llvm-svn: 65582

llvm-svn: 65578

nicely sugared type that shows how the user wrote the actual
specialization. This sugared type won't actually show up until we
start doing instantiations.

llvm-svn: 65577

llvm-svn: 65574

(This is not yet used.)

llvm-svn: 65573

llvm-svn: 65571

know how to recover from an error, we can attach a hint to the
diagnostic that states how to modify the code, which can be one of:

  - Insert some new code (a text string) at a particular source
    location
  - Remove the code within a given range
  - Replace the code within a given range with some new code (a text
    string)

Right now, we use these hints to annotate diagnostic information. For
example, if one uses the '>>' in a template argument in C++98, as in
this code:

  template<int I> class B { };
  B<1000 >> 2> *b1;

we'll warn that the behavior will change in C++0x. The fix is to
insert parenthese, so we use code insertion annotations to illustrate
where the parentheses go:

test.cpp:10:10: warning: use of right-shift operator ('>>') in template
argument will require parentheses in C++0x
  B<1000 >> 2> *b1;
         ^
    (        )


Use of these annotations is partially implemented for HTML
diagnostics, but it's not (yet) producing valid HTML, which may be
related to PR2386, so it has been #if 0'd out.

In this future, we could consider hooking this mechanism up to the
rewriter to actually try to fix these problems during compilation (or,
after a compilation whose only errors have fixes). For now, however, I
suggest that we use these code modification hints whenever we can, so
that we get better diagnostics now and will have better coverage when
we find better ways to use this information.

This also fixes PR3410 by placing the complaint about missing tokens
just after the previous token (rather than at the location of the next
token).

llvm-svn: 65570

 - For types whose native representation is a pointer.

 - Use to replace ExprConstant.cpp:HasPointerEvalType,
   CodeGenFunction::isObjCPointerType.

llvm-svn: 65569

llvm-svn: 65568

 - Having pointers and references share a base was not a useful
   notion.

llvm-svn: 65567

pointer type.
 - Drops use of PointerLikeType.
 - No intended functionality change.

llvm-svn: 65566

 - No functionality change.

llvm-svn: 65563

Fix <rdar://problem/6574319> clang issues error on 'readonly' property with a defaul setter attribute.

Needed to make isPropertyReadonly() non-const (for this fix to compile). I imagine there's a way to retain the const-ness, however I have more important fish to fry.

llvm-svn: 65562

 - No functionality change.

llvm-svn: 65560

the symbol for the root meta-data.

llvm-svn: 65548

This was a fairly recent regression.

llvm-svn: 65547

llvm-svn: 65533

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

llvm-svn: 65529

Also changed ObjCInterfaceDecl::lookupClassMethod() to look through a categories protocols.

Test/patch submitted by Jean-Daniel Dupas (thanks!).

llvm-svn: 65526

pretty sure we want to keep constant expression verification outside of 
Evaluate. Because of that, the short-circuit evaluation doesn't 
generally make sense, and the comma warning doesn't make sense in its 
current form.

llvm-svn: 65525

is a rather big change, but I think this is the direction we want to go; 
the code is significantly shorter now, and it doesn't duplicate Evaluate 
code.  There shouldn't be any visible changes as far as I know.

There has been some movement towards putting ICE handling into 
Evaluate (for example, VerifyIntegerConstantExpression uses Evaluate 
instead of isICE).  This patch is sort of the opposite of the approach, 
making ICE handling work without Evaluate being aware of it. I think 
this approach is better because it separates the code that does the 
constant evaluation from code that's calculating a rather 
arbitrary predicate.

The one thing I don't really like about this patch is that 
the handling of commas in C99 complicates it signficantly. (Seriously, 
what was the standards committee thinking when they wrote that 
part?) I think I've come up with a decent approach, but it doesn't feel
ideal.  I might add some way to check for evaluated commas from Evaluate 
in a subsequent patch; that said, it might not be worth bothering.

llvm-svn: 65524

llvm-svn: 65519

 - <rdar://problem/6622451> Bad x86_64 code gen for message call taking one argument.

llvm-svn: 65510

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

variable declarations where applicable.  Also, a few fixes to 
TryToFixInvalidVariablyModifiedType for issues that this exposed.

llvm-svn: 65500

llvm-svn: 65489

derive from a class template specialization, e.g.,

  class B : public A<int> { };

llvm-svn: 65488

llvm-svn: 65487

llvm-svn: 65486

llvm-svn: 65485

  vector<vector<double>> Matrix;

In C++98/03, this token always means "right shift". However, if we're in
a context where we know that it can't mean "right shift", provide a
friendly reminder to put a space between the two >'s and then treat it
as two >'s as part of recovery.

In C++0x, this token is always broken into two '>' tokens.

llvm-svn: 65484

expressions of the form: 'short x = (y != 10);' While we handle 'int x = (y !=
10)' lazily, the cast to another integer type currently loses the symbolic
constraint. Eager evaluation of the constraint causes the paths to bifurcate and
eagerly evaluate 'y != 10' to a constant of 1 or 0. This should address
<rdar://problem/6619921> until we have a better (more lazy approach) for
handling promotions/truncations of symbolic integer values.

llvm-svn: 65480

decls. Test and document the semantic location of class template
specialization definitions that occur within a scope enclosing the
scope of the class template.

llvm-svn: 65478

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

code) when calling noreturn functions; general expression emission
isn't ready to do the right thing in all cases.

llvm-svn: 65473

 - PR3662.

llvm-svn: 65472

 - No functionality change.

llvm-svn: 65470

  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

global variable) out of GenerateStaticBlockVarDecl. 
 - No intended functionality change.
 - Prep for some mild cleanups and PR3662.

llvm-svn: 65466