On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 3:33 PM, jahanian <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Jan 24, 2013, at 3:27 PM, John McCall <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Jan 24, 2013, at 3:11 PM, Richard Smith <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 2:11 PM, Fariborz Jahanian <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> Author: fjahanian >>>> Date: Thu Jan 24 16:11:45 2013 >>>> New Revision: 173377 >>>> >>>> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=173377&view=rev >>>> Log: >>>> Patch to check for integer overflow. It has been >>>> commented on and approved by Richard Smith. >>>> >>>> Modified: >>>> cfe/trunk/include/clang/AST/Expr.h >>>> cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticASTKinds.td >>>> cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td >>>> cfe/trunk/include/clang/Sema/Sema.h >>>> cfe/trunk/lib/AST/ExprConstant.cpp >>>> cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaChecking.cpp >>>> cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp >>>> cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaExprCXX.cpp >>>> cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaStmt.cpp >>>> cfe/trunk/test/Sema/switch-1.c >>>> >>>> Modified: cfe/trunk/include/clang/AST/Expr.h >>>> URL: >>>> http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/include/clang/AST/Expr.h?rev=173377&r1=173376&r2=173377&view=diff >>>> ============================================================================== >>>> --- cfe/trunk/include/clang/AST/Expr.h (original) >>>> +++ cfe/trunk/include/clang/AST/Expr.h Thu Jan 24 16:11:45 2013 >>>> @@ -570,6 +570,9 @@ >>>> /// integer. >>>> llvm::APSInt EvaluateKnownConstInt(const ASTContext &Ctx, >>>> SmallVectorImpl<PartialDiagnosticAt> *Diag=0) >>>> const; >>>> + >>>> + void EvaluateForOverflow(const ASTContext &Ctx, >>>> + SmallVectorImpl<PartialDiagnosticAt> *Diag) >>>> const; >>>> >>>> /// EvaluateAsLValue - Evaluate an expression to see if we can fold it to >>>> an >>>> /// lvalue with link time known address, with no side-effects. >>>> >>>> Modified: cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticASTKinds.td >>>> URL: >>>> http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticASTKinds.td?rev=173377&r1=173376&r2=173377&view=diff >>>> ============================================================================== >>>> --- cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticASTKinds.td (original) >>>> +++ cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticASTKinds.td Thu Jan 24 >>>> 16:11:45 2013 >>>> @@ -106,6 +106,9 @@ >>>> "(skipping %0 call%s0 in backtrace; use -fconstexpr-backtrace-limit=0 to " >>>> "see all)">; >>>> def note_constexpr_call_here : Note<"in call to '%0'">; >>>> +def warn_integer_constant_overflow : Warning< >>>> + "overflow in case constant expression results in value %0 of type %1">, >>>> + InGroup<DiagGroup<"integer-overflow">>; >>> >>> This diagnostic text is wrong, since we're checking for overflow in >>> all expressions, not just case constant expressions. >> >> It's also confusingly worded. A better diagnostic, if we keep a specialized >> message for case expressions, would be something like: >> "overflow in 'case' expression; resulting value is %0 of type %1" >> In particular, the quotation marks are importing in order to prevent >> people from interpreting "in case ..." as the common English idiom. >> It is also unnecessary to point out that this is a constant expression. > > No longer specialized to case expression. > So, I need to mention that it is a constant expression. > Currently it says. overflow of constant expression results in value %0 of > type %1 > I think your suggesting would be something like: > > "overflow of constant expression; resulting value is %0 of type %1"
The warning also catches cases which are not constant expressions, such as... int a; int b = (a, 65537) * 65537; _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
