Author: Aaron Ballman Date: 2022-10-26T13:53:50-04:00 New Revision: 5e676aa702d8df32a832c765eb8f60773d190236
URL: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/5e676aa702d8df32a832c765eb8f60773d190236 DIFF: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/5e676aa702d8df32a832c765eb8f60773d190236.diff LOG: Add tests for C11 DRs and update the status page This gets a start on testing how we're doing for C11 DRs Added: clang/test/C/drs/dr411.c Modified: clang/test/C/drs/dr4xx.c clang/www/c_dr_status.html Removed: ################################################################################ diff --git a/clang/test/C/drs/dr411.c b/clang/test/C/drs/dr411.c new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000..0cb0000b3c316 --- /dev/null +++ b/clang/test/C/drs/dr411.c @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@ +/* RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c89 -fsyntax-only -verify -DC89 -Wno-c11-extensions %s + RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c99 -fsyntax-only -verify -DC99 -Wno-c11-extensions %s + RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c11 -fsyntax-only -verify -DC11 %s + RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c17 -fsyntax-only -verify -DC17 %s + RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c2x -fsyntax-only -verify -DC2X %s + */ + +/* expected-no-diagnostics */ + +/* WG14 DR411: yes + * Predefined macro values + * + * Note: the DR is about the C11 macro value, but we'll test all the standard + * version macro values just to be sure. We do not need to test + * __STDC_LIB_EXT1__ values because that requires an Annex K-compatible header. + */ +#if defined(C89) +#ifdef __STDC_VERSION__ +#error "C89 didn't have this macro!" +#endif +#elif defined(C99) +_Static_assert(__STDC_VERSION__ == 199901L, ""); +#elif defined(C11) +_Static_assert(__STDC_VERSION__ == 201112L, ""); +#elif defined(C17) +_Static_assert(__STDC_VERSION__ == 201710L, ""); +#elif defined(C2X) +/* FIXME: this value will change once WG14 picks the final value for C2x. */ +_Static_assert(__STDC_VERSION__ == 202000L, ""); +#else +#error "unknown language standard version" +#endif + diff --git a/clang/test/C/drs/dr4xx.c b/clang/test/C/drs/dr4xx.c index ab3407520f592..c1e55f5153d12 100644 --- a/clang/test/C/drs/dr4xx.c +++ b/clang/test/C/drs/dr4xx.c @@ -1,14 +1,102 @@ /* RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c89 -verify=expected,c89only -pedantic -Wno-c11-extensions %s - RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c99 -verify=expected,c99untilc2x -pedantic -Wno-c11-extensions %s - RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c11 -verify=expected,c99untilc2x -pedantic %s - RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c17 -verify=expected,c99untilc2x -pedantic %s - RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c2x -verify=expected,c2xandup -pedantic %s + RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c99 -verify=expected -pedantic -Wno-c11-extensions %s + RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c11 -verify=expected -pedantic %s + RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c17 -verify=expected -pedantic %s + RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c2x -verify=expected -pedantic %s */ /* The following are DRs which do not require tests to demonstrate * conformance or nonconformance. + * + * WG14 DR401: yes + * "happens before" can not be cyclic + * + * WG14 DR402: yes + * Memory model coherence is not aligned with C++11 + * + * WG14 DR404: yes + * Joke fragment remains in a footnote + * + * WG14 DR406: yes + * Visible sequences of side effects are redundant + * + * WG14 DR415: yes + * Missing divide by zero entry in Annex J + * + * WG14 DR417: yes + * Annex J not updated with necessary aligned_alloc entries + * + * WG14 DR419: yes + * Generic Functions + * + * WG14 DR420: yes + * Sytax error in specification of for-statement + * + * WG14 DR425: yes + * No specification for the access to variables with temporary lifetime + * + * WG14 DR434: yes + * Possible defect report: Missing constraint w.r.t. Atomic + * + * WG14 DR435: yes + * Possible defect report: Missing constraint w.r.t. Imaginary + * + * WG14 DR436: yes + * Request for interpretation of C11 6.8.5#6 + * Note: This is not really testable because it requires -O1 or higher for LLVM + * to perform its reachability analysis and -Wunreachable-code only verifies + * diagnostic behavior, not runtime behavior. Also, both are a matter of QoI as + * to what they optimize/diagnose. But if someone thinks of a way to test this, + * we can add a test case for it then. */ +/* WG14 DR412: yes + * #elif + * + * Note: this is testing that #elif behaves the same as #else followed by #if. + */ +#if 1 +#elif this is not a valid expression +#else + #if this is not a valid expression + #endif +#endif + +/* WG14 DR413: yes + * Initialization + */ +void dr413(void) { + typedef struct { + int k; + int l; + int a[2]; + } T; + + typedef struct { + int i; + T t; + } S; + + /* Ensure that explicit initialization (.t = { ... }) takes precedence over a + * later implicit partial initialization (.t.l = 41). The value should be 42, + * not 0. + */ + _Static_assert((S){ /* c89only-warning {{compound literals are a C99-specific feature}} + expected-warning {{expression is not an integer constant expression; folding it to a constant is a GNU extension}} + */ + 1, + .t = { /* c89only-warning {{designated initializers are a C99 feature}} */ + .l = 43, /* c89only-warning {{designated initializers are a C99 feature}} + expected-note {{previous initialization is here}} + */ + .k = 42, + .a[1] = 19, /* expected-note {{previous initialization is here}} */ + .a[0] = 18 + }, + .t.l = 41, /* expected-warning {{initializer overrides prior initialization of this subobject}} */ + .t.a[1] = 17 /* expected-warning {{initializer overrides prior initialization of this subobject}} */ + }.t.k == 42, ""); +} /* WG14 DR423: partial * Defect Report relative to n1570: underspecification for qualified rvalues @@ -30,3 +118,47 @@ void dr423_func(void) { v2 = 100; /* Not an error; the qualifier was stripped. */ } +/* WG14 DR432: yes + * Possible defect report: Is 0.0 required to be a representable value? + * + * We're going to lean on the fpclassify builtin to tell us whether 0.0 + * represents the value 0, and we'll test that adding and subtracting 0.0 does + * not change the value, and we'll hope that's enough to validate this DR. + */ +_Static_assert(__builtin_fpclassify(0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 0.0f) == 4, ""); +_Static_assert((1.0 / 3.0) + 0.0 == (1.0 / 3.0) - 0.0, ""); /* expected-warning {{expression is not an integer constant expression; folding it to a constant is a GNU extension}} */ + +/* WG14 DR444: partial + * Issues with alignment in C11, part 1 + */ +void dr444(void) { + _Alignas(int) int i; + _Alignas(int) struct S { + _Alignas(int) int i; + } s; + + /* FIXME: This should be accepted as per this DR. */ + int j = (_Alignas(int) int){12}; /* expected-error {{expected expression}} */ + + /* FIXME: The diagnostic in this case is really bad; moving the specifier to + * where the diagnostic recommends causes a diff erent, more inscrutable error + * about anonymous structures. + */ + _Alignas(int) struct T { /* expected-warning {{attribute '_Alignas' is ignored, place it after "struct" to apply attribute to type declaration}} */ + int i; + }; + + struct U { + _Alignas(int) int bit : 1; /* expected-error {{'_Alignas' attribute cannot be applied to a bit-field}} */ + }; + + _Alignas(int) typedef int foo; /* expected-error {{'_Alignas' attribute only applies to variables and fields}} */ + _Alignas(int) register int bar; /* expected-error {{'_Alignas' attribute cannot be applied to a variable with 'register' storage class}} */ + _Alignas(int) void func(void); /* expected-error {{'_Alignas' attribute only applies to variables and fields}} */ + + /* FIXME: it is correct for us to accept this per 6.7.3p5, but it seems like + * a situation we'd want to diagnose because the alignments are diff erent and + * the user probably doesn't know which one "wins". + */ + _Alignas(int) _Alignas(double) int k; +} diff --git a/clang/www/c_dr_status.html b/clang/www/c_dr_status.html index 667e0f668f57d..b0a54cf0b934c 100644 --- a/clang/www/c_dr_status.html +++ b/clang/www/c_dr_status.html @@ -2042,13 +2042,13 @@ <h2 id="cdr">C defect report implementation status</h2> <td><a href="https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2148.htm#dr_401";>401</a></td> <td>C11</td> <td>"happens before" can not be cyclic</td> - <td class="unknown" align="center">Unknown</td> + <td class="full" align="center">Yes</td> </tr> <tr id="402"> <td><a href="https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2148.htm#dr_402";>402</a></td> <td>C11</td> <td>Memory model coherence is not aligned with C++11</td> - <td class="unknown" align="center">Unknown</td> + <td class="full" align="center">Yes</td> </tr> <tr id="403"> <td><a href="https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2148.htm#dr_403";>403</a></td> @@ -2072,7 +2072,7 @@ <h2 id="cdr">C defect report implementation status</h2> <td><a href="https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2148.htm#dr_406";>406</a></td> <td>C11</td> <td>Visible sequences of side effects are redundant</td> - <td class="unknown" align="center">Unknown</td> + <td class="full" align="center">Yes</td> </tr> <tr id="407"> <td><a href="https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2148.htm#dr_407";>407</a></td> @@ -2101,20 +2101,20 @@ <h2 id="cdr">C defect report implementation status</h2> <tr id="411"> <td><a href="https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2148.htm#dr_411";>411</a></td> <td>C11</td> - <td>#elif</td> - <td class="unknown" align="center">Unknown</td> + <td>Predefined macro values</td> + <td class="full" align="center">Yes</td> </tr> <tr id="412"> <td><a href="https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2148.htm#dr_412";>412</a></td> <td>C11</td> <td>#elif</td> - <td class="unknown" align="center">Unknown</td> + <td class="full" align="center">Yes</td> </tr> <tr id="413"> <td><a href="https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2148.htm#dr_413";>413</a></td> <td>NAD</td> <td>Initialization</td> - <td class="unknown" align="center">Unknown</td> + <td class="full" align="center">Yes</td> </tr> <tr id="414"> <td><a href="https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2148.htm#dr_414";>414</a></td> @@ -2150,7 +2150,7 @@ <h2 id="cdr">C defect report implementation status</h2> <td><a href="https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2148.htm#dr_419";>419</a></td> <td>C11</td> <td>Generic Functions</td> - <td class="unknown" align="center">Unknown</td> + <td class="full" align="center">Yes</td> </tr> <tr id="420"> <td><a href="https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2148.htm#dr_420";>420</a></td> @@ -2191,7 +2191,7 @@ <h2 id="cdr">C defect report implementation status</h2> <td><a href="https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2148.htm#dr_425";>425</a></td> <td>NAD</td> <td>No specification for the access to variables with temporary lifetime</td> - <td class="unknown" align="center">Unknown</td> + <td class="full" align="center">Yes</td> </tr> <tr id="426"> <td><a href="https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2148.htm#dr_426";>426</a></td> @@ -2233,7 +2233,7 @@ <h2 id="cdr">C defect report implementation status</h2> <td><a href="https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2148.htm#dr_432";>432</a></td> <td>C11</td> <td>Possible defect report: Is 0.0 required to be a representable value?</td> - <td class="unknown" align="center">Unknown</td> + <td class="full" align="center">Yes</td> </tr> <tr id="433"> <td><a href="https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2148.htm#dr_433";>433</a></td> @@ -2257,7 +2257,7 @@ <h2 id="cdr">C defect report implementation status</h2> <td><a href="https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2148.htm#dr_436";>436</a></td> <td>C11</td> <td>Request for interpretation of C11 6.8.5#6</td> - <td class="unknown" align="center">Unknown</td> + <td class="full" align="center">Yes</td> </tr> <tr id="437"> <td><a href="https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2148.htm#dr_437";>437</a></td> @@ -2305,7 +2305,11 @@ <h2 id="cdr">C defect report implementation status</h2> <td><a href="https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2148.htm#dr_444";>444</a></td> <td>C11</td> <td>Issues with alignment in C11, part 1</td> - <td class="unknown" align="center">Unknown</td> + <td class="partial" align="center"> + <details><summary>Partial</summary> + Clang rejects use of an alignment specifier in a compound literal expression. + </details> + </td> </tr> <tr id="445"> <td><a href="https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2148.htm#dr_445";>445</a></td> _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
