ilya-biryukov wrote:
I have also left a few comments in the parallel discussion on the RFC.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106730
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-com
@@ -3158,6 +3161,33 @@ checkBuiltinTemplateIdType(Sema &SemaRef,
BuiltinTemplateDecl *BTD,
int64_t N = Index.getExtValue();
return Ts.getPackAsArray()[N].getAsType();
}
+ case BTK__type_pack_dedup: {
+assert(Converted.size() == 2 && "__builtin_type_pack_dedup sh
ilya-biryukov wrote:
Friendly ping for another round of review.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106730
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106730
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106730
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106730
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -266,6 +262,20 @@ void Sema::inferLifetimeBoundAttribute(FunctionDecl *FD) {
LifetimeBoundAttr::CreateImplicit(Context, FD->getLocation()));
}
}
+ } else if (auto *CanonDecl = FD->getCanonicalDecl(); FD != CanonDecl) {
+// Propagate the lifetimeb
@@ -462,14 +462,16 @@ static void visitFunctionCallArguments(IndirectLocalPath
&Path, Expr *Call,
}
}
- for (unsigned I = 0,
-N = std::min(Callee->getNumParams(), Args.size());
- I != N; ++I) {
-if (CheckCoroCall || Callee->getParamDecl(I)->ha
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/88893
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/88893
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -3158,6 +3161,33 @@ checkBuiltinTemplateIdType(Sema &SemaRef,
BuiltinTemplateDecl *BTD,
int64_t N = Index.getExtValue();
return Ts.getPackAsArray()[N].getAsType();
}
+ case BTK__type_pack_dedup: {
+assert(Converted.size() == 2 && "__builtin_type_pack_dedup sh
ilya-biryukov wrote:
> I don't think the rfc has reached its conclusion yet, and consensus has not
> been called (for example, i still need to think about whether my questions
> were addressed) so we should wait for the RFC process before continuing with
> that PR.
>
> Thanks
Thanks for expl
@@ -3158,6 +3161,33 @@ checkBuiltinTemplateIdType(Sema &SemaRef,
BuiltinTemplateDecl *BTD,
int64_t N = Index.getExtValue();
return Ts.getPackAsArray()[N].getAsType();
}
+ case BTK__type_list_dedup: {
+assert(Converted.size() == 2 &&
+ "__type_list_dedu
@@ -0,0 +1,57 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 %s -verify
ilya-biryukov wrote:
Done. I have also added a few tests with arrays and pointers, which should also
exhibit a few more combinations of types that subsume qualifiers and could be
different when canonical/non-canon
@@ -309,7 +309,10 @@ enum BuiltinTemplateKind : int {
BTK__make_integer_seq,
/// This names the __type_pack_element BuiltinTemplateDecl.
- BTK__type_pack_element
+ BTK__type_pack_element,
+
+ /// This names the __type_list_dedup BuiltinTemplateDecl.
ily
@@ -309,7 +309,10 @@ enum BuiltinTemplateKind : int {
BTK__make_integer_seq,
/// This names the __type_pack_element BuiltinTemplateDecl.
- BTK__type_pack_element
+ BTK__type_pack_element,
+
+ /// This names the __type_list_dedup BuiltinTemplateDecl.
+ BTK__type_list_de
ilya-biryukov wrote:
@AaronBallman @cor3ntin I believe we are getting close to finalizing this PR.
Would you be okay with this feature landing and myself approving this when it's
ready?
There was some discussion here and in the RFC, but I don't think there was
explicit approval (or objection)
@@ -743,6 +743,12 @@ void InitListChecker::FillInEmptyInitForField(unsigned
Init, FieldDecl *Field,
ILE->updateInit(SemaRef.Context, Init, Filler);
return;
}
+
+if (Field->hasAttr()) {
+ SemaRef.Diag(ILE->getExprLoc(), diag::warn_field_requires_expli
@@ -1472,3 +1472,49 @@ template struct Outer {
};
};
Outer::Inner outerinner;
+
+void aggregate() {
+ struct S {
+[[clang::requires_explicit_initialization]] int x;
+int y;
+int z = 12;
+[[clang::requires_explicit_initialization]] int q = 100;
+static voi
@@ -2148,6 +2158,19 @@ void
CXXRecordDecl::completeDefinition(CXXFinalOverriderMap *FinalOverriders) {
for (conversion_iterator I = conversion_begin(), E = conversion_end();
I != E; ++I)
I.setAccess((*I)->getAccess());
+
+ ASTContext &Context = getASTContext();
+
@@ -743,6 +743,12 @@ void InitListChecker::FillInEmptyInitForField(unsigned
Init, FieldDecl *Field,
ILE->updateInit(SemaRef.Context, Init, Filler);
return;
}
+
+if (Field->hasAttr()) {
+ SemaRef.Diag(ILE->getExprLoc(), diag::warn_field_requires_expli
@@ -119,6 +119,14 @@ FIELD(HasInitMethod, 1, NO_MERGE)
/// within anonymous unions or structs.
FIELD(HasInClassInitializer, 1, NO_MERGE)
+/// Custom attribute that is True if any field is marked as explicit in a type
ilya-biryukov wrote:
Suggestion: could we
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov commented:
See my comment about `VerifyOnly` and duplicate diagnostics.
The rest are small NITs.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/102040
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llv
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/102040
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108197
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov approved this pull request.
LGTM from my side if all other tests pass.
Given that it's a small change and bugfix, I think it should be okay to land
this without waiting for other reviewers. We could always follow up with more
fixes if they have additional commen
@@ -113,9 +113,11 @@ class TreeTransform {
class ForgetPartiallySubstitutedPackRAII {
Derived &Self;
TemplateArgument Old;
+Sema::ArgumentPackSubstitutionIndexRAII ResetPackSubstIndex;
ilya-biryukov wrote:
Could you add a short comment mentioning
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108197
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
ilya-biryukov wrote:
I have spent some time poking at the code and looking at the debugger and came
up with a smaller repro, see https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/6ccPPd6hz:
```cpp
int bar(...);
template struct Int {};
template
constexpr auto foo(T... x) -> decltype(bar(T(x)...)) { return 1; }
temp
ilya-biryukov wrote:
Other than the test, the idea of the change does seem correct, here's the
relevant comment from `Sema.h`:
```cpp
/// The current index into pack expansion arguments that will be
/// used for substitution of parameter packs.
///
/// The pack expansion index will be -1 to indi
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov commented:
Sorry for not looking closer yet, but could we get a test case?
It would make it much easier to review this change.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108197
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@li
@@ -38,9 +40,11 @@
#include "clang/Sema/Template.h"
#include "clang/Sema/TemplateDeduction.h"
#include "llvm/ADT/BitVector.h"
+#include "llvm/ADT/DenseSet.h"
#include "llvm/ADT/SmallBitVector.h"
#include "llvm/ADT/SmallString.h"
#include "llvm/ADT/StringExtras.h"
+#include "
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106730
>From a46885df62ff64f355abb010f778d84309acd10f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Ilya Biryukov
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2024 17:27:26 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 1/5] [Clang] Add __type_list_dedup builtin to deduplicate
@@ -309,7 +309,10 @@ enum BuiltinTemplateKind : int {
BTK__make_integer_seq,
/// This names the __type_pack_element BuiltinTemplateDecl.
- BTK__type_pack_element
+ BTK__type_pack_element,
+
+ /// This names the __type_list_dedup BuiltinTemplateDecl.
+ BTK__type_list_de
@@ -309,7 +309,10 @@ enum BuiltinTemplateKind : int {
BTK__make_integer_seq,
/// This names the __type_pack_element BuiltinTemplateDecl.
- BTK__type_pack_element
+ BTK__type_pack_element,
+
+ /// This names the __type_list_dedup BuiltinTemplateDecl.
+ BTK__type_list_de
@@ -2133,6 +2142,18 @@ void
CXXRecordDecl::completeDefinition(CXXFinalOverriderMap *FinalOverriders) {
for (conversion_iterator I = conversion_begin(), E = conversion_end();
I != E; ++I)
I.setAccess((*I)->getAccess());
+
+ ASTContext &Context = getASTContext();
+
@@ -1472,3 +1472,25 @@ template struct Outer {
};
};
Outer::Inner outerinner;
+
+void aggregate() {
ilya-biryukov wrote:
Could we add examples from @AaronBallman's [RFC
comment](https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-add-clang-attribute-to-ensure-that-fields-are-
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov commented:
I think there are some good parallel disscussions happening in the RFC, but
despite their outcomes, we could probably update the PR to capture current
behavior in those interesting cases.
I left a few comments along those lines, PTAL.
https://githu
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/102040
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
ilya-biryukov wrote:
> To better understand the motivation, I have two questions:
>
> * Why do you give Clang module maps describing modules that are already
> described in PCM files? Unless the module map describes some other top-level
> module that's yet to be built, the information it provi
ilya-biryukov wrote:
@ChuanqiXu9 thanks for taking a look! Makes sense to give others a chance to
chime in, I will wait for more comments.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/88893
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://
ilya-biryukov wrote:
I still need to add code that preserves source locations for template arguments
and tests for it, but otherwise this is ready for review and I would like to
get some initial feedback.
The RFC did not get any comments so far, but also happy to discuss the general
design th
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106730
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106730
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106730
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov ready_for_review
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106730
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106730
>From a46885df62ff64f355abb010f778d84309acd10f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Ilya Biryukov
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2024 17:27:26 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] [Clang] Add __type_list_dedup builtin to deduplicate
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106730
>From a46885df62ff64f355abb010f778d84309acd10f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Ilya Biryukov
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2024 17:27:26 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] [Clang] Add __type_list_dedup builtin to deduplicate
@@ -1472,3 +1472,25 @@ template struct Outer {
};
};
Outer::Inner outerinner;
+
+void aggregate() {
+ struct B {
+[[clang::explicit_init]] int f1;
+ };
+
+ struct S : B { // expected-warning {{uninitialized}}
+int f2;
+int f3 [[clang::explicit_init]];
+ };
+
+
@@ -1419,6 +1419,28 @@ is not specified.
}];
}
+def ExplicitInitDocs : Documentation {
+ let Category = DocCatField;
+ let Content = [{
+The ``clang::explicit_init`` attribute indicates that the field must be
+initialized explicitly by the caller when the class is construc
@@ -146,9 +148,24 @@ class ASTWalker : public RecursiveASTVisitor {
//
// If it's an enum constant, it must be due to prior decl. Report
references
// to it when qualifier isn't a type.
-if (llvm::isa(FD)) {
- if (!DRE->getQualifier() || DRE->getQualifier(
ilya-biryukov wrote:
RFC for this change:
https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-adding-builtin-for-deduplicating-type-lists/80986
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106730
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.or
@@ -146,9 +148,24 @@ class ASTWalker : public RecursiveASTVisitor {
//
// If it's an enum constant, it must be due to prior decl. Report
references
// to it when qualifier isn't a type.
-if (llvm::isa(FD)) {
- if (!DRE->getQualifier() || DRE->getQualifier(
@@ -534,6 +534,8 @@ TEST(WalkAST, Enums) {
testWalk(R"(namespace ns { enum E { A = 42 }; }
struct S { using ns::E::A; };)",
"int e = S::^A;");
+ testWalk(R"(namespace ns { enum E { $explicit^A = 42 }; })",
+ "namespace z = ns; int e = z::^A
@@ -146,9 +148,24 @@ class ASTWalker : public RecursiveASTVisitor {
//
// If it's an enum constant, it must be due to prior decl. Report
references
// to it when qualifier isn't a type.
-if (llvm::isa(FD)) {
- if (!DRE->getQualifier() || DRE->getQualifier(
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov approved this pull request.
Still LGTM. See one minor comment about the code style, but up to you if you
want to apply it or not.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106706
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commit
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106706
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106730
>From 0151fbf9a8cea2d1c60dc399f088258dd94ad562 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Ilya Biryukov
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2024 17:27:26 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [Clang] Add __type_list_dedup builtin to deduplicate
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106730
…e arguments
This allows to deduplicate the type lists efficiently in C++. It is possible to
achieve the same effect via template metaprogramming, but performance of the
resulting code is much lower than
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov approved this pull request.
LGTM. See a small suggestion about adding another test too.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106706
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106706
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -534,6 +534,8 @@ TEST(WalkAST, Enums) {
testWalk(R"(namespace ns { enum E { A = 42 }; }
struct S { using ns::E::A; };)",
"int e = S::^A;");
+ testWalk(R"(namespace ns { enum E { $explicit^A = 42 }; })",
+ "namespace z = ns; int e = z::^A
@@ -1419,6 +1419,28 @@ is not specified.
}];
}
+def ExplicitInitDocs : Documentation {
+ let Category = DocCatField;
+ let Content = [{
+The ``clang::explicit_init`` attribute indicates that the field must be
+initialized explicitly by the caller when the class is construc
@@ -1472,3 +1472,25 @@ template struct Outer {
};
};
Outer::Inner outerinner;
+
+void aggregate() {
+ struct B {
+[[clang::explicit_init]] int f1;
+ };
+
+ struct S : B { // expected-warning {{uninitialized}}
+int f2;
+int f3 [[clang::explicit_init]];
+ };
+
+
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov commented:
I hope folks are ok with me chiming in as a reviewer for this.
I've left quite a few comments in the RFC and is also supportive of landing
this change and happy to invest into supporting it going forward inside our
team.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/102040
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -453,6 +454,61 @@ TEST_F(SourceManagerTest,
loadedSLocEntryIsInTheSameTranslationUnit) {
#if defined(LLVM_ON_UNIX)
+TEST_F(SourceManagerTest, ResetsIncludeLocMap) {
ilya-biryukov wrote:
Suggestion: add a comment explaining what this aims to test at a mor
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov approved this pull request.
LGMT with a small suggestion.
Thanks for getting the test in!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106241
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106241
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -194,13 +236,15 @@ struct llvm::TimeTraceProfiler {
J.attribute("pid", Pid);
J.attribute("tid", int64_t(Tid));
J.attribute("ts", StartUs);
-if (E.AsyncEvent) {
+if (TimeTraceEventType::AsyncEvent == E.EventType) {
J.attribut
@@ -406,34 +450,50 @@ TimeTraceProfilerEntry
*llvm::timeTraceProfilerBegin(StringRef Name,
StringRef Detail) {
if (TimeTraceProfilerInstance != nullptr)
return TimeTraceProfilerInstance->begin(
-std::string(Nam
@@ -104,6 +105,23 @@ struct llvm::TimeTraceProfilerEntry {
}
};
+struct InProgressEntry {
+ std::unique_ptr Event;
+ std::vector InstantEvents;
+
+ InProgressEntry(TimePointType &&S, TimePointType &&E, std::string &&N,
ilya-biryukov wrote:
Suggestion: re
@@ -83,6 +83,8 @@ namespace llvm {
class raw_pwrite_stream;
+enum class TimeTraceEventType { CompleteEvent, InstantEvent, AsyncEvent };
ilya-biryukov wrote:
It would be useful to add a comment explaining what different event types are
about (e.g. it would m
@@ -104,6 +105,23 @@ struct llvm::TimeTraceProfilerEntry {
}
};
+struct InProgressEntry {
+ std::unique_ptr Event;
+ std::vector InstantEvents;
+
+ InProgressEntry(TimePointType &&S, TimePointType &&E, std::string &&N,
+ std::string &&Dt, TimeTraceEventTy
@@ -75,18 +76,18 @@ struct llvm::TimeTraceProfilerEntry {
const std::string Name;
TimeTraceMetadata Metadata;
- const bool AsyncEvent = false;
+ TimeTraceEventType EventType;
ilya-biryukov wrote:
Let's assign the default to avoid accidentally having uni
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/103039
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov commented:
I have left quite a few comments, but they are mostly about the code style.
I think this looks really good overall and almost ready to land.
Could you split the change to Sema into a separate PR so that we have time
profiler changes separately?
https
@@ -104,6 +105,23 @@ struct llvm::TimeTraceProfilerEntry {
}
};
+struct InProgressEntry {
+ std::unique_ptr Event;
ilya-biryukov wrote:
Could we store it directly as `TimeTraceProfilerEntry` without unique_ptr?
We are already creating `InProgressEntry` in
@@ -92,13 +94,17 @@ struct TimeTraceMetadata {
bool isEmpty() const { return Detail.empty() && File.empty(); }
};
+struct TimeTraceProfilerEntry;
ilya-biryukov wrote:
The idea of sharing most code and configuring only the relevant bits we need to
write for
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov requested changes to this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/103039
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -1255,8 +1256,12 @@ Parser::DeclGroupPtrTy
Parser::ParseDeclarationOrFunctionDefinition(
// Add an enclosing time trace scope for a bunch of small scopes with
// "EvaluateAsConstExpr".
llvm::TimeTraceScope TimeScope("ParseDeclarationOrFunctionDefinition", [&]()
{
-
@@ -223,15 +223,15 @@ Frontend (test.cc)
| | | | EvaluateAsRValue ()
| | | EvaluateAsBooleanCondition ()
| | | | EvaluateAsRValue ()
-| ParseDeclarationOrFunctionDefinition (test.cc:16:1)
+| ParseDeclarationOrFunctionDefinition (test.cc:16)
| | ParseFunctionDefinition (slow_te
@@ -1255,8 +1256,12 @@ Parser::DeclGroupPtrTy
Parser::ParseDeclarationOrFunctionDefinition(
// Add an enclosing time trace scope for a bunch of small scopes with
// "EvaluateAsConstExpr".
llvm::TimeTraceScope TimeScope("ParseDeclarationOrFunctionDefinition", [&]()
{
-
@@ -1255,8 +1256,12 @@ Parser::DeclGroupPtrTy
Parser::ParseDeclarationOrFunctionDefinition(
// Add an enclosing time trace scope for a bunch of small scopes with
// "EvaluateAsConstExpr".
llvm::TimeTraceScope TimeScope("ParseDeclarationOrFunctionDefinition", [&]()
{
-
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov commented:
Suggestion: could we update the PR title to say something like "Output location
in separate fields of `-ftime-trace`"?
"properly" is open to interpretation and requires reading the full change
description.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/1
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106277
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -350,6 +350,7 @@ void SourceManager::clearIDTables() {
LastLineNoContentCache = nullptr;
LastFileIDLookup = FileID();
+ IncludedLocMap.clear();
ilya-biryukov wrote:
Is there a way to write a unit test checking this behavior?
SourceManager should be r
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov requested changes to this pull request.
This looks good, but I wanted to explore if we could write a unit test for
this...
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106241
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106241
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov approved this pull request.
LGTM.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/105844
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -181,9 +187,18 @@ class TimeTraceScope {
Entry = timeTraceProfilerBegin(Name, Detail);
}
TimeTraceScope(StringRef Name,
ilya-biryukov wrote:
We should not use the `TimeTraceScope` for instant events at all.
It does not make much sense to deal with
ilya-biryukov wrote:
> r3 is in 2 weeks and we have to be more conservatives in our backports, so it
> really depends on how long it took you and @ilya-biryukov to address these
> issues and the complexity of the patches.
>
> In particular, I would be surprised if the attribute case impacts ma
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100985
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100985
>From d35544d971f073f98fba047cfcbe3cfe92dd78c4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Ivana Ivanovska
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2024 08:08:00 +
Subject: [PATCH 1/4] Surface error for plain return statement in coroutin
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov approved this pull request.
Thanks! The changes LG, I'll wait until premerge checks finish and merge it
into mainline.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100985
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llv
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100985
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -684,6 +684,19 @@ bool Sema::checkFinalSuspendNoThrow(const Stmt
*FinalSuspend) {
return ThrowingDecls.empty();
}
+// [stmt.return.coroutine]p1:
+// A coroutine shall not enclose a return statement ([stmt.return]).
+static void checkReturnStmtInCoroutine(Sema &S, Funct
https://github.com/ilya-biryukov requested changes to this pull request.
The `assert` condition seems wrong, otherwise this should be good to go.
I've also left one more suggestion to leave a comment that I missed in the
original review since we need another round anyway.
https://github.com/ll
@@ -694,6 +707,9 @@ bool Sema::ActOnCoroutineBodyStart(Scope *SC,
SourceLocation KWLoc,
auto *ScopeInfo = getCurFunction();
assert(ScopeInfo->CoroutinePromise);
+ if (ScopeInfo->FirstCoroutineStmtLoc == KWLoc)
ilya-biryukov wrote:
NIT: add a comment exp
@@ -291,6 +318,50 @@ void mixed_coreturn_template2(bool b, T) {
return; // expected-error {{not allowed in coroutine}}
}
+struct promise_handle;
+
+struct Handle : std::coroutine_handle { // expected-note
4{{not viable}}
+// expected-note@-1 4{{not viable}}
+using
1 - 100 of 1048 matches
Mail list logo
