[PATCH] D69218: [ASTMatchers] Add `cxxBaseSpecifier` matcher (non-top-level)

2021-04-08 Thread Stephen Kelly via Phabricator via cfe-commits 
This revision was not accepted when it landed; it landed in state "Needs 
Review".
This revision was landed with ongoing or failed builds.
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rG2f181086b5cb: [ASTMatchers] Add `cxxBaseSpecifier` matcher 
(non-top-level) (authored by nick, committed by stephenkelly).

Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218

Files:
  clang/docs/LibASTMatchersReference.html
  clang/include/clang/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchers.h
  clang/lib/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersInternal.cpp
  clang/lib/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/Registry.cpp
  clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersNarrowingTest.cpp
  clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersTraversalTest.cpp
  clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/RegistryTest.cpp

Index: clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/RegistryTest.cpp
===
--- clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/RegistryTest.cpp
+++ clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/RegistryTest.cpp
@@ -297,6 +297,17 @@
   EXPECT_TRUE(matches("int b[7];", M));
 }
 
+TEST_F(RegistryTest, CXXBaseSpecifier) {
+  // TODO: rewrite with top-level cxxBaseSpecifier matcher when available
+  DeclarationMatcher ClassHasAnyDirectBase =
+  constructMatcher("cxxRecordDecl",
+   constructMatcher("hasDirectBase",
+constructMatcher("cxxBaseSpecifier")))
+  .getTypedMatcher();
+  EXPECT_TRUE(matches("class X {}; class Y : X {};", ClassHasAnyDirectBase));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(notMatches("class X {};", ClassHasAnyDirectBase));
+}
+
 TEST_F(RegistryTest, CXXCtorInitializer) {
   Matcher CtorDecl = constructMatcher(
   "cxxConstructorDecl",
Index: clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersTraversalTest.cpp
===
--- clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersTraversalTest.cpp
+++ clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersTraversalTest.cpp
@@ -320,6 +320,15 @@
 varDecl(hasType(pointsTo(ClassX);
 }
 
+TEST(HasType, TakesQualTypeMatcherAndMatchesCXXBaseSpecifier) {
+  TypeMatcher ClassX = hasDeclaration(recordDecl(hasName("X")));
+  CXXBaseSpecifierMatcher BaseClassX = cxxBaseSpecifier(hasType(ClassX));
+  DeclarationMatcher ClassHasBaseClassX =
+  cxxRecordDecl(hasDirectBase(BaseClassX));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(matches("class X {}; class Y : X {};", ClassHasBaseClassX));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(notMatches("class Z {}; class Y : Z {};", ClassHasBaseClassX));
+}
+
 TEST(HasType, TakesDeclMatcherAndMatchesExpr) {
   DeclarationMatcher ClassX = recordDecl(hasName("X"));
   EXPECT_TRUE(
@@ -337,6 +346,15 @@
 notMatches("class X {}; void y() { X *x; }", varDecl(hasType(ClassX;
 }
 
+TEST(HasType, TakesDeclMatcherAndMatchesCXXBaseSpecifier) {
+  DeclarationMatcher ClassX = recordDecl(hasName("X"));
+  CXXBaseSpecifierMatcher BaseClassX = cxxBaseSpecifier(hasType(ClassX));
+  DeclarationMatcher ClassHasBaseClassX =
+  cxxRecordDecl(hasDirectBase(BaseClassX));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(matches("class X {}; class Y : X {};", ClassHasBaseClassX));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(notMatches("class Z {}; class Y : Z {};", ClassHasBaseClassX));
+}
+
 TEST(HasType, MatchesTypedefDecl) {
   EXPECT_TRUE(matches("typedef int X;", typedefDecl(hasType(asString("int");
   EXPECT_TRUE(matches("typedef const int T;",
Index: clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersNarrowingTest.cpp
===
--- clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersNarrowingTest.cpp
+++ clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersNarrowingTest.cpp
@@ -4400,6 +4400,13 @@
 return;
   }
 
+  DeclarationMatcher ClassHasAnyDirectBase =
+  cxxRecordDecl(hasDirectBase(cxxBaseSpecifier()));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(notMatches("class X {};", ClassHasAnyDirectBase));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(matches("class X {}; class Y : X {};", ClassHasAnyDirectBase));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(matches("class X {}; class Y : public virtual X {};",
+  ClassHasAnyDirectBase));
+
   EXPECT_TRUE(matches(
   R"cc(
 class Base {};
Index: clang/lib/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/Registry.cpp
===
--- clang/lib/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/Registry.cpp
+++ clang/lib/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/Registry.cpp
@@ -175,6 +175,7 @@
   REGISTER_MATCHER(coreturnStmt);
   REGISTER_MATCHER(coyieldExpr);
   REGISTER_MATCHER(cudaKernelCallExpr);
+  REGISTER_MATCHER(cxxBaseSpecifier);
   REGISTER_MATCHER(cxxBindTemporaryExpr);
   REGISTER_MATCHER(cxxBoolLiteral);
   REGISTER_MATCHER(cxxCatchStmt);
Index: clang/lib/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersInternal.cpp
===
--- clang/lib/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersInternal.cpp
+++ clang/lib/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersInternal.cpp
@@ -756,6 +756,7 @@
 const internal::VariadicDynCastAllOfMatcher parmVarDecl;
 const internal::VariadicDynCastAllOfMatcher

[PATCH] D69218: [ASTMatchers] Add `cxxBaseSpecifier` matcher (non-top-level)

2021-04-03 Thread Nikita Kniazev via Phabricator via cfe-commits 
nick added a comment.

In D69218#2667523 , @steveire wrote:

> What name/email should I use for the commit?

Nikita Kniazev 


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218

___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D69218: [ASTMatchers] Add `cxxBaseSpecifier` matcher (non-top-level)

2021-04-03 Thread Stephen Kelly via Phabricator via cfe-commits 
steveire added a comment.

In D69218#2654638 , @nick wrote:

> In D69218#2654614 , @steveire wrote:
>
>> @nick Sorry that getting these changes merged takes so long.
>>
>> @njames93 If you have an alternative way forward, please let us know what it 
>> is.
>>
>> Otherwise, this LGTM too and we should merge it soon unless there are 
>> objections which haven't been addressed.
>
> I had a PR in Boost that took 4 years to merge, so it is nothing new to me :D

Yes, I'm a few years trying to get 
https://steveire.wordpress.com/2019/04/30/the-future-of-ast-matching-refactoring-tools-eurollvm-and-accu/
 merged, but I've made some progress :D.

> Rebased, even though there was no conflicts.

I think `arc patch` might be a bit fickle, so it wasn't applying cleanly for me 
before.

This LGTM and there have been no further objections, and the objection from 
@njames93 seems to be addressed.

What name/email should I use for the commit?




Comment at: clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/RegistryTest.cpp:301
+TEST_F(RegistryTest, CXXBaseSpecifier) {
+  // TODO: rewrite with top-level cxxBaseSpecifier matcher when available
+  DeclarationMatcher ClassHasAnyDirectBase =

nick wrote:
> steveire wrote:
> > @nick Is this implemented in another MR? I don't see anything in your list 
> > of revisions. I think this is reasonable as is, but wondering if you intend 
> > to implement the top-level support too.
> The patch had some of the top-level matcher parts, but it cut them off when 
> rebased. I have no need in it myself and I am not sure there is any kind of 
> use for it.
If you look at the overloads of `MatchFinder::addMatcher` and compare to, say, 
the `using` declarations near the top of `ASTMatchers.h` or the types supported 
in `ASTNodeKind` or `DynTypedNode::BaseConverter`, this one is certainly 
"missing" as a supported top level node in `MatchFinder::addMatcher` (though 
it's not the only one in any case). 

That said I don't think merging this MR should depend on that feature.

Hopefully someone will submit it for review. I have the same difficulty with 
getting changes reviewed, but I can review them and get them towards approval 
and merge more easily than I can find a reviewer :).


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218

___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D69218: [ASTMatchers] Add `cxxBaseSpecifier` matcher (non-top-level)

2021-03-28 Thread Nikita Kniazev via Phabricator via cfe-commits 
nick added inline comments.



Comment at: clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/RegistryTest.cpp:301
+TEST_F(RegistryTest, CXXBaseSpecifier) {
+  // TODO: rewrite with top-level cxxBaseSpecifier matcher when available
+  DeclarationMatcher ClassHasAnyDirectBase =

steveire wrote:
> @nick Is this implemented in another MR? I don't see anything in your list of 
> revisions. I think this is reasonable as is, but wondering if you intend to 
> implement the top-level support too.
The patch had some of the top-level matcher parts, but it cut them off when 
rebased. I have no need in it myself and I am not sure there is any kind of use 
for it.


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218

___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D69218: [ASTMatchers] Add `cxxBaseSpecifier` matcher (non-top-level)

2021-03-28 Thread Nikita Kniazev via Phabricator via cfe-commits 
nick updated this revision to Diff 333728.
nick added a comment.

In D69218#2654614 , @steveire wrote:

> @nick Sorry that getting these changes merged takes so long.
>
> @njames93 If you have an alternative way forward, please let us know what it 
> is.
>
> Otherwise, this LGTM too and we should merge it soon unless there are 
> objections which haven't been addressed.

I had a PR in Boost that took 4 years to merge, so it is nothing new to me :D

Rebased, even though there was no conflicts.


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218

Files:
  clang/docs/LibASTMatchersReference.html
  clang/include/clang/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchers.h
  clang/lib/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersInternal.cpp
  clang/lib/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/Registry.cpp
  clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersNarrowingTest.cpp
  clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersTraversalTest.cpp
  clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/RegistryTest.cpp

Index: clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/RegistryTest.cpp
===
--- clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/RegistryTest.cpp
+++ clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/RegistryTest.cpp
@@ -297,6 +297,17 @@
   EXPECT_TRUE(matches("int b[7];", M));
 }
 
+TEST_F(RegistryTest, CXXBaseSpecifier) {
+  // TODO: rewrite with top-level cxxBaseSpecifier matcher when available
+  DeclarationMatcher ClassHasAnyDirectBase =
+  constructMatcher("cxxRecordDecl",
+   constructMatcher("hasDirectBase",
+constructMatcher("cxxBaseSpecifier")))
+  .getTypedMatcher();
+  EXPECT_TRUE(matches("class X {}; class Y : X {};", ClassHasAnyDirectBase));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(notMatches("class X {};", ClassHasAnyDirectBase));
+}
+
 TEST_F(RegistryTest, CXXCtorInitializer) {
   Matcher CtorDecl = constructMatcher(
   "cxxConstructorDecl",
Index: clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersTraversalTest.cpp
===
--- clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersTraversalTest.cpp
+++ clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersTraversalTest.cpp
@@ -320,6 +320,15 @@
 varDecl(hasType(pointsTo(ClassX);
 }
 
+TEST(HasType, TakesQualTypeMatcherAndMatchesCXXBaseSpecifier) {
+  TypeMatcher ClassX = hasDeclaration(recordDecl(hasName("X")));
+  CXXBaseSpecifierMatcher BaseClassX = cxxBaseSpecifier(hasType(ClassX));
+  DeclarationMatcher ClassHasBaseClassX =
+  cxxRecordDecl(hasDirectBase(BaseClassX));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(matches("class X {}; class Y : X {};", ClassHasBaseClassX));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(notMatches("class Z {}; class Y : Z {};", ClassHasBaseClassX));
+}
+
 TEST(HasType, TakesDeclMatcherAndMatchesExpr) {
   DeclarationMatcher ClassX = recordDecl(hasName("X"));
   EXPECT_TRUE(
@@ -337,6 +346,15 @@
 notMatches("class X {}; void y() { X *x; }", varDecl(hasType(ClassX;
 }
 
+TEST(HasType, TakesDeclMatcherAndMatchesCXXBaseSpecifier) {
+  DeclarationMatcher ClassX = recordDecl(hasName("X"));
+  CXXBaseSpecifierMatcher BaseClassX = cxxBaseSpecifier(hasType(ClassX));
+  DeclarationMatcher ClassHasBaseClassX =
+  cxxRecordDecl(hasDirectBase(BaseClassX));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(matches("class X {}; class Y : X {};", ClassHasBaseClassX));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(notMatches("class Z {}; class Y : Z {};", ClassHasBaseClassX));
+}
+
 TEST(HasType, MatchesTypedefDecl) {
   EXPECT_TRUE(matches("typedef int X;", typedefDecl(hasType(asString("int");
   EXPECT_TRUE(matches("typedef const int T;",
Index: clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersNarrowingTest.cpp
===
--- clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersNarrowingTest.cpp
+++ clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersNarrowingTest.cpp
@@ -4400,6 +4400,13 @@
 return;
   }
 
+  DeclarationMatcher ClassHasAnyDirectBase =
+  cxxRecordDecl(hasDirectBase(cxxBaseSpecifier()));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(notMatches("class X {};", ClassHasAnyDirectBase));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(matches("class X {}; class Y : X {};", ClassHasAnyDirectBase));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(matches("class X {}; class Y : public virtual X {};",
+  ClassHasAnyDirectBase));
+
   EXPECT_TRUE(matches(
   R"cc(
 class Base {};
Index: clang/lib/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/Registry.cpp
===
--- clang/lib/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/Registry.cpp
+++ clang/lib/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/Registry.cpp
@@ -175,6 +175,7 @@
   REGISTER_MATCHER(coreturnStmt);
   REGISTER_MATCHER(coyieldExpr);
   REGISTER_MATCHER(cudaKernelCallExpr);
+  REGISTER_MATCHER(cxxBaseSpecifier);
   REGISTER_MATCHER(cxxBindTemporaryExpr);
   REGISTER_MATCHER(cxxBoolLiteral);
   REGISTER_MATCHER(cxxCatchStmt);
Index: clang/lib/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersInternal.cpp
===
--- clang/lib/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersInternal.cpp
+++

[PATCH] D69218: [ASTMatchers] Add `cxxBaseSpecifier` matcher (non-top-level)

2021-03-28 Thread Stephen Kelly via Phabricator via cfe-commits 
steveire added a comment.

@nick I think this also might need to be rebased again, sorry.


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218

___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D69218: [ASTMatchers] Add `cxxBaseSpecifier` matcher (non-top-level)

2021-03-28 Thread Stephen Kelly via Phabricator via cfe-commits 
steveire added a comment.

@nick Sorry that getting these changes merged takes so long.

@njames93 If you have an alternative way forward, please let us know what it is.

Otherwise, this LGTM too and we should merge it soon unless there are 
objections which haven't been addressed.




Comment at: clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/RegistryTest.cpp:301
+TEST_F(RegistryTest, CXXBaseSpecifier) {
+  // TODO: rewrite with top-level cxxBaseSpecifier matcher when available
+  DeclarationMatcher ClassHasAnyDirectBase =

@nick Is this implemented in another MR? I don't see anything in your list of 
revisions. I think this is reasonable as is, but wondering if you intend to 
implement the top-level support too.


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218

___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D69218: [ASTMatchers] Add `cxxBaseSpecifier` matcher (non-top-level)

2021-03-23 Thread Stephen Kelly via Phabricator via cfe-commits 
steveire added a comment.

Does anything prevent this going in now?


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218

___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D69218: [ASTMatchers] Add `cxxBaseSpecifier` matcher (non-top-level)

2021-03-22 Thread Aaron Ballman via Phabricator via cfe-commits 
aaron.ballman added inline comments.



Comment at: clang/include/clang/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchers.h:3812-3821
 AST_POLYMORPHIC_MATCHER_P_OVERLOAD(
 hasType,
 AST_POLYMORPHIC_SUPPORTED_TYPES(Expr, FriendDecl, TypedefNameDecl,
-ValueDecl),
+ValueDecl, CXXBaseSpecifier),
 internal::Matcher, InnerMatcher, 0) {
   QualType QT = internal::getUnderlyingType(Node);
   if (!QT.isNull())

nick wrote:
> njames93 wrote:
> > I don't think the change to this matcher is warranted.
> > The `hasType` matcher that accepts a DeclarationMatcher already has support 
> > for cxxBaseSpecifier.
> > However overloading the matcher that takes a QualType matcher doesn't make 
> > sense as base specifiers have no qualifications.
> What should I use in D69000 then? It is been a very long time since I 
> developed and published these patches, but D69000 definitely requires this 
> matcher, without it I get:
> 
> ```
> llvm-project\clang\include\clang\ASTMatchers\ASTMatchersInternal.h(1569): 
> error C2338: right polymorphic conversion
> llvm-project\clang-tools-extra\clang-tidy\modernize\DeprecatedIteratorBaseCheck.cpp(200):
>  note: see reference to function template instantiation 
> 'clang::ast_matchers::internal::PolymorphicMatcher  
> (clang::ast_matchers::internal::TypeList),clang::ast_matchers::internal::Matcher>::operator
>  clang::ast_matchers::internal::Matcher(void) 
> const' being compiled
> llvm-project\clang-tools-extra\clang-tidy\modernize\DeprecatedIteratorBaseCheck.cpp(192):
>  note: see reference to function template instantiation 
> 'clang::ast_matchers::internal::PolymorphicMatcher  
> (clang::ast_matchers::internal::TypeList),clang::ast_matchers::internal::Matcher>::operator
>  clang::ast_matchers::internal::Matcher(void) 
> const' being compiled
> ```
> 
> However overloading the matcher that takes a QualType matcher doesn't make 
> sense as base specifiers have no qualifications.

`QualType` is a convenience wrapper around a `Type` and so I think it's 
reasonable based on that convenience alone. We have some matchers that return a 
`QualType`, like `asString()`, which I could imagine a user wanting to use with 
`cxxBaseSpecifier()`. e.g., `cxxBaseSpecifier(asString("SomeClass"))`


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218

___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D69218: [ASTMatchers] Add `cxxBaseSpecifier` matcher (non-top-level)

2021-03-21 Thread Nikita Kniazev via Phabricator via cfe-commits 
nick added inline comments.



Comment at: clang/include/clang/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchers.h:3812-3821
 AST_POLYMORPHIC_MATCHER_P_OVERLOAD(
 hasType,
 AST_POLYMORPHIC_SUPPORTED_TYPES(Expr, FriendDecl, TypedefNameDecl,
-ValueDecl),
+ValueDecl, CXXBaseSpecifier),
 internal::Matcher, InnerMatcher, 0) {
   QualType QT = internal::getUnderlyingType(Node);
   if (!QT.isNull())

njames93 wrote:
> I don't think the change to this matcher is warranted.
> The `hasType` matcher that accepts a DeclarationMatcher already has support 
> for cxxBaseSpecifier.
> However overloading the matcher that takes a QualType matcher doesn't make 
> sense as base specifiers have no qualifications.
What should I use in D69000 then? It is been a very long time since I developed 
and published these patches, but D69000 definitely requires this matcher, 
without it I get:

```
llvm-project\clang\include\clang\ASTMatchers\ASTMatchersInternal.h(1569): error 
C2338: right polymorphic conversion
llvm-project\clang-tools-extra\clang-tidy\modernize\DeprecatedIteratorBaseCheck.cpp(200):
 note: see reference to function template instantiation 
'clang::ast_matchers::internal::PolymorphicMatcher),clang::ast_matchers::internal::Matcher>::operator
 clang::ast_matchers::internal::Matcher(void) 
const' being compiled
llvm-project\clang-tools-extra\clang-tidy\modernize\DeprecatedIteratorBaseCheck.cpp(192):
 note: see reference to function template instantiation 
'clang::ast_matchers::internal::PolymorphicMatcher),clang::ast_matchers::internal::Matcher>::operator
 clang::ast_matchers::internal::Matcher(void) 
const' being compiled
```



CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218

___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D69218: [ASTMatchers] Add `cxxBaseSpecifier` matcher (non-top-level)

2021-03-21 Thread Nathan James via Phabricator via cfe-commits 
njames93 requested changes to this revision.
njames93 added inline comments.
This revision now requires changes to proceed.



Comment at: clang/include/clang/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchers.h:3812-3821
 AST_POLYMORPHIC_MATCHER_P_OVERLOAD(
 hasType,
 AST_POLYMORPHIC_SUPPORTED_TYPES(Expr, FriendDecl, TypedefNameDecl,
-ValueDecl),
+ValueDecl, CXXBaseSpecifier),
 internal::Matcher, InnerMatcher, 0) {
   QualType QT = internal::getUnderlyingType(Node);
   if (!QT.isNull())

I don't think the change to this matcher is warranted.
The `hasType` matcher that accepts a DeclarationMatcher already has support for 
cxxBaseSpecifier.
However overloading the matcher that takes a QualType matcher doesn't make 
sense as base specifiers have no qualifications.


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218

___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D69218: [ASTMatchers] Add `cxxBaseSpecifier` matcher (non-top-level)

2021-03-21 Thread Nikita Kniazev via Phabricator via cfe-commits 
nick added a comment.

Could you please commit the patch for me? I do not have commit rights.


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218

___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D69218: [ASTMatchers] Add `cxxBaseSpecifier` matcher (non-top-level)

2021-03-21 Thread Aaron Ballman via Phabricator via cfe-commits 
aaron.ballman accepted this revision.
aaron.ballman added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.

LGTM, thank you!


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218

___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D69218: [ASTMatchers] Add `cxxBaseSpecifier` matcher (non-top-level)

2021-03-21 Thread Nikita Kniazev via Phabricator via cfe-commits 
nick updated this revision to Diff 332151.
nick added a comment.

Lint fixes


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218

Files:
  clang/docs/LibASTMatchersReference.html
  clang/include/clang/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchers.h
  clang/lib/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersInternal.cpp
  clang/lib/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/Registry.cpp
  clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersNarrowingTest.cpp
  clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersTraversalTest.cpp
  clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/RegistryTest.cpp

Index: clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/RegistryTest.cpp
===
--- clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/RegistryTest.cpp
+++ clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/RegistryTest.cpp
@@ -297,6 +297,17 @@
   EXPECT_TRUE(matches("int b[7];", M));
 }
 
+TEST_F(RegistryTest, CXXBaseSpecifier) {
+  // TODO: rewrite with top-level cxxBaseSpecifier matcher when available
+  DeclarationMatcher ClassHasAnyDirectBase =
+  constructMatcher("cxxRecordDecl",
+   constructMatcher("hasDirectBase",
+constructMatcher("cxxBaseSpecifier")))
+  .getTypedMatcher();
+  EXPECT_TRUE(matches("class X {}; class Y : X {};", ClassHasAnyDirectBase));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(notMatches("class X {};", ClassHasAnyDirectBase));
+}
+
 TEST_F(RegistryTest, CXXCtorInitializer) {
   Matcher CtorDecl = constructMatcher(
   "cxxConstructorDecl",
Index: clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersTraversalTest.cpp
===
--- clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersTraversalTest.cpp
+++ clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersTraversalTest.cpp
@@ -320,6 +320,15 @@
 varDecl(hasType(pointsTo(ClassX);
 }
 
+TEST(HasType, TakesQualTypeMatcherAndMatchesCXXBaseSpecifier) {
+  TypeMatcher ClassX = hasDeclaration(recordDecl(hasName("X")));
+  CXXBaseSpecifierMatcher BaseClassX = cxxBaseSpecifier(hasType(ClassX));
+  DeclarationMatcher ClassHasBaseClassX =
+  cxxRecordDecl(hasDirectBase(BaseClassX));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(matches("class X {}; class Y : X {};", ClassHasBaseClassX));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(notMatches("class Z {}; class Y : Z {};", ClassHasBaseClassX));
+}
+
 TEST(HasType, TakesDeclMatcherAndMatchesExpr) {
   DeclarationMatcher ClassX = recordDecl(hasName("X"));
   EXPECT_TRUE(
@@ -337,6 +346,15 @@
 notMatches("class X {}; void y() { X *x; }", varDecl(hasType(ClassX;
 }
 
+TEST(HasType, TakesDeclMatcherAndMatchesCXXBaseSpecifier) {
+  DeclarationMatcher ClassX = recordDecl(hasName("X"));
+  CXXBaseSpecifierMatcher BaseClassX = cxxBaseSpecifier(hasType(ClassX));
+  DeclarationMatcher ClassHasBaseClassX =
+  cxxRecordDecl(hasDirectBase(BaseClassX));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(matches("class X {}; class Y : X {};", ClassHasBaseClassX));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(notMatches("class Z {}; class Y : Z {};", ClassHasBaseClassX));
+}
+
 TEST(HasType, MatchesTypedefDecl) {
   EXPECT_TRUE(matches("typedef int X;", typedefDecl(hasType(asString("int");
   EXPECT_TRUE(matches("typedef const int T;",
Index: clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersNarrowingTest.cpp
===
--- clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersNarrowingTest.cpp
+++ clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersNarrowingTest.cpp
@@ -4400,6 +4400,13 @@
 return;
   }
 
+  DeclarationMatcher ClassHasAnyDirectBase =
+  cxxRecordDecl(hasDirectBase(cxxBaseSpecifier()));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(notMatches("class X {};", ClassHasAnyDirectBase));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(matches("class X {}; class Y : X {};", ClassHasAnyDirectBase));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(matches("class X {}; class Y : public virtual X {};",
+  ClassHasAnyDirectBase));
+
   EXPECT_TRUE(matches(
   R"cc(
 class Base {};
Index: clang/lib/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/Registry.cpp
===
--- clang/lib/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/Registry.cpp
+++ clang/lib/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/Registry.cpp
@@ -172,6 +172,7 @@
   REGISTER_MATCHER(containsDeclaration);
   REGISTER_MATCHER(continueStmt);
   REGISTER_MATCHER(cudaKernelCallExpr);
+  REGISTER_MATCHER(cxxBaseSpecifier);
   REGISTER_MATCHER(cxxBindTemporaryExpr);
   REGISTER_MATCHER(cxxBoolLiteral);
   REGISTER_MATCHER(cxxCatchStmt);
Index: clang/lib/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersInternal.cpp
===
--- clang/lib/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersInternal.cpp
+++ clang/lib/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersInternal.cpp
@@ -756,6 +756,7 @@
 const internal::VariadicDynCastAllOfMatcher parmVarDecl;
 const internal::VariadicDynCastAllOfMatcher
 accessSpecDecl;
+const internal::VariadicAllOfMatcher cxxBaseSpecifier;
 const internal::VariadicAllOfMatcher cxxCtorInitializer;
 const internal::VariadicAllOfMatcher templateArgument;
 const internal::VariadicAllOfMatcher templateArgumentLoc;
Index: clang/include/clang/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchers.h

[PATCH] D69218: [ASTMatchers] Add `cxxBaseSpecifier` matcher (non-top-level)

2021-03-21 Thread Aaron Ballman via Phabricator via cfe-commits 
aaron.ballman added inline comments.



Comment at: clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersTraversalTest.cpp:329
+  EXPECT_TRUE(matches("class X {}; class Y : X {};", ClassHasBaseClassX));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(notMatches("class Z {}; class Y : Z {};", ClassHasBaseClassX));
+}

nick wrote:
> aaron.ballman wrote:
> > I'd like to see another test along these lines:
> > ```
> > struct Base {};
> > struct Intermediate : Base {};
> > struct Derived : Intermediate {};
> > ```
> > Where we test that `Derived` does not have a direct base relationship with 
> > `Base`, but does with `hasAnyBase`.
> I do not understand why it should be here. The point of this test is to 
> ensure that `hasType` can be used inside `cxxBaseSpecifier`.  The support was 
> added in D79063 without a test and I just fill the gaps. 
> 
Oh shoot, good point, we already *have* those tests. :-)


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218

___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D69218: [ASTMatchers] Add `cxxBaseSpecifier` matcher (non-top-level)

2021-03-21 Thread Nikita Kniazev via Phabricator via cfe-commits 
nick added inline comments.



Comment at: clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersTraversalTest.cpp:329
+  EXPECT_TRUE(matches("class X {}; class Y : X {};", ClassHasBaseClassX));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(notMatches("class Z {}; class Y : Z {};", ClassHasBaseClassX));
+}

aaron.ballman wrote:
> I'd like to see another test along these lines:
> ```
> struct Base {};
> struct Intermediate : Base {};
> struct Derived : Intermediate {};
> ```
> Where we test that `Derived` does not have a direct base relationship with 
> `Base`, but does with `hasAnyBase`.
I do not understand why it should be here. The point of this test is to ensure 
that `hasType` can be used inside `cxxBaseSpecifier`.  The support was added in 
D79063 without a test and I just fill the gaps. 



CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218

___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D69218: [ASTMatchers] Add `cxxBaseSpecifier` matcher (non-top-level)

2021-03-21 Thread Aaron Ballman via Phabricator via cfe-commits 
aaron.ballman added inline comments.



Comment at: clang/lib/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/Registry.cpp:182
   REGISTER_MATCHER(cxxConversionDecl);
+  REGISTER_MATCHER(cxxBaseSpecifier);
   REGISTER_MATCHER(cxxCtorInitializer);

Please keep this list sorted alphabetically.



Comment at: clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersTraversalTest.cpp:329
+  EXPECT_TRUE(matches("class X {}; class Y : X {};", ClassHasBaseClassX));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(notMatches("class Z {}; class Y : Z {};", ClassHasBaseClassX));
+}

I'd like to see another test along these lines:
```
struct Base {};
struct Intermediate : Base {};
struct Derived : Intermediate {};
```
Where we test that `Derived` does not have a direct base relationship with 
`Base`, but does with `hasAnyBase`.


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218

___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D69218: [ASTMatchers] Add `cxxBaseSpecifier` matcher (non-top-level)

2021-03-19 Thread Nikita Kniazev via Phabricator via cfe-commits 
nick updated this revision to Diff 331955.
nick added a comment.

Forgot to remove a duplicated test


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218

Files:
  clang/docs/LibASTMatchersReference.html
  clang/include/clang/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchers.h
  clang/lib/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersInternal.cpp
  clang/lib/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/Registry.cpp
  clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersNarrowingTest.cpp
  clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersTraversalTest.cpp
  clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/RegistryTest.cpp

Index: clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/RegistryTest.cpp
===
--- clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/RegistryTest.cpp
+++ clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/RegistryTest.cpp
@@ -297,6 +297,17 @@
   EXPECT_TRUE(matches("int b[7];", M));
 }
 
+TEST_F(RegistryTest, CXXBaseSpecifier) {
+  // TODO: rewrite with top-level cxxBaseSpecifier matcher when available
+  DeclarationMatcher ClassHasAnyDirectBase =
+  constructMatcher("cxxRecordDecl",
+   constructMatcher("hasDirectBase",
+constructMatcher("cxxBaseSpecifier")))
+  .getTypedMatcher();
+  EXPECT_TRUE(matches("class X {}; class Y : X {};", ClassHasAnyDirectBase));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(notMatches("class X {};", ClassHasAnyDirectBase));
+}
+
 TEST_F(RegistryTest, CXXCtorInitializer) {
   Matcher CtorDecl = constructMatcher(
   "cxxConstructorDecl",
Index: clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersTraversalTest.cpp
===
--- clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersTraversalTest.cpp
+++ clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersTraversalTest.cpp
@@ -320,6 +320,15 @@
 varDecl(hasType(pointsTo(ClassX);
 }
 
+TEST(HasType, TakesQualTypeMatcherAndMatchesCXXBaseSpecifier) {
+  TypeMatcher ClassX = hasDeclaration(recordDecl(hasName("X")));
+  CXXBaseSpecifierMatcher BaseClassX = cxxBaseSpecifier(hasType(ClassX));
+  DeclarationMatcher ClassHasBaseClassX =
+  cxxRecordDecl(hasDirectBase(BaseClassX));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(matches("class X {}; class Y : X {};", ClassHasBaseClassX));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(notMatches("class Z {}; class Y : Z {};", ClassHasBaseClassX));
+}
+
 TEST(HasType, TakesDeclMatcherAndMatchesExpr) {
   DeclarationMatcher ClassX = recordDecl(hasName("X"));
   EXPECT_TRUE(
@@ -337,6 +346,15 @@
 notMatches("class X {}; void y() { X *x; }", varDecl(hasType(ClassX;
 }
 
+TEST(HasType, TakesDeclMatcherAndMatchesCXXBaseSpecifier) {
+  DeclarationMatcher ClassX = recordDecl(hasName("X"));
+  CXXBaseSpecifierMatcher BaseClassX = cxxBaseSpecifier(hasType(ClassX));
+  DeclarationMatcher ClassHasBaseClassX =
+  cxxRecordDecl(hasDirectBase(BaseClassX));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(matches("class X {}; class Y : X {};", ClassHasBaseClassX));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(notMatches("class Z {}; class Y : Z {};", ClassHasBaseClassX));
+}
+
 TEST(HasType, MatchesTypedefDecl) {
   EXPECT_TRUE(matches("typedef int X;", typedefDecl(hasType(asString("int");
   EXPECT_TRUE(matches("typedef const int T;",
Index: clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersNarrowingTest.cpp
===
--- clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersNarrowingTest.cpp
+++ clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersNarrowingTest.cpp
@@ -4400,6 +4400,13 @@
 return;
   }
 
+  DeclarationMatcher ClassHasAnyDirectBase =
+  cxxRecordDecl(hasDirectBase(cxxBaseSpecifier()));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(notMatches("class X {};", ClassHasAnyDirectBase));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(matches("class X {}; class Y : X {};", ClassHasAnyDirectBase));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(matches("class X {}; class Y : public virtual X {};",
+  ClassHasAnyDirectBase));
+
   EXPECT_TRUE(matches(
   R"cc(
 class Base {};
Index: clang/lib/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/Registry.cpp
===
--- clang/lib/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/Registry.cpp
+++ clang/lib/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/Registry.cpp
@@ -179,6 +179,7 @@
   REGISTER_MATCHER(cxxConstructExpr);
   REGISTER_MATCHER(cxxConstructorDecl);
   REGISTER_MATCHER(cxxConversionDecl);
+  REGISTER_MATCHER(cxxBaseSpecifier);
   REGISTER_MATCHER(cxxCtorInitializer);
   REGISTER_MATCHER(cxxDeductionGuideDecl);
   REGISTER_MATCHER(cxxDefaultArgExpr);
Index: clang/lib/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersInternal.cpp
===
--- clang/lib/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersInternal.cpp
+++ clang/lib/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersInternal.cpp
@@ -756,6 +756,7 @@
 const internal::VariadicDynCastAllOfMatcher parmVarDecl;
 const internal::VariadicDynCastAllOfMatcher
 accessSpecDecl;
+const internal::VariadicAllOfMatcher cxxBaseSpecifier;
 const internal::VariadicAllOfMatcher cxxCtorInitializer;
 const internal::VariadicAllOfMatcher templateArgument;
 const internal::VariadicAllOfMatcher templateArgumentLoc;
Index:

[PATCH] D69218: [ASTMatchers] Add `cxxBaseSpecifier` matcher (non-top-level)

2021-03-19 Thread Nikita Kniazev via Phabricator via cfe-commits 
nick updated this revision to Diff 331945.
nick retitled this revision from "[clang][AST] Add `CXXBaseSpecifier` matcher 
support" to "[ASTMatchers] Add `cxxBaseSpecifier` matcher (non-top-level)".
nick edited the summary of this revision.
nick added a reviewer: aaron.ballman.
nick added a comment.

Rebased. Removed things reimplemented and landed in D81552 
 + D79063 .


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D69218

Files:
  clang/docs/LibASTMatchersReference.html
  clang/include/clang/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchers.h
  clang/lib/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersInternal.cpp
  clang/lib/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/Registry.cpp
  clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersNarrowingTest.cpp
  clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersTraversalTest.cpp
  clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/RegistryTest.cpp

Index: clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/RegistryTest.cpp
===
--- clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/RegistryTest.cpp
+++ clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/RegistryTest.cpp
@@ -297,6 +297,17 @@
   EXPECT_TRUE(matches("int b[7];", M));
 }
 
+TEST_F(RegistryTest, CXXBaseSpecifier) {
+  // TODO: rewrite with top-level cxxBaseSpecifier matcher when available
+  DeclarationMatcher ClassHasAnyDirectBase =
+  constructMatcher("cxxRecordDecl",
+   constructMatcher("hasDirectBase",
+constructMatcher("cxxBaseSpecifier")))
+  .getTypedMatcher();
+  EXPECT_TRUE(matches("class X {}; class Y : X {};", ClassHasAnyDirectBase));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(notMatches("class X {};", ClassHasAnyDirectBase));
+}
+
 TEST_F(RegistryTest, CXXCtorInitializer) {
   Matcher CtorDecl = constructMatcher(
   "cxxConstructorDecl",
Index: clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersTraversalTest.cpp
===
--- clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersTraversalTest.cpp
+++ clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersTraversalTest.cpp
@@ -320,6 +320,15 @@
 varDecl(hasType(pointsTo(ClassX);
 }
 
+TEST(HasType, TakesQualTypeMatcherAndMatchesCXXBaseSpecifier) {
+  TypeMatcher ClassX = hasDeclaration(recordDecl(hasName("X")));
+  CXXBaseSpecifierMatcher BaseClassX = cxxBaseSpecifier(hasType(ClassX));
+  DeclarationMatcher ClassHasBaseClassX =
+  cxxRecordDecl(hasDirectBase(BaseClassX));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(matches("class X {}; class Y : X {};", ClassHasBaseClassX));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(notMatches("class Z {}; class Y : Z {};", ClassHasBaseClassX));
+}
+
 TEST(HasType, TakesDeclMatcherAndMatchesExpr) {
   DeclarationMatcher ClassX = recordDecl(hasName("X"));
   EXPECT_TRUE(
@@ -337,6 +346,15 @@
 notMatches("class X {}; void y() { X *x; }", varDecl(hasType(ClassX;
 }
 
+TEST(HasType, TakesDeclMatcherAndMatchesCXXBaseSpecifier) {
+  DeclarationMatcher ClassX = recordDecl(hasName("X"));
+  CXXBaseSpecifierMatcher BaseClassX = cxxBaseSpecifier(hasType(ClassX));
+  DeclarationMatcher ClassHasBaseClassX =
+  cxxRecordDecl(hasDirectBase(BaseClassX));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(matches("class X {}; class Y : X {};", ClassHasBaseClassX));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(notMatches("class Z {}; class Y : Z {};", ClassHasBaseClassX));
+}
+
 TEST(HasType, MatchesTypedefDecl) {
   EXPECT_TRUE(matches("typedef int X;", typedefDecl(hasType(asString("int");
   EXPECT_TRUE(matches("typedef const int T;",
Index: clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersNarrowingTest.cpp
===
--- clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersNarrowingTest.cpp
+++ clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersNarrowingTest.cpp
@@ -1278,6 +1278,35 @@
   ZIsDirectlyDerivedFromX));
 }
 
+TEST_P(ASTMatchersTest, ClassHasBase) {
+  if (!GetParam().isCXX()) {
+return;
+  }
+  DeclarationMatcher ClassHasAnyDirectBase =
+  cxxRecordDecl(hasDirectBase(cxxBaseSpecifier()));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(notMatches("class X {};", ClassHasAnyDirectBase));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(matches("class X {}; class Y : X {};", ClassHasAnyDirectBase));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(matches("class X {}; class Y : public virtual X {};",
+  ClassHasAnyDirectBase));
+
+  TypeMatcher ClassX = asString("class X");
+  CXXBaseSpecifierMatcher BaseClassX = cxxBaseSpecifier(hasType(ClassX));
+  DeclarationMatcher ClassHasBaseClassX =
+  cxxRecordDecl(hasDirectBase(BaseClassX));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(matches("class X {}; class Y {}; class Z : X, Y {};",
+  ClassHasBaseClassX));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(matches("class X {}; class Y {}; class Z : Y, X {};",
+  ClassHasBaseClassX));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(notMatches("class W {}; class Y {}; class Z : W, Y {};",
+ ClassHasBaseClassX));
+  DeclarationMatcher ClassZHasBaseClassX =
+  cxxRecordDecl(hasName("Z"), hasDirectBase(BaseClassX));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(matches("class X {}; class Y : X {}; class Z : X {};",
+