The code for looking up local/private method in Sema::ActOnInstanceMessage() was not handling categories properly. Sema::ActOnClassMessage() didn't have this bug.
Created a helper with the correct logic and changed both methods to use it.

llvm-svn: 65532

anymore.  If we want to reuse bits and pieces to add strict checking for 
constant initializers, we can dig them out of SVN history; the existing 
code won't be useful as-is.

llvm-svn: 65502

specializations. In particular:

  - Make sure class template specializations have a "template<>"
    header, and complain if they don't.
  - Make sure class template specializations are declared/defined
    within a valid context. (e.g., you can't declare a specialization
    std::vector<MyType> in the global namespace).

llvm-svn: 65476

  std::vector<int>::allocator_type

When we parse a template-id that names a type, it will become either a
template-id annotation (which is a parsed representation of a
template-id that has not yet been through semantic analysis) or a
typename annotation (where semantic analysis has resolved the
template-id to an actual type), depending on the context. We only
produce a type in contexts where we know that we only need type
information, e.g., in a type specifier. Otherwise, we create a
template-id annotation that can later be "upgraded" by transforming it
into a typename annotation when the parser needs a type. This occurs,
for example, when we've parsed "std::vector<int>" above and then see
the '::' after it. However, it means that when writing something like
this:

  template<> class Outer::Inner<int> { ... };

We have two tokens to represent Outer::Inner<int>: one token for the
nested name specifier Outer::, and one template-id annotation token
for Inner<int>, which will be passed to semantic analysis to define
the class template specialization.

Most of the churn in the template tests in this patch come from an
improvement in our error recovery from ill-formed template-ids.

llvm-svn: 65467

llvm-svn: 65398

llvm-svn: 65397

llvm-svn: 65396

llvm-svn: 65395

lookup to skip over names without linkage. This finishes
<rdar://problem/6127293>.

llvm-svn: 65386

external declarations to also support external variable
declarations. Unified the code for these two cases into two new
subroutines.

Note that we fail to diagnose cases like the one Neil pointed
out, where a visible non-external declaration hides an external
declaration by the same name. That will require some reshuffling of
name lookup.

llvm-svn: 65385

  - When we are declaring a function in local scope, we can merge with
    a visible declaration from an outer scope if that declaration
    refers to an entity with linkage. This behavior now works in C++
    and properly ignores entities without linkage.
  - Diagnose the use of "static" on a function declaration in local
    scope.
  - Diagnose the declaration of a static function after a non-static
    declaration of the same function.
  - Propagate the storage specifier to a function declaration from a
    prior declaration (PR3425)
  - Don't name-mangle "main"

llvm-svn: 65360

appear to be constant.  I'll probably redo this and throw it all away
later once we have codegen for BlockDeclRefExprs.

llvm-svn: 65070

llvm-svn: 64961

(as GCC does), except when we've performed overload resolution and
found an unavailable function: in this case, we actually error.

Merge the checking of unavailable functions with the checking for
deprecated functions. This unifies a bit of code, and makes sure that
we're checking for unavailable functions in the right places. Also,
this check can cause an error. We may, eventually, want an option to
make "unavailable" warnings into errors.

Implement much of the logic needed for C++0x deleted functions, which
are effectively the same as "unavailable" functions (but always cause
an error when referenced). However, we don't have the syntax to
specify deleted functions yet :)

llvm-svn: 64955

First step, handle diagnostics in StringLiteral's that are due to token pasting.

For example, we now handle:
  id str2 = @"foo" 
            "bar"
           @"baz"
           " b\0larg";  // expected-warning {{literal contains NUL character}}

Correctly:

test/SemaObjC/exprs.m:17:15: warning: CFString literal contains NUL character
           " b\0larg";  // expected-warning {{literal contains NUL character}}
           ~~~^~~~~~~

There are several other related issues still to be done.

llvm-svn: 64924

llvm-svn: 64903

llvm-svn: 64894

specialization of class templates, e.g.,

  template<typename T> class X;

  template<> class X<int> { /* blah */ };

Each specialization is a different *Decl node (naturally), and can
have different members. We keep track of forward declarations and
definitions as for other class/struct/union types.

This is only the basic framework: we still have to deal with checking
the template headers properly, improving recovery when there are
failures, handling nested name specifiers, etc.

llvm-svn: 64848

t.c:4:9: error: invalid type 'short *' to __real operator
                         __tg_choose (__real__(z), C##f(z), (C)(z), C##l(z)), 
                                      ^
instead of:
t.c:4:9: error: invalid type 'short *' to __real or __imag operator
                         __tg_choose (__real__(z), C##f(z), (C)(z), C##l(z)),
                                      ^

fixing a fixme.  It would be even fancier to get the spelling of the token, but I
don't care *that* much :)

llvm-svn: 64759

instance in Sema be a pimpl.

llvm-svn: 64718

CXXRecordDecl that is used to represent class template
specializations. These are canonical declarations that can refer to
either an actual class template specialization in the code, e.g.,

  template<> class vector<bool> { };

or to a template instantiation. However, neither of these features is
actually implemented yet, so really we're just using (and uniqing) the
declarations to make sure that, e.g., A<int> is a different type from
A<float>. Note that we carefully distinguish between what the user
wrote in the source code (e.g., "A<FLOAT>") and the semantic entity it
represents (e.g., "A<float, int>"); the former is in the sugared Type,
the latter is an actual Decl.

llvm-svn: 64716

llvm-svn: 64712

  - If a declaration is an invalid redeclaration of an existing name,
    complain about the invalid redeclaration then avoid adding it to
    the AST (we can still parse the definition or initializer, if any).
  - If the declaration is invalid but there is no prior declaration
    with that name, introduce the invalid declaration into the AST
    (for later error recovery).
  - If the declaration is an invalid redeclaration of a builtin that
    starts with __builtin_, we produce an error and drop the
    redeclaration. If it is an invalid redeclaration of a library
    builtin (e.g., malloc, printf), warn (don't error!) and drop the
    redeclaration.

If a user attempts to define a builtin, produce an error and (if it's
a library builtin like malloc) suggest -ffreestanding.

This addresses <rdar://problem/6097585> and PR2892. However, PR3588 is
still going to cause some problems when builtins are redeclared
without a prototype.

llvm-svn: 64639

DiagnoseUseOfDeprecatedDecl method.  This ensures that they
are treated consistently.  This gets us 'unavailable' support
on a few new types of decls, and makes sure we consistently
silence deprecated when the caller is also deprecated.

llvm-svn: 64612

about, whether they are builtins or not. Use this to add the
appropriate "format" attribute to NSLog, NSLogv, asprintf, and
vasprintf, and to translate builtin attributes (from Builtins.def)
into actual attributes on the function declaration.

Use the "printf" format attribute on function declarations to
determine whether we should do format string checking, rather than
looking at an ad hoc list of builtins and "known" function names.

Be a bit more careful about when we consider a function a "builtin" in
C++.

llvm-svn: 64561

llvm-svn: 64560

we can define builtins such as fprintf, vfprintf, and
__builtin___fprintf_chk. Give a nice error message when we need to
implicitly declare a function like fprintf.

llvm-svn: 64526

printf-like functions, both builtin functions and those in the
C library. The function-call checker now queries this attribute do
determine if we have a printf-like function, rather than scanning
through the list of "known functions IDs". However, there are 5
functions they are not yet "builtins", so the function-call checker
handles them specifically still:

  - fprintf and vfprintf: the builtins mechanism cannot (yet)
    express FILE* arguments, so these can't be encoded.
  - NSLog: the builtins mechanism cannot (yet) express NSString*
    arguments, so this (and NSLogv) can't be encoded.
  - asprintf and vasprintf: these aren't part of the C99 standard
    library, so we really shouldn't be defining them as builtins in
    the general case (and we don't seem to have the machinery to make
    them builtins only on certain targets and depending on whether
    extensions are enabled).

llvm-svn: 64512

etc.) when we perform name lookup on them. This ensures that we
produce the correct signature for these functions, which has two
practical impacts:

  1) When we're supporting the "implicit function declaration" feature
  of C99, these functions will be implicitly declared with the right
  signature rather than as a function returning "int" with no
  prototype. See PR3541 for the reason why this is important (hint:
  GCC always predeclares these functions).
 
  2) If users attempt to redeclare one of these library functions with
  an incompatible signature, we produce a hard error.

This patch does a little bit of work to give reasonable error
messages. For example, when we hit case #1 we complain that we're
implicitly declaring this function with a specific signature, and then
we give a note that asks the user to include the appropriate header
(e.g., "please include <stdlib.h> or explicitly declare 'malloc'"). In
case #2, we show the type of the implicit builtin that was incorrectly
declared, so the user can see the problem. We could do better here:
for example, when displaying this latter error message we say
something like:

  'strcpy' was implicitly declared here with type 'char *(char *, char
  const *)'

but we should really print out a fake code line showing the
declaration, like this:

  'strcpy' was implicitly declared here as:

    char *strcpy(char *, char const *)

This would also be good for printing built-in candidates with C++
operator overloading.

The set of C library functions supported by this patch includes all
functions from the C99 specification's <stdlib.h> and <string.h> that
(a) are predefined by GCC and (b) have signatures that could cause
codegen issues if they are treated as functions with no prototype
returning and int. Future work could extend this set of functions to
other C library functions that we know about.

llvm-svn: 64504

system. Since C99 doesn't have overloading and C++ doesn't have
_Complex, there is no specification for    this. Here's what I think
makes sense.

Complex conversions come in several flavors:

  - Complex promotions:  a complex -> complex   conversion where the
    underlying real-type conversion is a floating-point promotion. GCC
    seems to call this a promotion, EDG does something else. This is
    given "promotion" rank for determining the best viable function.
  - Complex conversions: a complex -> complex conversion that is
    not a complex promotion. This is given "conversion" rank for
    determining the best viable   function.
  - Complex-real conversions: a real -> complex or complex -> real
    conversion. This is given "conversion" rank for determining the
    best viable function.

These rules are the same for C99 (when using the "overloadable"
attribute) and C++. However, there is one difference in the handling
of floating-point promotions: in C99, float -> long double and double
-> long double are considered promotions (so we give them "promotion" 
rank), while C++ considers these conversions ("conversion" rank).

llvm-svn: 64343

llvm-svn: 64318

for non-external names whose address becomes the template
argument. This completes C++ [temp.arg.nontype]p1.

Note that our interpretation of C++ [temp.arg.nontype]p1b3 differs
from EDG's interpretation (we're stricter, and GCC agrees with
us). They're opening a core issue about the matter.

llvm-svn: 64317

Rename Sema::hasSameUnqualifiedType to QualType::isSameIgnoringQalifiers

llvm-svn: 64307

integral or enumeration type.

llvm-svn: 64256

arguments. This commit covers checking and merging default template
arguments from previous declarations, but it does not cover the actual
use of default template arguments when naming class template
specializations.

llvm-svn: 64229

template parameters.

llvm-svn: 64188

template parameters when performing semantic analysis of a template-id
naming a class template specialization.

llvm-svn: 64185

representation for template arguments. Also simplifies the interface
for ActOnClassTemplateSpecialization and eliminates some annoying
allocations of TemplateArgs.

My attempt at smart pointers for template arguments lists is
relatively lame. We can improve it once we're sure that we have the
right representation for template arguments.

llvm-svn: 64154

to a class template. For example, the template-id 'vector<int>' now
has a nice, sugary type in the type system. What we can do now:

  - Parse template-ids like 'vector<int>' (where 'vector' names a
    class template) and form proper types for them in the type system.
  - Parse icky template-ids like 'A<5>' and 'A<(5 > 0)>' properly,
    using (sadly) a bool in the parser to tell it whether '>' should
    be treated as an operator or not.

This is a baby-step, with major problems and limitations:
  - There are currently two ways that we handle template arguments
  (whether they are types or expressions). These will be merged, and,
  most likely, TemplateArg will disappear.
  - We don't have any notion of the declaration of class template
  specializations or of template instantiations, so all template-ids
  are fancy names for 'int' :)

llvm-svn: 64153

References are not objects; implement this in Type::isObjectType().

llvm-svn: 64152