often use git log as a first line
in analyzing issues. Summaries w/o detailed summary are not useful.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-proj
@@ -504,4 +504,39 @@ namespace AnonymousUnion {
static_assert(return_init_all().a.p == 7); // both-error {{}} \
// both-note {{read of member 'p'
of union with no active member}}
}
+
+namespace InactiveDestroy {
+ struct A {
+
@@ -504,4 +504,39 @@ namespace AnonymousUnion {
static_assert(return_init_all().a.p == 7); // both-error {{}} \
// both-note {{read of member 'p'
of union with no active member}}
}
+
+namespace InactiveDestroy {
+ struct A {
+
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
LGTM but please add a more detailed summary something along the lines of `Added
LLVM_PREFERRED_TYPE to InUnion field of InlineDescriptor` would be sufficient.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/128740
_
https://github.com/shafik commented:
I did not fully understand this part of the summary `I did not check for other
possibilities for namespaces that are not in a TU or namespace but at least the
code should handle all cases` but I take it there are cases you are not
testing?
Is there a reas
https://github.com/shafik commented:
I get that we are allowing constexpr unknown values into codegen and that is a
mistake but I don't totally follow the fix. Can you go into more details?
If I am reading the code correctly there should be some constexpr cases that
generate a diagnostic, can
@@ -12796,6 +12799,7 @@ namespace {
}
void VisitCXXOperatorCallExpr(CXXOperatorCallExpr *E) {
+ llvm::SaveAndRestore CxxOpCallScope(isInCXXOperatorCall, true);
shafik wrote:
We should be using
[bugprone-argument-comment](https://clang.llvm.org/e
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/129198
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -12609,6 +12611,7 @@ namespace {
isPODType = false;
isRecordType = false;
isReferenceType = false;
+ isInCXXOperatorCall = false;
shafik wrote:
It feels like changing this to use in class member initializers would have been
a big win
@@ -892,6 +892,11 @@ namespace lambdas {
return a1.x;
});
A a2([&] { return a2.x; }); // ok
+A a3([=] { return a3.x; }()); // expected-warning{{variable 'a3' is
uninitialized when used within its own initialization}}
shafik wrote:
Do we now
shafik wrote:
> > Should this have updated: https://clang.llvm.org/c_status.html
>
> Not according to Aaron: [#129737
> (comment)](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/129737#discussion_r1980260552)
Oh wow, my bad, I missed that 😬
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/129737
@@ -1,13 +1,21 @@
-// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify %s
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify=c11 -std=c11 -pedantic %s
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify=c23 -std=c23 -Wpre-c23-compat %s
// Check C99 6.8.5p3
void b1 (void) { for (void (*f) (void);;); }
-void
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/128866
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -0,0 +1,48 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++11 -fsyntax-only -verify %s
+
+namespace t1{
+template struct VSX {
+ ~VSX() { static_assert(sizeof(T) != 4, ""); } // expected-error {{static
assertion failed due to requirement 'sizeof(int) != 4':}} \
+
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
LGTM besides the last comment I made on adding a comment to the test.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/128866
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Does this also warns on expressions that result in a `bool` e.g.
https://godbolt.org/z/aY3cons4T
```cpp
bool a = (x < y) << 1;
```
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/127336
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-
https://github.com/shafik edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/127336
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -1,13 +1,21 @@
-// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify %s
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify=c11 -std=c11 -pedantic %s
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify=c23 -std=c23 -Wpre-c23-compat %s
// Check C99 6.8.5p3
void b1 (void) { for (void (*f) (void);;); }
-void
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Thank you for the PR, some after commit review. The bugprone comment should be
addressed and if there are more cases we catch that are not covered by existing
tests, we should add more tests.
The in class member initializers feels like it would be worth doi
@@ -759,13 +759,11 @@ Sema::BuildDependentDeclRefExpr(const CXXScopeSpec &SS,
TemplateArgs);
}
-bool Sema::DiagnoseUninstantiableTemplate(SourceLocation PointOfInstantiation,
- NamedDecl *Instantiation,
-
shafik wrote:
This PR was flagged as the cause of this crash:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/130272
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/117841
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/ma
Timm =?utf-8?q?Bäder?=
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
shafik wrote:
> > @cor3ntin I see... My opinion is because [N4916](https://wg21.link/n4916)
> > said the [P2280R4](https://wg21.link/p2280r4) was accepted as a DR and GCC
> > is so treating it. Not sure whether the divergence would be desired.
@@ -2269,10 +2269,11 @@ StmtResult Sema::ActOnForStmt(SourceLocation ForLoc,
SourceLocation LParenLoc,
for (auto *DI : DS->decls()) {
if (VarDecl *VD = dyn_cast(DI)) {
VarDeclSeen = true;
- if (VD->isLocalVarDecl() && !VD->hasLocalStorage()) {
https://github.com/shafik closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/129627
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Just throwing in my $0.02 and saying I agree w/ Aaron and Vlad here, this is
not the right direction. Having a `const` method return a non-const that we
will then mutate is just not clean code.
Having to use `const_cast` documents we are violating expectati
shafik wrote:
ping, are you waiting on feedback on your last comment to move forward?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/78742
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Should this have updated: https://clang.llvm.org/c_status.html
Also it would have been nice to mention the paper number in the release notes,
I am assuming there was a paper?
CC @AaronBallman
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/129737
_
shafik wrote:
> > It seems like for gcc at least, IIUC, `cc` does a bit more than `c` so
> > while we are supporting `cc` for compatibility we are not fully supporting
> > it? Specifically:
> > `except try harder to print it with no punctuation`
> > Perhaps we should document that in the commen
shafik wrote:
> @shafik I added the sample to our test cases, not sure if we can add source
> loc in expected line, I will check that
h/t @erichkeane something like this should help get us the confirmation in the
test we want: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/129116
https://github.co
https://github.com/shafik commented:
LGTM, thank you for the quick fix!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/129169
___
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/128866
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -5450,10 +5450,20 @@ bool Sema::SetCtorInitializers(CXXConstructorDecl
*Constructor, bool AnyErrors,
NumInitializers * sizeof(CXXCtorInitializer*));
Constructor->setCtorInitializers(baseOrMemberInitializers);
+SourceLocation Location = Constructor->getLo
https://github.com/shafik commented:
This requires a release note, especially b/c this is a conformance fix.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/128866
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman
@@ -0,0 +1,48 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++11 -fsyntax-only -verify %s
+
+namespace t1{
+template struct VSX {
+ ~VSX() { static_assert(sizeof(T) != 4, ""); } // expected-error {{static
assertion failed due to requirement 'sizeof(int) != 4':}} \
+
https://github.com/shafik approved this pull request.
LGTM, I am a bit discouraged that this did not alter an tests.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/130731
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin
801 - 900 of 1025 matches
Mail list logo
