[PATCH] D55307: [analyzer] MoveChecker Pt.6: Suppress the warning for the few move-safe STL classes.

a_sidorin accepted this revision. a_sidorin added a comment. I think the change is fine, just a minor stylish remark. Comment at: test/Analysis/Inputs/system-header-simulator-cxx.h:782 +namespace std { + template // TODO: Implement the stub for deleter. + class unique_ptr {

[PATCH] D55484: ComputeLineNumbers: delete SSE2 vectorization

MaskRay created this revision. MaskRay added a reviewer: bkramer. Herald added a subscriber: cfe-commits. SSE2 vectorization was added in 2012, but it is 2018 now and I can't observe any performance boost with the existing _mm_movemask_epi8 or the following SSE4.2 (compiling with -msse4.2):

[PATCH] D55483: Introduce the callback attribute and emit !callback metadata

jdoerfert created this revision. jdoerfert added reviewers: hfinkel, reames, fhahn, ABataev. Herald added subscribers: jfb, bollu. With commit rX (currently https://reviews.llvm.org/D54498), LLVM gained the ability to apply existing optimizations on indirections through callbacks. This

[PATCH] D55482: [clang-tidy] Improve google-objc-function-naming diagnostics 

stephanemoore created this revision. stephanemoore added reviewers: benhamilton, aaron.ballman. Herald added subscribers: cfe-commits, xazax.hun. The diagnostics from google-objc-function-naming check will be more actionable if they provide a brief description of the requirements from the Google

[PATCH] D47196: [Time-report ](2): Recursive timers in Clang

Trass3r added a comment. Is this still in progress? CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D47196/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D47196 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org

r348709 - SourceManager: insert(make_pair(..)) -> try_emplace. NFC

Author: maskray Date: Sat Dec 8 17:46:01 2018 New Revision: 348709 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=348709=rev Log: SourceManager: insert(make_pair(..)) -> try_emplace. NFC Modified: cfe/trunk/lib/Basic/SourceManager.cpp Modified: cfe/trunk/lib/Basic/SourceManager.cpp URL:

[PATCH] D45898: [SemaCXX] Mark destructor as referenced

rjmccall added a comment. Yeah, if we weren't exercising the code in our test suite, that would be one thing, but I think a language-mode-specific test probably isn't too valuable. Repository: rC Clang CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D45898/new/

[PATCH] D45898: [SemaCXX] Mark destructor as referenced

orivej added a comment. Actually, `arc-list-init-destruct.mm` crashes Clang 7 with the same backtrace as this test case, and Clang trunk generates similar assembly (to the the point that I could essentially copy the `// CHECK` comments from the .mm test to a .cpp test), so I'm not sure if

[PATCH] D45898: [SemaCXX] Mark destructor as referenced

rjmccall added a comment. Always worth adding more tests. Mind writing that one up as a commit? Repository: rC Clang CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D45898/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D45898 ___ cfe-commits mailing list

[PATCH] D45898: [SemaCXX] Mark destructor as referenced

orivej added a comment. Herald added a subscriber: jkorous. The committed test does not crash Clang 7, but the following test does, yet it compiles without any warnings by the current Clang trunk thanks to this fix. struct A { ~A(); }; struct B : A {}; struct C { C(); B b; }; struct D

[PATCH] D48342: [libcxx] Optimize vectors construction of trivial types from an iterator range with const-ness mismatch.

Quuxplusone added inline comments. Comment at: libcxx/include/memory:1645 -template +template _LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY ldionne wrote: > Coming at it from a slightly different angle, I would think this is what we > want: > > ``` > template

[PATCH] D55476: [libunwind] [cmake] Rename append_if to avoid collision with LLVM

mgorny created this revision. mgorny added reviewers: krytarowski, compnerd, phosek. Herald added subscribers: libcxx-commits, jfb. Rename the 'append_if' macro used in libunwind to 'unwind_append_if'. Otherwise, when used in a combined LLVM+libunwind build, it overrides the *incompatible*

[PATCH] D55270: [Sema] Further improvements to to static_assert diagnostics.

Quuxplusone added a subscriber: saar.raz. Quuxplusone added inline comments. Comment at: test/PCH/cxx-static_assert.cpp:17 -// expected-error@12 {{static_assert failed "N is not 2!"}} +// expected-error@12 {{static_assert failed due to requirement '1 == 2' "N is not 2!"}}

[PATCH] D55475: Misc typos fixes in ./lib folder

luzpaz created this revision. Herald added subscribers: cfe-commits, jfb, whisperity, nhaehnle, jvesely, jholewinski. Herald added a reviewer: teemperor. Found via `codespell -q 3 -I ../clang-whitelist.txt -L uint,importd,crasher,gonna,cant,ue,ons,orign,ned` Repository: rC Clang

[PATCH] D54450: Get the correct range of tokens for preprocessor conditions

lebedev.ri added a comment. This seems to be correct, but the test coverage could be improved. There are no tests with `()` e.g. Comment at: lib/Lex/PPExpressions.cpp:154-156 // Consume the ). -Result.setEnd(PeekTok.getLocation()); PP.LexNonComment(PeekTok); +

[PATCH] D54450: Get the correct range of tokens for preprocessor conditions

vmiklos added a comment. Next ping -- could you please review this one? Thanks! :-) CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D54450/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D54450 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org

[PATCH] D55097: [constexpr][c++2a] Try-catch blocks in constexpr functions

aaron.ballman accepted this revision. aaron.ballman added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. LGTM aside from a few other small nits. Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaDeclCXX.cpp:1904 + case Stmt::CXXTryStmtClass: +if (!Cxx2aLoc.isValid()) + Cxx2aLoc

[PATCH] D49754: Add -m(no-)spe, and e500 CPU definitions and support to clang

glaubitz added a comment. In D49754#1323642 , @vit9696 wrote: > Might the first crash from https://reviews.llvm.org/D49754#1183753 reproduce > for you or perhaps you have already bisected to trunk to figure out the > changest that fixes it? Yes, it