Fix PR8625 and correctly interpret member-calls to static members when

producing warnings.

This feels really fragile, and I've not audited all other argument index-based
warnings. I suspect we'll grow this bug on another warning eventually. It might
be nice to adjust the argument indices when building up the attribute AST node,
as we already have to remember about the 'this' argument within that code to
produce correct errors.

llvm-svn: 119340

1 files changed, 13 insertions, 1 deletions

diff --git a/clang/test/SemaCXX/attr-format.cpp b/clang/test/SemaCXX/attr-format.cpp
index bf131496007..da134a136d2 100644
--- a/clang/test/SemaCXX/attr-format.cpp
+++ b/clang/test/SemaCXX/attr-format.cpp
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify %s
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -Wformat-nonliteral -verify %s
 struct S {
   static void f(const char*, ...) __attribute__((format(printf, 1, 2)));
   static const char* f2(const char*) __attribute__((format_arg(1)));
@@ -21,3 +21,15 @@ struct A { void a(const char*,...) __attribute((format(printf,2,3))); };
 void b(A x) {
   x.a("%d", 3);
 }
+
+// PR8625: correctly interpret static member calls as not having an implicit
+// 'this' argument.
+namespace PR8625 {
+  struct S {
+    static void f(const char*, const char*, ...)
+      __attribute__((format(printf, 2, 3)));
+  };
+  void test(S s, const char* str) {
+    s.f(str, "%s", str);
+  }
+}