| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
types.
Also improve diagnostic for the case where a type is non-literal because it's a lambda.
llvm-svn: 332286
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fixes PR36054.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45194
llvm-svn: 329244
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
of constexpr lambdas.
Enable evaluation of captures within constexpr lambdas by using a strategy similar to that used in CodeGen:
- when starting evaluation of a lambda's call operator, create a map from VarDecl's to a closure's FieldDecls
- every time a VarDecl (or '*this) that represents a capture is encountered while evaluating the expression via the expression evaluator (specifically the LValueEvaluator) in ExprConstant.cpp - it is replaced by the corresponding FieldDecl LValue (an Lvalue-to-Rvalue conversion on this LValue representation then determines the right rvalue when needed).
Thanks to Richard Smith and Hubert Tong for their review and feedback!
https://reviews.llvm.org/D29748
llvm-svn: 295279
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
lambda expressions.
Add a visitor for lambda expressions to RecordExprEvaluator in ExprConstant.cpp that creates an empty APValue of Struct type to represent the closure object. Additionally, add a LambdaExpr visitor to the TemporaryExprEvaluator that forwards constant evaluation of immediately-called-lambda-expressions to the one in RecordExprEvaluator through VisitConstructExpr.
This patch supports:
constexpr auto ID = [] (auto a) { return a; };
static_assert(ID(3.14) == 3.14);
static_assert([](auto a) { return a + 1; }(10) == 11);
Lambda captures are still not supported for constexpr lambdas.
llvm-svn: 291416
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
expression-evaluator to evaluate the static-invoker.
This patch has been sitting in review hell since july 2016 and our lack of constexpr lambda support is getting embarrassing (given that I've had a branch that implements the feature (modulo *this capture) for over a year. While in Issaquah I was enjoying shamelessly trying to convince folks of the lie that this was Richard's fault ;) I won't be able to do so in Kona since I won't be attending - so I'm going to aim to have this feature be implemented by then.
I'm quite confident of the approach in this patch, which simply maps the static-invoker 'thunk' back to the corresponding call-operator (specialization).
Thanks!
llvm-svn: 291397
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
during constant expression evaluation.
Only look for a variable's value in the constant expression evaluation activation frame, if the variable was indeed declared in that frame, otherwise it might be a constant expression and be usable within a nested local scope or emit an error.
void f(char c) {
struct X {
static constexpr char f() {
return c; // error gracefully here as opposed to crashing.
}
};
int I = X::f();
}
llvm-svn: 286748
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
This makes it easier to add C++1z examples to the bottom, just before the #endif.
llvm-svn: 277287
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
literal-type in C++1z
Additionally, for pre-C++1z, instead of forbidding a lambda's closure type from being a literal type through circumlocutorily setting HasNonLiteralTypeFieldsOrBases falsely to true -- handle lambda's more directly in CXXRecordDecl::isLiteral().
One additional small step towards implementing constexpr-lambdas.
Thanks to Richard Smith for his review!
https://reviews.llvm.org/D22662
llvm-svn: 276514
|
|
|
(and its inference) on lambda expressions
Support the constexpr specifier on lambda expressions - and support its inference from the lambda call operator's body.
i.e.
auto L = [] () constexpr { return 5; };
static_assert(L() == 5); // OK
auto Implicit = [] (auto a) { return a; };
static_assert(Implicit(5) == 5);
We do not support evaluation of lambda's within constant expressions just yet.
Implementation Strategy:
- teach ParseLambdaExpressionAfterIntroducer to expect a constexpr specifier and mark the invented function call operator's declarator's decl-specifier with it; Have it emit fixits for multiple decl-specifiers (mutable or constexpr) in this location.
- for cases where constexpr is not explicitly specified, have buildLambdaExpr check whether the invented function call operator satisfies the requirements of a constexpr function, by calling CheckConstexprFunctionDecl/Body.
Much obliged to Richard Smith for his patience and his care, in ensuring the code is clang-worthy.
llvm-svn: 264513
|
