Thanks! Committed in r194441.
On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 7:44 AM, Will Wilson <[email protected]> wrote: > *ping* Any chance of getting this patch in before the 3.4 release branch? > > Thanks! > Will. > > > On 7 November 2013 08:06, Will Wilson <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Thanks Richard. Updated patch with comment attached ready for committing >> (if it looks acceptable). >> >> Cheers, >> Will. >> >> >> On 7 November 2013 00:25, Richard Smith <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> LGTM. But please add a comment to AST/Expr.cpp near the >>> isCXX98IntegralConstantExpr check to say that we follow the C++98 rules in >>> Microsoft mode. >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 5:31 AM, Will Wilson <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Thanks David! Patch attached... >>>> >>>> >>>> On 6 November 2013 14:25, David Majnemer <[email protected]>wrote: >>>> >>>>> There doesn't seem to see a patch attached. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 2:50 AM, Will Wilson <[email protected]>wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Richard, >>>>>> >>>>>> Only just had another crack at this MS mode issue. I've updated the >>>>>> patch and added your example to the test case. The new version correctly >>>>>> mirrors MSVC's handling in clang with C++11 mode active. >>>>>> >>>>>> All tests pass and clang-format applied. Let me know what you think. >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Will. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 28 August 2013 03:11, Will Wilson <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks for the review (and catching the fail on my part)! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> MSVC accepts your templated example without complaint. The patched >>>>>>> clang asserts in EvalAddr() in SemaChecking.cpp after being called by >>>>>>> Sema::CheckReturnStackAddr() with "EvalAddr only works on pointers" >>>>>>> using >>>>>>> your example case. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Do you have some ideas on how best to support this facet of MSVC >>>>>>> behavior without uglifying the code too much? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> Will. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 27 August 2013 22:04, Richard Smith <[email protected]>wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Please use isCXX98IntegralConstantExpr, not isIntegerConstantExpr, >>>>>>>> in C++11 + MicrosoftMode. (Take a look at how we behaved prior to >>>>>>>> r183883.) >>>>>>>> We *really* don't want to use full constexpr evaluation when >>>>>>>> determining >>>>>>>> whether an expression is a null pointer constant. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Also, this patch tries to evaluate value-dependent potential null >>>>>>>> pointer constants in C++11 + MicrosoftMode. That's not OK, and will >>>>>>>> sometimes assert. How should we behave here? Does MSVC accept this: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> template<int N> int *f() { return N; } >>>>>>>> int *p = f<0>(); >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 10:05 AM, Will Wilson >>>>>>>> <[email protected]>wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi All, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This patch uses the more relaxed integer expression codepath in >>>>>>>>> Expr::isNullPointerConstant() when MicrosoftMode is enabled, this >>>>>>>>> reflects >>>>>>>>> MSVC behavior and is required to compile various cases I've come >>>>>>>>> across in >>>>>>>>> MSVC targeted code. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Test case included. Built and tested against latest code. Please >>>>>>>>> review and commit if possible. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks! >>>>>>>>> Will. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> *Indefiant Ltd.* >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> cfe-commits mailing list >>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> *Indefiant Ltd.* >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> *Indefiant Ltd.* >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> cfe-commits mailing list >>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> *Indefiant Ltd.* >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> *Indefiant Ltd.* >> > > > > -- > *Indefiant Ltd.* > > _______________________________________________ > cfe-commits mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits > >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
