Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
* | P0305R0: Semantic analysis and code generation for C++17 init-statement for ↵ | Richard Smith | 2016-07-14 | 1 | -13/+15 |
| | | | | | | | | | | 'if' and 'switch': if (stmt; condition) { ... } Patch by Anton Bikineev! Some minor formatting and comment tweets by me. llvm-svn: 275350 | ||||
* | Fix typo-correction crash if a typo occurs within the operand of a | Richard Smith | 2016-06-30 | 1 | -3/+5 |
| | | | | | | | | | function-style cast to a non-dependent type which is then used in an invalid way. We'd lose the "type dependent" bit here, and downstream Sema processing would then discard the expression if it was used in a context where its type rendered it invalid. llvm-svn: 274267 | ||||
* | P0305R1: Parsing support for init-statements in 'if' and 'switch' statements. | Richard Smith | 2016-06-29 | 1 | -0/+47 |
No semantic analysis yet. This is a pain to disambiguate correctly, because the parsing rules for the declaration form of a condition and of an init-statement are quite different -- for a token sequence that looks like a declaration, we frequently need to disambiguate all the way to the ')' or ';'. We could do better here in some cases by stopping disambiguation once we've decided whether we've got an expression or not (rather than keeping going until we know whether it's an init-statement declaration or a condition declaration), by unifying our parsing code for the two types of declaration and moving the syntactic checks into Sema; if this has a measurable impact on parsing performance, I'll look into that. llvm-svn: 274169 |