================
@@ -1881,15 +1881,47 @@ Sema::ConditionResult
Parser::ParseCXXCondition(StmtResult *InitStmt,
}
ParsedAttributes attrs(AttrFactory);
- MaybeParseCXX11Attributes(attrs);
+ bool ParsedAttrs = MaybeParseCXX11Attributes(attrs);
const auto WarnOnInit = [this, &CK] {
- Diag(Tok.getLocation(), getLangOpts().CPlusPlus17
- ? diag::warn_cxx14_compat_init_statement
- : diag::ext_init_statement)
- << (CK == Sema::ConditionKind::Switch);
+ if (getLangOpts().CPlusPlus)
+ Diag(Tok.getLocation(), getLangOpts().CPlusPlus17
+ ? diag::warn_cxx14_compat_init_statement
+ : diag::ext_init_statement)
+ << (CK == Sema::ConditionKind::Switch);
+ else
+ Diag(Tok.getLocation(), getLangOpts().C2y
+ ? diag::warn_c2y_compat_init_statement
+ : diag::ext_c2y_init_statement)
+ << (CK == Sema::ConditionKind::Switch);
};
+ if (!getLangOpts().CPlusPlus) {
+ if (Tok.isOneOf(tok::kw_static_assert, tok::kw__Static_assert)) {
+ WarnOnInit();
+ DeclGroupPtrTy DG;
+ SourceLocation DeclStart = Tok.getLocation(), DeclEnd;
+ ParsedAttributes DeclSpecAttrs(AttrFactory);
+ // C2y replaces the init-statement in C++17 to be a declaration instead.
+ DG = ParseDeclaration(DeclaratorContext::SelectionInit, DeclEnd, attrs,
+ DeclSpecAttrs);
+ *InitStmt = Actions.ActOnDeclStmt(DG, DeclStart, DeclEnd);
+ return ParseCondition(nullptr, Loc, CK, MissingOK);
+ }
+
+ // Handle 'if (; true)' and 'if ([[...]]; true)'.
+ if (Tok.is(tok::semi)) {
+ StmtResult Null = Actions.ActOnNullStmt(ConsumeToken());
+ if (ParsedAttrs) {
+ WarnOnInit();
+ *InitStmt = Actions.ActOnAttributedStmt(attrs, Null.get());
+ } else
+ Diag(Null.get()->getBeginLoc(),
+ diag::err_c2y_first_condition_clause_is_not_declaration);
+ return ParseCondition(nullptr, Loc, CK, MissingOK);
+ }
+ }
+
// Determine what kind of thing we have.
switch (isCXXConditionDeclarationOrInitStatement(InitStmt, FRI)) {
----------------
AaronBallman wrote:
This eventually calls into `Parser::isCXXDeclarationSpecifier()` and that's
very C++-specific; it'll return "ambiguous" for `auto(` but that's definitely
not a declaration specifier in C, does special handling for `::` which seems
likely to behave incorrectly in C, etc.
I suspect we could get creative with our testing to trigger failures from this
in C mode.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/198244
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
