Re: [PATCH] D18221: [Concepts] Implement subsection [dcl.spec.concept]p7 of the Concepts TS
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rL265868: [Concepts] Implement subsection [dcl.spec.concept]p7
of the Concepts TS (authored by nwilson).
Changed prior to commit:
http://reviews.llvm.org/D18221?vs=53103=53110#toc
Repository:
rL LLVM
http://reviews.llvm.org/D18221
Files:
cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td
cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp
cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaTemplate.cpp
cfe/trunk/test/CXX/concepts-ts/dcl.dcl/dcl.spec/dcl.spec.concept/p7.cpp
Index: cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaTemplate.cpp
===
--- cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaTemplate.cpp
+++ cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaTemplate.cpp
@@ -6920,6 +6920,15 @@
// Ignore access information; it doesn't figure into redeclaration checking.
FunctionDecl *Specialization = cast(*Result);
+ // C++ Concepts TS [dcl.spec.concept]p7: A program shall not declare [...]
+ // an explicit specialization (14.8.3) [...] of a concept definition.
+ if (Specialization->getPrimaryTemplate()->isConcept()) {
+Diag(FD->getLocation(), diag::err_concept_specialized)
+<< 0 /*function*/ << 1 /*explicitly specialized*/;
+Diag(Specialization->getLocation(), diag::note_previous_declaration);
+return true;
+ }
+
FunctionTemplateSpecializationInfo *SpecInfo
= Specialization->getTemplateSpecializationInfo();
assert(SpecInfo && "Function template specialization info missing?");
@@ -7774,6 +7783,15 @@
return true;
}
+ // C++ Concepts TS [dcl.spec.concept]p7: A program shall not declare an
+ // explicit instantiation (14.8.2) [...] of a concept definition.
+ if (PrevTemplate->isConcept()) {
+Diag(D.getIdentifierLoc(), diag::err_concept_specialized)
+<< 1 /*variable*/ << 0 /*explicitly instantiated*/;
+Diag(PrevTemplate->getLocation(), diag::note_previous_declaration);
+return true;
+ }
+
// Translate the parser's template argument list into our AST format.
TemplateArgumentListInfo TemplateArgs =
makeTemplateArgumentListInfo(*this, *D.getName().TemplateId);
@@ -7988,6 +8006,16 @@
diag::ext_explicit_instantiation_without_qualified_id)
<< Specialization << D.getCXXScopeSpec().getRange();
+ // C++ Concepts TS [dcl.spec.concept]p7: A program shall not declare an
+ // explicit instantiation (14.8.2) [...] of a concept definition.
+ if (FunTmpl && FunTmpl->isConcept() &&
+ !D.getDeclSpec().isConceptSpecified()) {
+Diag(D.getIdentifierLoc(), diag::err_concept_specialized)
+<< 0 /*function*/ << 0 /*explicitly instantiated*/;
+Diag(FunTmpl->getLocation(), diag::note_previous_declaration);
+return true;
+ }
+
CheckExplicitInstantiationScope(*this,
FunTmpl? (NamedDecl *)FunTmpl
: Specialization->getInstantiatedFromMemberFunction(),
Index: cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp
===
--- cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp
+++ cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp
@@ -6285,6 +6285,25 @@
if (!IsVariableTemplateSpecialization)
D.setRedeclaration(CheckVariableDeclaration(NewVD, Previous));
+// C++ Concepts TS [dcl.spec.concept]p7: A program shall not declare [...]
+// an explicit specialization (14.8.3) or a partial specialization of a
+// concept definition.
+if (IsVariableTemplateSpecialization &&
+!D.getDeclSpec().isConceptSpecified() && !Previous.empty() &&
+Previous.isSingleResult()) {
+ NamedDecl *PreviousDecl = Previous.getFoundDecl();
+ if (VarTemplateDecl *VarTmpl = dyn_cast(PreviousDecl)) {
+if (VarTmpl->isConcept()) {
+ Diag(NewVD->getLocation(), diag::err_concept_specialized)
+ << 1/*variable*/
+ << (IsPartialSpecialization ? 2 /*partially specialized*/
+ : 1 /*explicitly specialized*/);
+ Diag(VarTmpl->getLocation(), diag::note_previous_declaration);
+ NewVD->setInvalidDecl();
+}
+ }
+}
+
if (NewTemplate) {
VarTemplateDecl *PrevVarTemplate =
NewVD->getPreviousDecl()
@@ -7823,6 +7842,8 @@
if (isFunctionTemplateSpecialization) {
Diag(D.getDeclSpec().getConceptSpecLoc(),
diag::err_concept_specified_specialization) << 1;
+NewFD->setInvalidDecl(true);
+return NewFD;
}
}
Index: cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td
===
--- cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td
+++ cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td
@@ -2098,6 +2098,9 @@
def err_concept_specified_specialization : Error<
"'concept' cannot be applied on an "
"%select{explicit instantiation|explicit specialization|partial specialization}0">;
+def
Re: [PATCH] D18221: [Concepts] Implement subsection [dcl.spec.concept]p7 of the Concepts TS
nwilson updated this revision to Diff 53103.
nwilson added a comment.
- Address Aaron's comments by putting comments next to the magic numbers
http://reviews.llvm.org/D18221
Files:
include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td
lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp
lib/Sema/SemaTemplate.cpp
test/CXX/concepts-ts/dcl.dcl/dcl.spec/dcl.spec.concept/p7.cpp
Index: test/CXX/concepts-ts/dcl.dcl/dcl.spec/dcl.spec.concept/p7.cpp
===
--- /dev/null
+++ test/CXX/concepts-ts/dcl.dcl/dcl.spec/dcl.spec.concept/p7.cpp
@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c++14 -fconcepts-ts -x c++ -verify %s
+
+template concept bool FCEI() { return true; } // expected-note {{previous declaration is here}} expected-note {{previous declaration is here}}
+template bool FCEI(); // expected-error {{function concept cannot be explicitly instantiated}}
+extern template bool FCEI(); // expected-error {{function concept cannot be explicitly instantiated}}
+
+template concept bool FCES() { return true; } // expected-note {{previous declaration is here}}
+template <> bool FCES() { return true; } // expected-error {{function concept cannot be explicitly specialized}}
+
+template concept bool VC { true }; // expected-note {{previous declaration is here}} expected-note {{previous declaration is here}}
+template bool VC; // expected-error {{variable concept cannot be explicitly instantiated}}
+extern template bool VC; // expected-error {{variable concept cannot be explicitly instantiated}}
+
+template concept bool VCES { true }; // expected-note {{previous declaration is here}}
+template <> bool VCES { true }; // expected-error {{variable concept cannot be explicitly specialized}}
+
+template concept bool VCPS { true }; // expected-note {{previous declaration is here}}
+template bool VCPS { true }; // expected-error {{variable concept cannot be partially specialized}}
Index: lib/Sema/SemaTemplate.cpp
===
--- lib/Sema/SemaTemplate.cpp
+++ lib/Sema/SemaTemplate.cpp
@@ -6920,6 +6920,15 @@
// Ignore access information; it doesn't figure into redeclaration checking.
FunctionDecl *Specialization = cast(*Result);
+ // C++ Concepts TS [dcl.spec.concept]p7: A program shall not declare [...]
+ // an explicit specialization (14.8.3) [...] of a concept definition.
+ if (Specialization->getPrimaryTemplate()->isConcept()) {
+Diag(FD->getLocation(), diag::err_concept_specialized)
+<< 0 /*function*/ << 1 /*explicitly specialized*/;
+Diag(Specialization->getLocation(), diag::note_previous_declaration);
+return true;
+ }
+
FunctionTemplateSpecializationInfo *SpecInfo
= Specialization->getTemplateSpecializationInfo();
assert(SpecInfo && "Function template specialization info missing?");
@@ -7774,6 +7783,15 @@
return true;
}
+ // C++ Concepts TS [dcl.spec.concept]p7: A program shall not declare an
+ // explicit instantiation (14.8.2) [...] of a concept definition.
+ if (PrevTemplate->isConcept()) {
+Diag(D.getIdentifierLoc(), diag::err_concept_specialized)
+<< 1 /*variable*/ << 0 /*explicitly instantiated*/;
+Diag(PrevTemplate->getLocation(), diag::note_previous_declaration);
+return true;
+ }
+
// Translate the parser's template argument list into our AST format.
TemplateArgumentListInfo TemplateArgs =
makeTemplateArgumentListInfo(*this, *D.getName().TemplateId);
@@ -7988,6 +8006,16 @@
diag::ext_explicit_instantiation_without_qualified_id)
<< Specialization << D.getCXXScopeSpec().getRange();
+ // C++ Concepts TS [dcl.spec.concept]p7: A program shall not declare an
+ // explicit instantiation (14.8.2) [...] of a concept definition.
+ if (FunTmpl && FunTmpl->isConcept() &&
+ !D.getDeclSpec().isConceptSpecified()) {
+Diag(D.getIdentifierLoc(), diag::err_concept_specialized)
+<< 0 /*function*/ << 0 /*explicitly instantiated*/;
+Diag(FunTmpl->getLocation(), diag::note_previous_declaration);
+return true;
+ }
+
CheckExplicitInstantiationScope(*this,
FunTmpl? (NamedDecl *)FunTmpl
: Specialization->getInstantiatedFromMemberFunction(),
Index: lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp
===
--- lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp
+++ lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp
@@ -6285,6 +6285,25 @@
if (!IsVariableTemplateSpecialization)
D.setRedeclaration(CheckVariableDeclaration(NewVD, Previous));
+// C++ Concepts TS [dcl.spec.concept]p7: A program shall not declare [...]
+// an explicit specialization (14.8.3) or a partial specialization of a
+// concept definition.
+if (IsVariableTemplateSpecialization &&
+!D.getDeclSpec().isConceptSpecified() && !Previous.empty() &&
+Previous.isSingleResult()) {
+ NamedDecl *PreviousDecl = Previous.getFoundDecl();
+
Re: [PATCH] D18221: [Concepts] Implement subsection [dcl.spec.concept]p7 of the Concepts TS
aaron.ballman added a comment. Generally looks good to me, but you should wait for @rsmith as he may have other ideas on the error recovery. Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp:6295 @@ +6294,3 @@ + Diag(NewVD->getLocation(), diag::err_concept_specialized) + << 1 << (IsPartialSpecialization ? 2 : 1); + Diag(VarTmpl->getLocation(), diag::note_previous_declaration); Can you put comments near the magic numbers to describe what they mean? e.g., `1 /*variable*/` Same comment applies elsewhere in the patch as well. http://reviews.llvm.org/D18221 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D18221: [Concepts] Implement subsection [dcl.spec.concept]p7 of the Concepts TS
nwilson added inline comments.
Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp:7837
@@ -7819,1 +7836,3 @@
+NewFD->setInvalidDecl(true);
+return NewFD;
}
Please let me know if there are thoughts about better error recovery here. I
did this because we don't have the specifier information when checking an
explicit specialization. So, we still diagnose for the explication
specialization (one of the checks in this patch), when `concept` is specified,
e.g.:
template concept bool C() { return true; }
template <> concept bool C() { return true; }
Would it be okay to pass `Declarator` to
Sema::CheckFunctionTemplateSpecialization?
http://reviews.llvm.org/D18221
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
