================
@@ -0,0 +1,171 @@
+#include "clang/Parse/ParseHLSLRootSignature.h"
+
+namespace clang {
+namespace hlsl {
+
+// Lexer Definitions
+
+static bool IsNumberChar(char C) {
+ // TODO(#120472): extend for float support exponents
+ return isdigit(C); // integer support
+}
+
+bool RootSignatureLexer::LexNumber(RootSignatureToken &Result) {
+ // NumericLiteralParser does not handle the sign so we will manually apply it
+ bool Negative = Buffer.front() == '-';
+ bool Signed = Negative || Buffer.front() == '+';
+ if (Signed)
+ AdvanceBuffer();
+
+ // Retrieve the possible number
+ StringRef NumSpelling = Buffer.take_while(IsNumberChar);
+
+ // Catch this now as the Literal Parser will accept it as valid
+ if (NumSpelling.empty()) {
+ PP.getDiagnostics().Report(Result.TokLoc,
+ diag::err_hlsl_invalid_number_literal);
+ return true;
+ }
+
+ // Parse the numeric value and do semantic checks on its specification
+ clang::NumericLiteralParser Literal(NumSpelling, SourceLoc,
+ PP.getSourceManager(), PP.getLangOpts(),
+ PP.getTargetInfo(), PP.getDiagnostics());
+ if (Literal.hadError)
+ return true; // Error has already been reported so just return
+
+ // Note: if IsNumberChar allows for hexidecimal we will need to turn this
+ // into a diagnostics for potential fixed-point literals
+ assert(Literal.isIntegerLiteral() && "IsNumberChar will only support
digits");
+
+ // Retrieve the number value to store into the token
+ Result.Kind = TokenKind::int_literal;
+
+ // NOTE: for compabibility with DXC, we will treat any integer with '+' as an
+ // unsigned integer
+ llvm::APSInt X = llvm::APSInt(32, !Negative);
+ if (Literal.GetIntegerValue(X)) {
+ // Report that the value has overflowed
+ PP.getDiagnostics().Report(Result.TokLoc,
+ diag::err_hlsl_number_literal_overflow)
+ << (unsigned)Signed << NumSpelling;
+ return true;
+ }
+
+ X = Negative ? -X : X;
+ Result.NumLiteral = APValue(X);
+
+ AdvanceBuffer(NumSpelling.size());
+ return false;
+}
+
+bool RootSignatureLexer::Lex(SmallVector<RootSignatureToken> &Tokens) {
----------------
inbelic wrote:
Understood, I have updated this to only support a
`ConsumeToken`/`PeekNextToken` api.
It could be updated further to define and be used as an iterator. Although from
how it is used in the parser (usually through `PeekNextToken`). I think it
would essentially be just renaming `ConsumeToken` to the `++` operator. Maybe
there are other benefits I don't see?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/122981
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
