Thank you for getting this patch in :)
On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 6:38 PM, Richard Smith rich...@metafoo.co.ukwrote:
Rebased, reworked a little, and submitted as r192666. Thanks! (And sorry
for the delay. Ahem.)
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 9:50 PM, Michael Han fragmentshad...@gmail.comwrote
Author: hanm
Date: Fri Sep 13 17:24:50 2013
New Revision: 190728
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=190728view=rev
Log:
Fix a comment.
Modified:
cfe/trunk/include/clang/AST/RecursiveASTVisitor.h
Modified: cfe/trunk/include/clang/AST/RecursiveASTVisitor.h
URL:
Author: hanm
Date: Thu Sep 12 15:59:33 2013
New Revision: 190632
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=190632view=rev
Log:
Add a test case to test RAV visits parameters of implicit copy constructor.
Modified:
cfe/trunk/unittests/Tooling/RecursiveASTVisitorTest.cpp
Modified:
Thank you for review. Committed as r190528.
On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 4:21 AM, Manuel Klimek kli...@google.com wrote:
lg for the testing side, with the grammar updates :)
Comment at: unittests/Tooling/RecursiveASTVisitorTest.cpp:158
@@ -146,1 +157,3 @@
+// Test RAV
Author: hanm
Date: Wed Sep 11 10:53:29 2013
New Revision: 190528
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=190528view=rev
Log:
Teach RAV to visit parameter variable declarations of implicit functions. Fixes
PR16182.
Normally RAV visits parameter variable declarations of a function by
Update patch based on comments from Richard.
Hi klimek, rsmith,
http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D958
CHANGE SINCE LAST DIFF
http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D958?vs=4045id=4182#toc
Files:
unittests/Tooling/RecursiveASTVisitorTest.cpp
unittests/Tooling/TestVisitor.h
Ping. OK to commit this one?
On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 2:27 PM, Michael Han fragmentshad...@gmail.comwrote:
Sorry for long delay of this patch. Just had a chance to get back to
this.
As Richard suggested, RAV now traverses function parameter variable
declarations instead of relying
Sorry for long delay of this patch. Just had a chance to get back to this.
As Richard suggested, RAV now traverses function parameter variable
declarations instead of relying on TypeSourceInfo of the function type to visit
the parameter variable declarations of a function when RAV is set to
Patch updated with comments.
http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D958
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@cs.uiuc.edu
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
The example in the comment has this node visiting order: VisitDecl(),
VisitNamedDecl(), VisitNamespaceDecl(), so the type of the given node
should be NamespaceDecl, not NamedDecl. OK to commit?
comment.patch
Description: Binary data
___
cfe-commits
Thanks. Commit in r189185.
Michael
On Sat, Aug 24, 2013 at 12:51 PM, James Dennett jdenn...@googlers.comwrote:
On Sat, Aug 24, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Michael Han fragmentshad...@gmail.com
wrote:
The example in the comment has this node visiting order: VisitDecl(),
VisitNamedDecl
Author: hanm
Date: Sat Aug 24 20:29:56 2013
New Revision: 189185
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=189185view=rev
Log:
Fix comment.
Modified:
cfe/trunk/include/clang/AST/RecursiveASTVisitor.h
Modified: cfe/trunk/include/clang/AST/RecursiveASTVisitor.h
URL:
Ping.
To recap: this patch fixes PR16182 (
http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=16182). OK to commit?
Thanks.
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 1:31 PM, Michael Han fragmentshad...@gmail.comwrote:
Hi klimek, rsmith,
This patch fixes PR16182
http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=16182
A valid
Make sense, fix the visitor seems better than adding the type nodes to AST
that no one would use. Will look into this. Thanks for the pointer.
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 3:53 PM, Richard Smith rich...@metafoo.co.uk wrote:
It seems strange to me to build a TypeSourceInfo for a type that was not
Ping.
Hi Richard, do you have a chance to take a look at this patch? Does this
patch make sense or there is a better way of creating type nodes for
implicit functions?
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 10:40 AM, Michael Han fragmentshad...@gmail.comwrote:
Hi Manuel,
Thank you for the comments
Rename VisitsParmVarDecl to VisitsParmVarDeclForImplicitCode and add comments
to explain what this test is doing.
Hi klimek, rsmith,
http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D958
CHANGE SINCE LAST DIFF
http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D958?vs=2361id=2373#toc
Files:
Klimek kli...@google.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 10:31 PM, Michael Han
fragmentshad...@gmail.comwrote:
Hi klimek, rsmith,
This patch fixes PR16182
http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=16182
A valid TypeSourceInfo of a function is required for the RAV to visit the
parameter
Hi klimek, rsmith,
This patch fixes PR16182
http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=16182
A valid TypeSourceInfo of a function is required for the RAV to visit the
parameter declaration of the function, and previously we don't have a valid
TypeSourceInfo when creating the function declaration of
This patch is trying to fix PR15512. For lambda with internal linkage, Itanium
ABI would mangle the names as anonymous struct and using a unique mangling
number to differentiate between different lambdas. This patch takes a similar
approach by maintaining a mangling number for local lambdas in
Comment at: lib/AST/MicrosoftMangle.cpp:485-492
@@ +484,10 @@
+
+ // Mangle local lambda in the form
+ // lambda_n
+ // where n is the lambda id.
+ SmallString64 Str;
+ Str += lambda_;
+ Str += llvm::utostr(ID);
+
Slightly change the logic of dealing with each type of attributes and add
more test cases :)
For C++11 attributes, they could be printed anywhere except at end of
declaration; for GNU attributes, we enforce that these attributes only appear
at end of declaration to prevent them printing
Thanks for pointing this out!
Maybe we can always print GNU attributes at the beginning (there are some
test cases assume GNU attributes are printed at the end so they need to be
updated.).
Another idea is instead of hard code the print position of attribute we rely
on source locations
Update patch to teach printPretty making the decision of print an attribute
or not based on an enum value that identifies where the attribute appears
around declaration and statement. For C++11 attributes, we always print them at
the start of declarations or immediately after declarator-id to
Comment at: utils/TableGen/ClangAttrEmitter.cpp:811
@@ +810,3 @@
+if (Variety == CXX11)
+ OS if (LK == 0 || LK == 1 || LK == 3) {\n;
+
Richard Smith wrote:
Each attribute should only be printed at one location.
This seems not possible using
Thanks, this sounds good.
Rather than passing an enum value to 'printPretty' that indicates where the
attributes are, how about passing an enum value to it that indicates the syntax
of the attribute so when we ask all attributes to print themselves, only the
specified syntax(es) will be
Revive an old patch :).
Richard, do you have a chance to take a look at this?
Michael.
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 6:24 PM, Michael Han fragmentshad...@gmail.comwrote:
Patch updated. Summary of change:
- Introduce a new table-gen generated function isCXX11Syntax to Attr.
- Always print
Patch updated. Summary of change:
- Introduce a new table-gen generated function isCXX11Syntax to Attr.
- Always print out C++11 attributes of a function declaration after function
declarator-id to make sure they appertain to function itself.
Hi rsmith,
Ping. Patch is updated to TOT.
Hi rsmith,
http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D395
CHANGE SINCE LAST DIFF
http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D395?vs=948id=1120#toc
Files:
lib/AST/DeclPrinter.cpp
test/SemaCXX/attr-print.cpp
test/SemaCXX/cxx11-attr-print.cpp
test/Sema/attr-print.c
Thanks Richard! You are right this is fragile and will break for cases like
inheritable attributes, which I overlooked.
The primary goal of this patch is to fix C++11 attributes printing, so I am
thinking for now we can just check if an attribute is a C++11 attribute and if
it is then
Author: hanm
Date: Mon Feb 25 12:40:11 2013
New Revision: 176035
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=176035view=rev
Log:
Fix empty declaration printing.
Don't print the semicolon when visiting an empty declaration because the
semicolon
will be printed as a terminator later.
Modified:
Author: hanm
Date: Mon Feb 25 20:00:13 2013
New Revision: 176074
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=176074view=rev
Log:
Update tests to do a full match against printed C++11 attributes.
Modified:
cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/cxx11-attr-print.cpp
Modified:
Author: hanm
Date: Fri Feb 22 11:15:32 2013
New Revision: 175900
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=175900view=rev
Log:
[Sema] Semantic analysis for empty-declaration and attribute-declaration.
Introduce a new AST Decl node EmptyDecl to model empty-declaration. Have
attributes from
Thanks Richard and Dmitri. Committed as r175900.
http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D448
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@cs.uiuc.edu
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Hi David,
Sorry for breaking the build. Yes I think it is the appropriate fix. Thanks!
Michael.
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 9:46 AM, David Blaikie dblai...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 9:15 AM, Michael Han fragmentshad...@gmail.comwrote:
Author: hanm
Date: Fri Feb 22 11:15:32
Hi rsmith,
This patch introduces a new type of Decl node Empty to model empty
declarations, and let attribute declarations appertain to EmptyDecl so these
attributes can be stored in AST.
http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D448
Files:
tools/libclang/RecursiveASTVisitor.h
Patch updated to address review comments. Thanks!
Hi rsmith,
http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D448
CHANGE SINCE LAST DIFF
http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D448?vs=1072id=1073#toc
Files:
tools/libclang/RecursiveASTVisitor.h
lib/Sema/SemaDeclCXX.cpp
lib/AST/DeclBase.cpp
Hi Richard,
For attribute declarations, are they appertaining to the translation unit
in which they are declared? If true then maybe TranslationUnitDecl is a
place to store the AST nodes for these attributes? If not what would be the
right place to store these attributes in AST? I am interested
Ping.
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 2:24 PM, Michael Han fragmentshad...@gmail.comwrote:
Hi rsmith,
This patch improves attribute printing by taking the source location of
attributes into account when print them out. Previously, we hard code the
print out locations for attributes and this has
Hi rsmith,
This patch improves attribute printing by taking the source location of
attributes into account when print them out. Previously, we hard code the print
out locations for attributes and this has some issues especially for C++11
attributes for example:
void foo [[noreturn]] (); would
Hi rsmith,
This is the updated patch that fixes alignment attribute printing by removing
IsMSDeclSpec argument from alignment attribute and using attribute syntax
accessor generated by TableGen to decide if an alignment attribute is a MS
declspec attribute.
Author: hanm
Date: Thu Jan 31 19:19:17 2013
New Revision: 174133
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=174133view=rev
Log:
[Sema][Attr]Fix alignment attribute printing.
Remove IsMSDeclspec argument from Align attribute since the arguments in
Attr.td should
only model those appear in
Thanks! Committed as r174133 with all suggested fixes.
http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D360
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@cs.uiuc.edu
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[dcl.attr.depend] also requires [[carries_dependency]] appear at most once
in an attribute list; same for [[noreturn]]. Should this be implemented as
part of semantic analysis for both attributes as well?
Michael
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 2:42 PM, Richard Smith
richard-l...@metafoo.co.ukwrote:
Ah OK. Thanks!
Michael
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 3:56 PM, Richard Smith rich...@metafoo.co.ukwrote:
This is already implemented, see test in r173645.
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 3:42 PM, Michael Han fragmentshad...@gmail.com
wrote:
[dcl.attr.depend] also requires [[carries_dependency]] appear
Author: hanm
Date: Mon Jan 28 22:13:20 2013
New Revision: 173765
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=173765view=rev
Log:
Add a test case for attribute print.
Modified:
cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/attr-print.cpp
Modified: cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/attr-print.cpp
URL:
Hi,
Attached patch fixes alignment attribute printing. It removes the
IsMSDeclSpec argument of alignment attribute, and uses the spelling list
index to decide if an alignment attribute is in the form of
__declspec(align()) or not. Please review, thanks!
Michael
attr-align-print.patch
Author: hanm
Date: Sat Jan 26 18:06:24 2013
New Revision: 173597
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=173597view=rev
Log:
Add the missing line return to align parameters of printPretty.
Modified:
cfe/trunk/utils/TableGen/ClangAttrEmitter.cpp
Modified:
Committed in r173358. Thanks for the review!
Michael
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 9:55 PM, Michael Han fragmentshad...@gmail.comwrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 9:10 PM, Richard Smith rich...@metafoo.co.ukwrote:
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 8:12 PM, Michael Han fragmentshad...@gmail.com
wrote
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 9:10 PM, Richard Smith rich...@metafoo.co.ukwrote:
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 8:12 PM, Michael Han fragmentshad...@gmail.com
wrote:
Attach updated patch with more tests added; also updated all attributes
to
include spelling index when their ast nodes are constructed
/SemaCXX/ast-print.cpp, and
test/SemaCXX/cxx11-ast-print.cpp look like good places to start.
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 7:09 PM, Michael Han fragmentshad...@gmail.com
wrote:
Agree, any suggestions on where / how to add the tests? I don't find any
existing regression tests that cover attributes print
.
Implementation of this method is generated through table-gen.
- Teach table-gen to print an attribute based on this index.
Michael
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 6:55 PM, Richard Smith rich...@metafoo.co.ukwrote:
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Michael Han
fragmentshad...@gmail.comwrote:
Hi Richard,
I
) {
default:
llvm_unreachable(Unknown attribute syntax!);
case AS_GNU:
AttrSyntax = GNU;
break;
... but, as noted above, don't do this conversion.
Thanks!
Michael
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 1:55 PM, Michael Han fragmentshad...@gmail.com
wrote:
Cool thanks. Please take a look
Attached patch should fix all issues pointed out in last review. Thanks!
Michael
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 4:01 PM, Richard Smith rich...@metafoo.co.ukwrote:
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Michael Han fragmentshad...@gmail.com
wrote:
Thanks! I have some inline comments below.
On Wed
Agree, any suggestions on where / how to add the tests? I don't find any
existing regression tests that cover attributes print.
Michael
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 6:56 PM, Richard Smith rich...@metafoo.co.ukwrote:
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 6:35 PM, Michael Han fragmentshad...@gmail.com
wrote
11, 2013 at 3:53 PM, Michael Han fragmentshad...@gmail.comwrote:
Hi,
Attached patch is to fix PR14922. Currently when print an attribute the
GNU syntax will always be used, even if the attribute has no GNU syntax.The
fix is to pass the syntax flag when constructing the Attr node and take
Hi,
Attached patch is to fix PR14922. Currently when print an attribute the GNU
syntax will always be used, even if the attribute has no GNU syntax.The fix
is to pass the syntax flag when constructing the Attr node and take that
into consideration when printing the attribute. The name of actual
Author: hanm
Date: Mon Jan 7 10:57:11 2013
New Revision: 171757
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=171757view=rev
Log:
Add fixit hints for misplaced C++11 attributes around class specifiers.
Following r168626, in class declaration or definition, there are a combination
of syntactic
Committed as r171757 with suggested fixes. Thanks for the review!
Michael
On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Richard Smith rich...@metafoo.co.uk wrote:
On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Michael Han fragmentshad...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi Richard,
Updated patch attached, please take a look
to move
+// them to right place.
... to *the* right place.
+// Parse any C++11 attributes after 'final'keyword
Missing space after 'final'. Missing full stop.
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 9:56 PM, Michael Han fragmentshad...@gmail.com
wrote:
Reviving an old patch. Is this patch OK to commit
Agreed, that makes code cleaner indeed. Attach revised patch.
Michael
On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Richard Smith rich...@metafoo.co.uk wrote:
On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Michael Han fragmentshad...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi Richard,
Updated patch attached, please take a look.
Thanks
Reviving an old patch. Is this patch OK to commit?
Cheers
Michael
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 9:39 AM, Michael Han fragmentshad...@gmail.comwrote:
Hi Richard,
Do you also have a chance to look at this patch? Please let me know if
it's OK to commit it. Thanks!
Michael
On Mon, Dec 3, 2012
=192199r2=192198pathrev=192199
Michael
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 8:01 PM, John McCall rjmcc...@apple.com wrote:
On Dec 7, 2012, at 3:08 PM, Michael Han fragmentshad...@gmail.com wrote:
This small patch forbids C++11 attributes on explicit template
instantiations, as required by C++11
at 4:09 PM, Richard Smith rich...@metafoo.co.uk wrote:
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 3:08 PM, Michael Han fragmentshad...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi,
There are a couple of places in parser where we parse attributes, then
discard them immediately because these attributes are not allowed to
appear
Patch updated. The attributes are dropped by marking as invalid so they
don't participate in semantic checking.
Cheers
Michael
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 3:41 PM, Michael Han fragmentshad...@gmail.comwrote:
I think we should. I'll update the patch.
This reminds me another place that needs a fix
Hi,
This small patch forbids C++11 attributes on explicit
template instantiations, as required by C++11 [dcl.attr.grammar] p4.
Cheers
Michael
templateattr.patch
Description: Binary data
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@cs.uiuc.edu
Hi,
There are a couple of places in parser where we parse attributes, then
discard them immediately because these attributes are not allowed to appear
on certain locations. This patch kills the unnecessary parsing by simply
skipping these attributes.
The existing attribute tests should cover all
the ParsingDeclarator after
diagnosing them?
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 3:08 PM, Michael Han fragmentshad...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi,
This small patch forbids C++11 attributes on explicit template
instantiations, as required by C++11 [dcl.attr.grammar] p4.
Cheers
Michael
Hi Richard,
Do you also have a chance to look at this patch? Please let me know if it's
OK to commit it. Thanks!
Michael
On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 11:00 AM, Michael Han fragmentshad...@gmail.comwrote:
I see. Thanks for the explanation!
Michael
On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Jordan Rose
where we're not *just* testing caret fixit emission.
Jordan
On Dec 1, 2012, at 21:05 , Michael Han fragmentshad...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Dmitri,
Thanks! Attach updated patch.
I noticed that not all test cases under clang/test/FixIt use
-fdiagnostics-parseable-fixits. Is there a reason why
:
On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 6:30 AM, Michael Han fragmentshad...@gmail.com
wrote:
This patch adds two FixIts to parser when parsing C++11 attributes
appertain
to class specifier. It is a following up patch of a previous patch [1].
Please review, thanks!
Hello Michael,
FixIts can be tested
Hi,
This patch adds two FixIts to parser when parsing C++11 attributes
appertain to class specifier. It is a following up patch of a previous
patch [1].
Please review, thanks!
Michael
[1] http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?view=revrevision=168626
fixit.patch
Description: Binary data
Author: hanm
Date: Fri Nov 30 22:35:48 2012
New Revision: 169078
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=169078view=rev
Log:
Fix a typo in comment.
Modified:
cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/SourceLocation.h
Modified: cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/SourceLocation.h
URL:
of the declarator is
finished. Thus, it seems reasonable to put the checks after function
declarators are fully parsed.
Attach tweaked patch that coveres all cases you mentioned.
Cheers
Michael
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 8:42 PM, Richard Smith rich...@metafoo.co.ukwrote:
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 6:43 PM, Michael
Author: hanm
Date: Wed Nov 28 17:17:40 2012
New Revision: 168826
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=168826view=rev
Log:
Implement C++11 [dcl.attr.grammar] p4: If an attribute-specifier-seq appertains
to a friend declaration, that declaration shall be a definition.
Modified:
...@metafoo.co.ukwrote:
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Michael Han fragmentshad...@gmail.comwrote:
Hi Richard,
I am not sure if it is possible to reject the attributes before finishing
parse of declarators, because we should only reject attributes appertain to
declarations, not to definitions, and I
Author: hanm
Date: Mon Nov 26 16:54:45 2012
New Revision: 168626
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=168626view=rev
Log:
Improve diagnostic on C++11 attribute specifiers that appear at wrong syntactic
locations around class specifiers.
This change list implemented logic that explicitly
Thanks for all the reviews! Committed as r168626 with recommended fixes.
Cheers
Michael
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 10:43 AM, Richard Smith rich...@metafoo.co.ukwrote:
Just some tiny things, then:
+// Skip C++11 attribute specifiers.
+do {
+ if (Tok.is(tok::l_square)
?
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Michael Han fragmentshad...@gmail.comwrote:
Sorry missing title in last email; resend patch with title this time..
-- Forwarded message --
From: Michael Han fragmentshad...@gmail.com
Date: Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 3:53 PM
Subject:
To: cfe-commits
Hi,
This patch implements C++11 [dcl.attr.grammar] p4: If an
attribute-specifier-seq appertains to a friend declaration, that declaration
shall be a definition. Please review.
Cheers
Michael
dcl.attr.grammar.p4.patch
Description: Binary data
___
Hi Richard,
Is the updated patch ok to commit?
Cheers
Michael
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 7:10 PM, Michael Han fragmentshad...@gmail.comwrote:
You are right, we need to process two tokens at once. Good test case :)
Attach updated patch, please take a look. Thanks!
Cheers
Michael
On Tue
Sorry missing title in last email; resend patch with title this time..
-- Forwarded message --
From: Michael Han fragmentshad...@gmail.com
Date: Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 3:53 PM
Subject:
To: cfe-commits@cs.uiuc.edu
Hi,
This patch implements C++11 [dcl.attr.grammar] p4
You are right, we need to process two tokens at once. Good test case :)
Attach updated patch, please take a look. Thanks!
Cheers
Michael
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 4:03 PM, Richard Smith rich...@metafoo.co.ukwrote:
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 11:13 AM, Michael Han fragmentshad...@gmail.com
wrote
standards:
http://llvm.org/docs/CodingStandards.html#name-types-functions-variables-and-enumerators-properly
-- Sean Silva
On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 5:52 PM, Michael Han fragmentshad...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi Richard,
Thanks for the suggestions!
Attached updated patch. The parser now
at 10:33 AM, Michael Han fragmentshad...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi,
Consider this code
class [[foo]] c [[foo]];
Clang generates diagnostic like this:
error: an attribute list cannot appear here
class [[foo]] c [[foo]];
^~~~
I think the first attribute is conforming, and it's
Hi,
Consider this code
class [[foo]] c [[foo]];
Clang generates diagnostic like this:
error: an attribute list cannot appear here
class [[foo]] c [[foo]];
^~~~
I think the first attribute is conforming, and it's the second attribute
that should be diagnosed.
Attached the patch that fixes
Hi Richard,
Shall we use CXX11gnu, warn_unused_result instead? It seems to me that
this attribute is not a clang only language extension (e.g.
[[clang::fallthrough]]), but a GNU function attribute, and I believe what we
plan to do in terms of migrating existing GNU attributes to C++11 syntax
Author: hanm
Date: Tue Nov 6 13:34:54 2012
New Revision: 167481
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=167481view=rev
Log:
Teach Clang parser to reject C++11 attributes that appertain to declaration
specifiers.
We don't support any C++11 attributes that appertain to declaration
Thanks for the review! Landed at r167481.
Cheers
Michael
-Original Message-
From: meta...@gmail.com [mailto:meta...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Richard Smith
Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2012 10:36 AM
To: Michael Han
Cc: cfe-commits@cs.uiuc.edu
Subject: Re: [cfe-commits] [PATCH] Reject C++11
Hi,
As previously discussed [1], attached patch enable Clang to reject C++11
attributes that appertain to declaration specifiers.
This also conforms to what g++ 4.8 is doing [2].
Please review, thanks!
Michael
[1]
suggestions on the best place to handle C++11 attributes that applies to types?
Cheers
Michael
-Original Message-
From: Eli Friedman [mailto:eli.fried...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 2:08 PM
To: Michael Han
Cc: cfe-commits@cs.uiuc.edu
Subject: Re: [cfe-commits] [PATCH] c++11 type
: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 3:31 PM
To: Michael Han
Cc: cfe-commits@cs.uiuc.edu
Subject: Re: [cfe-commits] [PATCH] c++11 type attribute fix
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Michael Han michael@autodesk.com wrote:
Hi Eli,
Thank you for the review!
I was using to differentiate case '[[foo
:10 PM
To: Michael Han
Cc: cfe-commits@cs.uiuc.edu
Subject: Re: [cfe-commits] [PATCH] c++11 type attribute fix
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Michael Han michael@autodesk.com wrote:
Hi Eli,
But something has already gone wrong if in [[foo]] int [[foo]] x;, both
attributes end up
Ping with updated patch against TOT.
Michael
-Original Message-
From: Michael Han
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 11:48 AM
To: 'cfe-commits@cs.uiuc.edu'
Subject: [PATCH] c++11 type attribute fix
Hi,
This patch enables Clang to apply C++11 attributes present after declaration
Hi,
This patch enables Clang to apply C++11 attributes present after declaration
specifiers to types instead of declarators, and warn on attributes that appear
at wrong place (like carries_dependency which can't be applied to types).
Please review, thanks!
Michael
typeattr.patch
Author: hanm
Date: Thu Oct 4 11:42:52 2012
New Revision: 165234
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=165234view=rev
Log:
Fix scope location when parsing GNU attributes.
For GNU attributes, instead of reusing attribute source
location for the scope location, use SourceLocation() since
Thank you for the review. Committed as r165234 with both fixes.
Thanks!
Michael
From: meta...@gmail.com [mailto:meta...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Richard Smith
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2012 10:51 PM
To: Michael Han
Cc: cfe-commits@cs.uiuc.edu
Subject: Re: [Patch] correct scope token location
Author: hanm
Date: Wed Aug 15 12:56:58 2012
New Revision: 161963
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=161963view=rev
Log:
Fix base type of ASTDeclNodeLister.
Modified:
cfe/trunk/lib/Frontend/ASTConsumers.cpp
Modified: cfe/trunk/lib/Frontend/ASTConsumers.cpp
URL:
Author: hanm
Date: Fri Aug 3 12:40:43 2012
New Revision: 161245
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=161245view=rev
Log:
Fix line endings.
Modified:
cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaDeclAttr.cpp
Modified: cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaDeclAttr.cpp
URL:
Author: hanm
Date: Mon Jul 23 13:48:41 2012
New Revision: 160635
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=160635view=rev
Log:
Refactor handler functions for thread safety attributes.
Make handler functions for thread safety attributes consistent with other
attributes handler functions
by
Thanks for the review!
Committed as r160635 with stylization fixes.
Michael
-Original Message-
From: Delesley Hutchins [mailto:deles...@google.com]
Sent: Monday, July 23, 2012 9:58 AM
To: Michael Han
Cc: cfe-commits@cs.uiuc.edu
Subject: Re: Refactor thread safety attribute sema checks
1 - 100 of 122 matches
Mail list logo
