| ============================ |
| "Clang" CFE Internals Manual |
| ============================ |
| |
| .. contents:: |
| :local: |
| |
| Introduction |
| ============ |
| |
| This document describes some of the more important APIs and internal design |
| decisions made in the Clang C front-end. The purpose of this document is to |
| both capture some of this high level information and also describe some of the |
| design decisions behind it. This is meant for people interested in hacking on |
| Clang, not for end-users. The description below is categorized by libraries, |
| and does not describe any of the clients of the libraries. |
| |
| LLVM Support Library |
| ==================== |
| |
| The LLVM ``libSupport`` library provides many underlying libraries and |
| `data-structures <http://llvm.org/docs/ProgrammersManual.html>`_, including |
| command line option processing, various containers and a system abstraction |
| layer, which is used for file system access. |
| |
| The Clang "Basic" Library |
| ========================= |
| |
| This library certainly needs a better name. The "basic" library contains a |
| number of low-level utilities for tracking and manipulating source buffers, |
| locations within the source buffers, diagnostics, tokens, target abstraction, |
| and information about the subset of the language being compiled for. |
| |
| Part of this infrastructure is specific to C (such as the ``TargetInfo`` |
| class), other parts could be reused for other non-C-based languages |
| (``SourceLocation``, ``SourceManager``, ``Diagnostics``, ``FileManager``). |
| When and if there is future demand we can figure out if it makes sense to |
| introduce a new library, move the general classes somewhere else, or introduce |
| some other solution. |
| |
| We describe the roles of these classes in order of their dependencies. |
| |
| The Diagnostics Subsystem |
| ------------------------- |
| |
| The Clang Diagnostics subsystem is an important part of how the compiler |
| communicates with the human. Diagnostics are the warnings and errors produced |
| when the code is incorrect or dubious. In Clang, each diagnostic produced has |
| (at the minimum) a unique ID, an English translation associated with it, a |
| :ref:`SourceLocation <SourceLocation>` to "put the caret", and a severity |
| (e.g., ``WARNING`` or ``ERROR``). They can also optionally include a number of |
| arguments to the dianostic (which fill in "%0"'s in the string) as well as a |
| number of source ranges that related to the diagnostic. |
| |
| In this section, we'll be giving examples produced by the Clang command line |
| driver, but diagnostics can be :ref:`rendered in many different ways |
| <DiagnosticClient>` depending on how the ``DiagnosticClient`` interface is |
| implemented. A representative example of a diagnostic is: |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| t.c:38:15: error: invalid operands to binary expression ('int *' and '_Complex float') |
| P = (P-42) + Gamma*4; |
| ~~~~~~ ^ ~~~~~~~ |
| |
| In this example, you can see the English translation, the severity (error), you |
| can see the source location (the caret ("``^``") and file/line/column info), |
| the source ranges "``~~~~``", arguments to the diagnostic ("``int*``" and |
| "``_Complex float``"). You'll have to believe me that there is a unique ID |
| backing the diagnostic :). |
| |
| Getting all of this to happen has several steps and involves many moving |
| pieces, this section describes them and talks about best practices when adding |
| a new diagnostic. |
| |
| The ``Diagnostic*Kinds.td`` files |
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| |
| Diagnostics are created by adding an entry to one of the |
| ``clang/Basic/Diagnostic*Kinds.td`` files, depending on what library will be |
| using it. From this file, :program:`tblgen` generates the unique ID of the |
| diagnostic, the severity of the diagnostic and the English translation + format |
| string. |
| |
| There is little sanity with the naming of the unique ID's right now. Some |
| start with ``err_``, ``warn_``, ``ext_`` to encode the severity into the name. |
| Since the enum is referenced in the C++ code that produces the diagnostic, it |
| is somewhat useful for it to be reasonably short. |
| |
| The severity of the diagnostic comes from the set {``NOTE``, ``REMARK``, |
| ``WARNING``, |
| ``EXTENSION``, ``EXTWARN``, ``ERROR``}. The ``ERROR`` severity is used for |
| diagnostics indicating the program is never acceptable under any circumstances. |
| When an error is emitted, the AST for the input code may not be fully built. |
| The ``EXTENSION`` and ``EXTWARN`` severities are used for extensions to the |
| language that Clang accepts. This means that Clang fully understands and can |
| represent them in the AST, but we produce diagnostics to tell the user their |
| code is non-portable. The difference is that the former are ignored by |
| default, and the later warn by default. The ``WARNING`` severity is used for |
| constructs that are valid in the currently selected source language but that |
| are dubious in some way. The ``REMARK`` severity provides generic information |
| about the compilation that is not necessarily related to any dubious code. The |
| ``NOTE`` level is used to staple more information onto previous diagnostics. |
| |
| These *severities* are mapped into a smaller set (the ``Diagnostic::Level`` |
| enum, {``Ignored``, ``Note``, ``Remark``, ``Warning``, ``Error``, ``Fatal``}) of |
| output |
| *levels* by the diagnostics subsystem based on various configuration options. |
| Clang internally supports a fully fine grained mapping mechanism that allows |
| you to map almost any diagnostic to the output level that you want. The only |
| diagnostics that cannot be mapped are ``NOTE``\ s, which always follow the |
| severity of the previously emitted diagnostic and ``ERROR``\ s, which can only |
| be mapped to ``Fatal`` (it is not possible to turn an error into a warning, for |
| example). |
| |
| Diagnostic mappings are used in many ways. For example, if the user specifies |
| ``-pedantic``, ``EXTENSION`` maps to ``Warning``, if they specify |
| ``-pedantic-errors``, it turns into ``Error``. This is used to implement |
| options like ``-Wunused_macros``, ``-Wundef`` etc. |
| |
| Mapping to ``Fatal`` should only be used for diagnostics that are considered so |
| severe that error recovery won't be able to recover sensibly from them (thus |
| spewing a ton of bogus errors). One example of this class of error are failure |
| to ``#include`` a file. |
| |
| The Format String |
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| |
| The format string for the diagnostic is very simple, but it has some power. It |
| takes the form of a string in English with markers that indicate where and how |
| arguments to the diagnostic are inserted and formatted. For example, here are |
| some simple format strings: |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| "binary integer literals are an extension" |
| "format string contains '\\0' within the string body" |
| "more '%%' conversions than data arguments" |
| "invalid operands to binary expression (%0 and %1)" |
| "overloaded '%0' must be a %select{unary|binary|unary or binary}2 operator" |
| " (has %1 parameter%s1)" |
| |
| These examples show some important points of format strings. You can use any |
| plain ASCII character in the diagnostic string except "``%``" without a |
| problem, but these are C strings, so you have to use and be aware of all the C |
| escape sequences (as in the second example). If you want to produce a "``%``" |
| in the output, use the "``%%``" escape sequence, like the third diagnostic. |
| Finally, Clang uses the "``%...[digit]``" sequences to specify where and how |
| arguments to the diagnostic are formatted. |
| |
| Arguments to the diagnostic are numbered according to how they are specified by |
| the C++ code that :ref:`produces them <internals-producing-diag>`, and are |
| referenced by ``%0`` .. ``%9``. If you have more than 10 arguments to your |
| diagnostic, you are doing something wrong :). Unlike ``printf``, there is no |
| requirement that arguments to the diagnostic end up in the output in the same |
| order as they are specified, you could have a format string with "``%1 %0``" |
| that swaps them, for example. The text in between the percent and digit are |
| formatting instructions. If there are no instructions, the argument is just |
| turned into a string and substituted in. |
| |
| Here are some "best practices" for writing the English format string: |
| |
| * Keep the string short. It should ideally fit in the 80 column limit of the |
| ``DiagnosticKinds.td`` file. This avoids the diagnostic wrapping when |
| printed, and forces you to think about the important point you are conveying |
| with the diagnostic. |
| * Take advantage of location information. The user will be able to see the |
| line and location of the caret, so you don't need to tell them that the |
| problem is with the 4th argument to the function: just point to it. |
| * Do not capitalize the diagnostic string, and do not end it with a period. |
| * If you need to quote something in the diagnostic string, use single quotes. |
| |
| Diagnostics should never take random English strings as arguments: you |
| shouldn't use "``you have a problem with %0``" and pass in things like "``your |
| argument``" or "``your return value``" as arguments. Doing this prevents |
| :ref:`translating <internals-diag-translation>` the Clang diagnostics to other |
| languages (because they'll get random English words in their otherwise |
| localized diagnostic). The exceptions to this are C/C++ language keywords |
| (e.g., ``auto``, ``const``, ``mutable``, etc) and C/C++ operators (``/=``). |
| Note that things like "pointer" and "reference" are not keywords. On the other |
| hand, you *can* include anything that comes from the user's source code, |
| including variable names, types, labels, etc. The "``select``" format can be |
| used to achieve this sort of thing in a localizable way, see below. |
| |
| Formatting a Diagnostic Argument |
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| |
| Arguments to diagnostics are fully typed internally, and come from a couple |
| different classes: integers, types, names, and random strings. Depending on |
| the class of the argument, it can be optionally formatted in different ways. |
| This gives the ``DiagnosticClient`` information about what the argument means |
| without requiring it to use a specific presentation (consider this MVC for |
| Clang :). |
| |
| Here are the different diagnostic argument formats currently supported by |
| Clang: |
| |
| **"s" format** |
| |
| Example: |
| ``"requires %1 parameter%s1"`` |
| Class: |
| Integers |
| Description: |
| This is a simple formatter for integers that is useful when producing English |
| diagnostics. When the integer is 1, it prints as nothing. When the integer |
| is not 1, it prints as "``s``". This allows some simple grammatical forms to |
| be to be handled correctly, and eliminates the need to use gross things like |
| ``"requires %1 parameter(s)"``. |
| |
| **"select" format** |
| |
| Example: |
| ``"must be a %select{unary|binary|unary or binary}2 operator"`` |
| Class: |
| Integers |
| Description: |
| This format specifier is used to merge multiple related diagnostics together |
| into one common one, without requiring the difference to be specified as an |
| English string argument. Instead of specifying the string, the diagnostic |
| gets an integer argument and the format string selects the numbered option. |
| In this case, the "``%2``" value must be an integer in the range [0..2]. If |
| it is 0, it prints "unary", if it is 1 it prints "binary" if it is 2, it |
| prints "unary or binary". This allows other language translations to |
| substitute reasonable words (or entire phrases) based on the semantics of the |
| diagnostic instead of having to do things textually. The selected string |
| does undergo formatting. |
| |
| **"plural" format** |
| |
| Example: |
| ``"you have %1 %plural{1:mouse|:mice}1 connected to your computer"`` |
| Class: |
| Integers |
| Description: |
| This is a formatter for complex plural forms. It is designed to handle even |
| the requirements of languages with very complex plural forms, as many Baltic |
| languages have. The argument consists of a series of expression/form pairs, |
| separated by ":", where the first form whose expression evaluates to true is |
| the result of the modifier. |
| |
| An expression can be empty, in which case it is always true. See the example |
| at the top. Otherwise, it is a series of one or more numeric conditions, |
| separated by ",". If any condition matches, the expression matches. Each |
| numeric condition can take one of three forms. |
| |
| * number: A simple decimal number matches if the argument is the same as the |
| number. Example: ``"%plural{1:mouse|:mice}4"`` |
| * range: A range in square brackets matches if the argument is within the |
| range. Then range is inclusive on both ends. Example: |
| ``"%plural{0:none|1:one|[2,5]:some|:many}2"`` |
| * modulo: A modulo operator is followed by a number, and equals sign and |
| either a number or a range. The tests are the same as for plain numbers |
| and ranges, but the argument is taken modulo the number first. Example: |
| ``"%plural{%100=0:even hundred|%100=[1,50]:lower half|:everything else}1"`` |
| |
| The parser is very unforgiving. A syntax error, even whitespace, will abort, |
| as will a failure to match the argument against any expression. |
| |
| **"ordinal" format** |
| |
| Example: |
| ``"ambiguity in %ordinal0 argument"`` |
| Class: |
| Integers |
| Description: |
| This is a formatter which represents the argument number as an ordinal: the |
| value ``1`` becomes ``1st``, ``3`` becomes ``3rd``, and so on. Values less |
| than ``1`` are not supported. This formatter is currently hard-coded to use |
| English ordinals. |
| |
| **"objcclass" format** |
| |
| Example: |
| ``"method %objcclass0 not found"`` |
| Class: |
| ``DeclarationName`` |
| Description: |
| This is a simple formatter that indicates the ``DeclarationName`` corresponds |
| to an Objective-C class method selector. As such, it prints the selector |
| with a leading "``+``". |
| |
| **"objcinstance" format** |
| |
| Example: |
| ``"method %objcinstance0 not found"`` |
| Class: |
| ``DeclarationName`` |
| Description: |
| This is a simple formatter that indicates the ``DeclarationName`` corresponds |
| to an Objective-C instance method selector. As such, it prints the selector |
| with a leading "``-``". |
| |
| **"q" format** |
| |
| Example: |
| ``"candidate found by name lookup is %q0"`` |
| Class: |
| ``NamedDecl *`` |
| Description: |
| This formatter indicates that the fully-qualified name of the declaration |
| should be printed, e.g., "``std::vector``" rather than "``vector``". |
| |
| **"diff" format** |
| |
| Example: |
| ``"no known conversion %diff{from $ to $|from argument type to parameter type}1,2"`` |
| Class: |
| ``QualType`` |
| Description: |
| This formatter takes two ``QualType``\ s and attempts to print a template |
| difference between the two. If tree printing is off, the text inside the |
| braces before the pipe is printed, with the formatted text replacing the $. |
| If tree printing is on, the text after the pipe is printed and a type tree is |
| printed after the diagnostic message. |
| |
| It is really easy to add format specifiers to the Clang diagnostics system, but |
| they should be discussed before they are added. If you are creating a lot of |
| repetitive diagnostics and/or have an idea for a useful formatter, please bring |
| it up on the cfe-dev mailing list. |
| |
| .. _internals-producing-diag: |
| |
| Producing the Diagnostic |
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| |
| Now that you've created the diagnostic in the ``Diagnostic*Kinds.td`` file, you |
| need to write the code that detects the condition in question and emits the new |
| diagnostic. Various components of Clang (e.g., the preprocessor, ``Sema``, |
| etc.) provide a helper function named "``Diag``". It creates a diagnostic and |
| accepts the arguments, ranges, and other information that goes along with it. |
| |
| For example, the binary expression error comes from code like this: |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| if (various things that are bad) |
| Diag(Loc, diag::err_typecheck_invalid_operands) |
| << lex->getType() << rex->getType() |
| << lex->getSourceRange() << rex->getSourceRange(); |
| |
| This shows that use of the ``Diag`` method: it takes a location (a |
| :ref:`SourceLocation <SourceLocation>` object) and a diagnostic enum value |
| (which matches the name from ``Diagnostic*Kinds.td``). If the diagnostic takes |
| arguments, they are specified with the ``<<`` operator: the first argument |
| becomes ``%0``, the second becomes ``%1``, etc. The diagnostic interface |
| allows you to specify arguments of many different types, including ``int`` and |
| ``unsigned`` for integer arguments, ``const char*`` and ``std::string`` for |
| string arguments, ``DeclarationName`` and ``const IdentifierInfo *`` for names, |
| ``QualType`` for types, etc. ``SourceRange``\ s are also specified with the |
| ``<<`` operator, but do not have a specific ordering requirement. |
| |
| As you can see, adding and producing a diagnostic is pretty straightforward. |
| The hard part is deciding exactly what you need to say to help the user, |
| picking a suitable wording, and providing the information needed to format it |
| correctly. The good news is that the call site that issues a diagnostic should |
| be completely independent of how the diagnostic is formatted and in what |
| language it is rendered. |
| |
| Fix-It Hints |
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| |
| In some cases, the front end emits diagnostics when it is clear that some small |
| change to the source code would fix the problem. For example, a missing |
| semicolon at the end of a statement or a use of deprecated syntax that is |
| easily rewritten into a more modern form. Clang tries very hard to emit the |
| diagnostic and recover gracefully in these and other cases. |
| |
| However, for these cases where the fix is obvious, the diagnostic can be |
| annotated with a hint (referred to as a "fix-it hint") that describes how to |
| change the code referenced by the diagnostic to fix the problem. For example, |
| it might add the missing semicolon at the end of the statement or rewrite the |
| use of a deprecated construct into something more palatable. Here is one such |
| example from the C++ front end, where we warn about the right-shift operator |
| changing meaning from C++98 to C++11: |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| test.cpp:3:7: warning: use of right-shift operator ('>>') in template argument |
| will require parentheses in C++11 |
| A<100 >> 2> *a; |
| ^ |
| ( ) |
| |
| Here, the fix-it hint is suggesting that parentheses be added, and showing |
| exactly where those parentheses would be inserted into the source code. The |
| fix-it hints themselves describe what changes to make to the source code in an |
| abstract manner, which the text diagnostic printer renders as a line of |
| "insertions" below the caret line. :ref:`Other diagnostic clients |
| <DiagnosticClient>` might choose to render the code differently (e.g., as |
| markup inline) or even give the user the ability to automatically fix the |
| problem. |
| |
| Fix-it hints on errors and warnings need to obey these rules: |
| |
| * Since they are automatically applied if ``-Xclang -fixit`` is passed to the |
| driver, they should only be used when it's very likely they match the user's |
| intent. |
| * Clang must recover from errors as if the fix-it had been applied. |
| |
| If a fix-it can't obey these rules, put the fix-it on a note. Fix-its on notes |
| are not applied automatically. |
| |
| All fix-it hints are described by the ``FixItHint`` class, instances of which |
| should be attached to the diagnostic using the ``<<`` operator in the same way |
| that highlighted source ranges and arguments are passed to the diagnostic. |
| Fix-it hints can be created with one of three constructors: |
| |
| * ``FixItHint::CreateInsertion(Loc, Code)`` |
| |
| Specifies that the given ``Code`` (a string) should be inserted before the |
| source location ``Loc``. |
| |
| * ``FixItHint::CreateRemoval(Range)`` |
| |
| Specifies that the code in the given source ``Range`` should be removed. |
| |
| * ``FixItHint::CreateReplacement(Range, Code)`` |
| |
| Specifies that the code in the given source ``Range`` should be removed, |
| and replaced with the given ``Code`` string. |
| |
| .. _DiagnosticClient: |
| |
| The ``DiagnosticClient`` Interface |
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| |
| Once code generates a diagnostic with all of the arguments and the rest of the |
| relevant information, Clang needs to know what to do with it. As previously |
| mentioned, the diagnostic machinery goes through some filtering to map a |
| severity onto a diagnostic level, then (assuming the diagnostic is not mapped |
| to "``Ignore``") it invokes an object that implements the ``DiagnosticClient`` |
| interface with the information. |
| |
| It is possible to implement this interface in many different ways. For |
| example, the normal Clang ``DiagnosticClient`` (named |
| ``TextDiagnosticPrinter``) turns the arguments into strings (according to the |
| various formatting rules), prints out the file/line/column information and the |
| string, then prints out the line of code, the source ranges, and the caret. |
| However, this behavior isn't required. |
| |
| Another implementation of the ``DiagnosticClient`` interface is the |
| ``TextDiagnosticBuffer`` class, which is used when Clang is in ``-verify`` |
| mode. Instead of formatting and printing out the diagnostics, this |
| implementation just captures and remembers the diagnostics as they fly by. |
| Then ``-verify`` compares the list of produced diagnostics to the list of |
| expected ones. If they disagree, it prints out its own output. Full |
| documentation for the ``-verify`` mode can be found in the Clang API |
| documentation for `VerifyDiagnosticConsumer |
| </doxygen/classclang_1_1VerifyDiagnosticConsumer.html#details>`_. |
| |
| There are many other possible implementations of this interface, and this is |
| why we prefer diagnostics to pass down rich structured information in |
| arguments. For example, an HTML output might want declaration names be |
| linkified to where they come from in the source. Another example is that a GUI |
| might let you click on typedefs to expand them. This application would want to |
| pass significantly more information about types through to the GUI than a |
| simple flat string. The interface allows this to happen. |
| |
| .. _internals-diag-translation: |
| |
| Adding Translations to Clang |
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| |
| Not possible yet! Diagnostic strings should be written in UTF-8, the client can |
| translate to the relevant code page if needed. Each translation completely |
| replaces the format string for the diagnostic. |
| |
| .. _SourceLocation: |
| .. _SourceManager: |
| |
| The ``SourceLocation`` and ``SourceManager`` classes |
| ---------------------------------------------------- |
| |
| Strangely enough, the ``SourceLocation`` class represents a location within the |
| source code of the program. Important design points include: |
| |
| #. ``sizeof(SourceLocation)`` must be extremely small, as these are embedded |
| into many AST nodes and are passed around often. Currently it is 32 bits. |
| #. ``SourceLocation`` must be a simple value object that can be efficiently |
| copied. |
| #. We should be able to represent a source location for any byte of any input |
| file. This includes in the middle of tokens, in whitespace, in trigraphs, |
| etc. |
| #. A ``SourceLocation`` must encode the current ``#include`` stack that was |
| active when the location was processed. For example, if the location |
| corresponds to a token, it should contain the set of ``#include``\ s active |
| when the token was lexed. This allows us to print the ``#include`` stack |
| for a diagnostic. |
| #. ``SourceLocation`` must be able to describe macro expansions, capturing both |
| the ultimate instantiation point and the source of the original character |
| data. |
| |
| In practice, the ``SourceLocation`` works together with the ``SourceManager`` |
| class to encode two pieces of information about a location: its spelling |
| location and its instantiation location. For most tokens, these will be the |
| same. However, for a macro expansion (or tokens that came from a ``_Pragma`` |
| directive) these will describe the location of the characters corresponding to |
| the token and the location where the token was used (i.e., the macro |
| instantiation point or the location of the ``_Pragma`` itself). |
| |
| The Clang front-end inherently depends on the location of a token being tracked |
| correctly. If it is ever incorrect, the front-end may get confused and die. |
| The reason for this is that the notion of the "spelling" of a ``Token`` in |
| Clang depends on being able to find the original input characters for the |
| token. This concept maps directly to the "spelling location" for the token. |
| |
| ``SourceRange`` and ``CharSourceRange`` |
| --------------------------------------- |
| |
| .. mostly taken from http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/cfe-dev/2010-August/010595.html |
| |
| Clang represents most source ranges by [first, last], where "first" and "last" |
| each point to the beginning of their respective tokens. For example consider |
| the ``SourceRange`` of the following statement: |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| x = foo + bar; |
| ^first ^last |
| |
| To map from this representation to a character-based representation, the "last" |
| location needs to be adjusted to point to (or past) the end of that token with |
| either ``Lexer::MeasureTokenLength()`` or ``Lexer::getLocForEndOfToken()``. For |
| the rare cases where character-level source ranges information is needed we use |
| the ``CharSourceRange`` class. |
| |
| The Driver Library |
| ================== |
| |
| The clang Driver and library are documented :doc:`here <DriverInternals>`. |
| |
| Precompiled Headers |
| =================== |
| |
| Clang supports two implementations of precompiled headers. The default |
| implementation, precompiled headers (:doc:`PCH <PCHInternals>`) uses a |
| serialized representation of Clang's internal data structures, encoded with the |
| `LLVM bitstream format <http://llvm.org/docs/BitCodeFormat.html>`_. |
| Pretokenized headers (:doc:`PTH <PTHInternals>`), on the other hand, contain a |
| serialized representation of the tokens encountered when preprocessing a header |
| (and anything that header includes). |
| |
| The Frontend Library |
| ==================== |
| |
| The Frontend library contains functionality useful for building tools on top of |
| the Clang libraries, for example several methods for outputting diagnostics. |
| |
| The Lexer and Preprocessor Library |
| ================================== |
| |
| The Lexer library contains several tightly-connected classes that are involved |
| with the nasty process of lexing and preprocessing C source code. The main |
| interface to this library for outside clients is the large ``Preprocessor`` |
| class. It contains the various pieces of state that are required to coherently |
| read tokens out of a translation unit. |
| |
| The core interface to the ``Preprocessor`` object (once it is set up) is the |
| ``Preprocessor::Lex`` method, which returns the next :ref:`Token <Token>` from |
| the preprocessor stream. There are two types of token providers that the |
| preprocessor is capable of reading from: a buffer lexer (provided by the |
| :ref:`Lexer <Lexer>` class) and a buffered token stream (provided by the |
| :ref:`TokenLexer <TokenLexer>` class). |
| |
| .. _Token: |
| |
| The Token class |
| --------------- |
| |
| The ``Token`` class is used to represent a single lexed token. Tokens are |
| intended to be used by the lexer/preprocess and parser libraries, but are not |
| intended to live beyond them (for example, they should not live in the ASTs). |
| |
| Tokens most often live on the stack (or some other location that is efficient |
| to access) as the parser is running, but occasionally do get buffered up. For |
| example, macro definitions are stored as a series of tokens, and the C++ |
| front-end periodically needs to buffer tokens up for tentative parsing and |
| various pieces of look-ahead. As such, the size of a ``Token`` matters. On a |
| 32-bit system, ``sizeof(Token)`` is currently 16 bytes. |
| |
| Tokens occur in two forms: :ref:`annotation tokens <AnnotationToken>` and |
| normal tokens. Normal tokens are those returned by the lexer, annotation |
| tokens represent semantic information and are produced by the parser, replacing |
| normal tokens in the token stream. Normal tokens contain the following |
| information: |
| |
| * **A SourceLocation** --- This indicates the location of the start of the |
| token. |
| |
| * **A length** --- This stores the length of the token as stored in the |
| ``SourceBuffer``. For tokens that include them, this length includes |
| trigraphs and escaped newlines which are ignored by later phases of the |
| compiler. By pointing into the original source buffer, it is always possible |
| to get the original spelling of a token completely accurately. |
| |
| * **IdentifierInfo** --- If a token takes the form of an identifier, and if |
| identifier lookup was enabled when the token was lexed (e.g., the lexer was |
| not reading in "raw" mode) this contains a pointer to the unique hash value |
| for the identifier. Because the lookup happens before keyword |
| identification, this field is set even for language keywords like "``for``". |
| |
| * **TokenKind** --- This indicates the kind of token as classified by the |
| lexer. This includes things like ``tok::starequal`` (for the "``*=``" |
| operator), ``tok::ampamp`` for the "``&&``" token, and keyword values (e.g., |
| ``tok::kw_for``) for identifiers that correspond to keywords. Note that |
| some tokens can be spelled multiple ways. For example, C++ supports |
| "operator keywords", where things like "``and``" are treated exactly like the |
| "``&&``" operator. In these cases, the kind value is set to ``tok::ampamp``, |
| which is good for the parser, which doesn't have to consider both forms. For |
| something that cares about which form is used (e.g., the preprocessor |
| "stringize" operator) the spelling indicates the original form. |
| |
| * **Flags** --- There are currently four flags tracked by the |
| lexer/preprocessor system on a per-token basis: |
| |
| #. **StartOfLine** --- This was the first token that occurred on its input |
| source line. |
| #. **LeadingSpace** --- There was a space character either immediately before |
| the token or transitively before the token as it was expanded through a |
| macro. The definition of this flag is very closely defined by the |
| stringizing requirements of the preprocessor. |
| #. **DisableExpand** --- This flag is used internally to the preprocessor to |
| represent identifier tokens which have macro expansion disabled. This |
| prevents them from being considered as candidates for macro expansion ever |
| in the future. |
| #. **NeedsCleaning** --- This flag is set if the original spelling for the |
| token includes a trigraph or escaped newline. Since this is uncommon, |
| many pieces of code can fast-path on tokens that did not need cleaning. |
| |
| One interesting (and somewhat unusual) aspect of normal tokens is that they |
| don't contain any semantic information about the lexed value. For example, if |
| the token was a pp-number token, we do not represent the value of the number |
| that was lexed (this is left for later pieces of code to decide). |
| Additionally, the lexer library has no notion of typedef names vs variable |
| names: both are returned as identifiers, and the parser is left to decide |
| whether a specific identifier is a typedef or a variable (tracking this |
| requires scope information among other things). The parser can do this |
| translation by replacing tokens returned by the preprocessor with "Annotation |
| Tokens". |
| |
| .. _AnnotationToken: |
| |
| Annotation Tokens |
| ----------------- |
| |
| Annotation tokens are tokens that are synthesized by the parser and injected |
| into the preprocessor's token stream (replacing existing tokens) to record |
| semantic information found by the parser. For example, if "``foo``" is found |
| to be a typedef, the "``foo``" ``tok::identifier`` token is replaced with an |
| ``tok::annot_typename``. This is useful for a couple of reasons: 1) this makes |
| it easy to handle qualified type names (e.g., "``foo::bar::baz<42>::t``") in |
| C++ as a single "token" in the parser. 2) if the parser backtracks, the |
| reparse does not need to redo semantic analysis to determine whether a token |
| sequence is a variable, type, template, etc. |
| |
| Annotation tokens are created by the parser and reinjected into the parser's |
| token stream (when backtracking is enabled). Because they can only exist in |
| tokens that the preprocessor-proper is done with, it doesn't need to keep |
| around flags like "start of line" that the preprocessor uses to do its job. |
| Additionally, an annotation token may "cover" a sequence of preprocessor tokens |
| (e.g., "``a::b::c``" is five preprocessor tokens). As such, the valid fields |
| of an annotation token are different than the fields for a normal token (but |
| they are multiplexed into the normal ``Token`` fields): |
| |
| * **SourceLocation "Location"** --- The ``SourceLocation`` for the annotation |
| token indicates the first token replaced by the annotation token. In the |
| example above, it would be the location of the "``a``" identifier. |
| * **SourceLocation "AnnotationEndLoc"** --- This holds the location of the last |
| token replaced with the annotation token. In the example above, it would be |
| the location of the "``c``" identifier. |
| * **void* "AnnotationValue"** --- This contains an opaque object that the |
| parser gets from ``Sema``. The parser merely preserves the information for |
| ``Sema`` to later interpret based on the annotation token kind. |
| * **TokenKind "Kind"** --- This indicates the kind of Annotation token this is. |
| See below for the different valid kinds. |
| |
| Annotation tokens currently come in three kinds: |
| |
| #. **tok::annot_typename**: This annotation token represents a resolved |
| typename token that is potentially qualified. The ``AnnotationValue`` field |
| contains the ``QualType`` returned by ``Sema::getTypeName()``, possibly with |
| source location information attached. |
| #. **tok::annot_cxxscope**: This annotation token represents a C++ scope |
| specifier, such as "``A::B::``". This corresponds to the grammar |
| productions "*::*" and "*:: [opt] nested-name-specifier*". The |
| ``AnnotationValue`` pointer is a ``NestedNameSpecifier *`` returned by the |
| ``Sema::ActOnCXXGlobalScopeSpecifier`` and |
| ``Sema::ActOnCXXNestedNameSpecifier`` callbacks. |
| #. **tok::annot_template_id**: This annotation token represents a C++ |
| template-id such as "``foo<int, 4>``", where "``foo``" is the name of a |
| template. The ``AnnotationValue`` pointer is a pointer to a ``malloc``'d |
| ``TemplateIdAnnotation`` object. Depending on the context, a parsed |
| template-id that names a type might become a typename annotation token (if |
| all we care about is the named type, e.g., because it occurs in a type |
| specifier) or might remain a template-id token (if we want to retain more |
| source location information or produce a new type, e.g., in a declaration of |
| a class template specialization). template-id annotation tokens that refer |
| to a type can be "upgraded" to typename annotation tokens by the parser. |
| |
| As mentioned above, annotation tokens are not returned by the preprocessor, |
| they are formed on demand by the parser. This means that the parser has to be |
| aware of cases where an annotation could occur and form it where appropriate. |
| This is somewhat similar to how the parser handles Translation Phase 6 of C99: |
| String Concatenation (see C99 5.1.1.2). In the case of string concatenation, |
| the preprocessor just returns distinct ``tok::string_literal`` and |
| ``tok::wide_string_literal`` tokens and the parser eats a sequence of them |
| wherever the grammar indicates that a string literal can occur. |
| |
| In order to do this, whenever the parser expects a ``tok::identifier`` or |
| ``tok::coloncolon``, it should call the ``TryAnnotateTypeOrScopeToken`` or |
| ``TryAnnotateCXXScopeToken`` methods to form the annotation token. These |
| methods will maximally form the specified annotation tokens and replace the |
| current token with them, if applicable. If the current tokens is not valid for |
| an annotation token, it will remain an identifier or "``::``" token. |
| |
| .. _Lexer: |
| |
| The ``Lexer`` class |
| ------------------- |
| |
| The ``Lexer`` class provides the mechanics of lexing tokens out of a source |
| buffer and deciding what they mean. The ``Lexer`` is complicated by the fact |
| that it operates on raw buffers that have not had spelling eliminated (this is |
| a necessity to get decent performance), but this is countered with careful |
| coding as well as standard performance techniques (for example, the comment |
| handling code is vectorized on X86 and PowerPC hosts). |
| |
| The lexer has a couple of interesting modal features: |
| |
| * The lexer can operate in "raw" mode. This mode has several features that |
| make it possible to quickly lex the file (e.g., it stops identifier lookup, |
| doesn't specially handle preprocessor tokens, handles EOF differently, etc). |
| This mode is used for lexing within an "``#if 0``" block, for example. |
| * The lexer can capture and return comments as tokens. This is required to |
| support the ``-C`` preprocessor mode, which passes comments through, and is |
| used by the diagnostic checker to identifier expect-error annotations. |
| * The lexer can be in ``ParsingFilename`` mode, which happens when |
| preprocessing after reading a ``#include`` directive. This mode changes the |
| parsing of "``<``" to return an "angled string" instead of a bunch of tokens |
| for each thing within the filename. |
| * When parsing a preprocessor directive (after "``#``") the |
| ``ParsingPreprocessorDirective`` mode is entered. This changes the parser to |
| return EOD at a newline. |
| * The ``Lexer`` uses a ``LangOptions`` object to know whether trigraphs are |
| enabled, whether C++ or ObjC keywords are recognized, etc. |
| |
| In addition to these modes, the lexer keeps track of a couple of other features |
| that are local to a lexed buffer, which change as the buffer is lexed: |
| |
| * The ``Lexer`` uses ``BufferPtr`` to keep track of the current character being |
| lexed. |
| * The ``Lexer`` uses ``IsAtStartOfLine`` to keep track of whether the next |
| lexed token will start with its "start of line" bit set. |
| * The ``Lexer`` keeps track of the current "``#if``" directives that are active |
| (which can be nested). |
| * The ``Lexer`` keeps track of an :ref:`MultipleIncludeOpt |
| <MultipleIncludeOpt>` object, which is used to detect whether the buffer uses |
| the standard "``#ifndef XX`` / ``#define XX``" idiom to prevent multiple |
| inclusion. If a buffer does, subsequent includes can be ignored if the |
| "``XX``" macro is defined. |
| |
| .. _TokenLexer: |
| |
| The ``TokenLexer`` class |
| ------------------------ |
| |
| The ``TokenLexer`` class is a token provider that returns tokens from a list of |
| tokens that came from somewhere else. It typically used for two things: 1) |
| returning tokens from a macro definition as it is being expanded 2) returning |
| tokens from an arbitrary buffer of tokens. The later use is used by |
| ``_Pragma`` and will most likely be used to handle unbounded look-ahead for the |
| C++ parser. |
| |
| .. _MultipleIncludeOpt: |
| |
| The ``MultipleIncludeOpt`` class |
| -------------------------------- |
| |
| The ``MultipleIncludeOpt`` class implements a really simple little state |
| machine that is used to detect the standard "``#ifndef XX`` / ``#define XX``" |
| idiom that people typically use to prevent multiple inclusion of headers. If a |
| buffer uses this idiom and is subsequently ``#include``'d, the preprocessor can |
| simply check to see whether the guarding condition is defined or not. If so, |
| the preprocessor can completely ignore the include of the header. |
| |
| The Parser Library |
| ================== |
| |
| The AST Library |
| =============== |
| |
| .. _Type: |
| |
| The ``Type`` class and its subclasses |
| ------------------------------------- |
| |
| The ``Type`` class (and its subclasses) are an important part of the AST. |
| Types are accessed through the ``ASTContext`` class, which implicitly creates |
| and uniques them as they are needed. Types have a couple of non-obvious |
| features: 1) they do not capture type qualifiers like ``const`` or ``volatile`` |
| (see :ref:`QualType <QualType>`), and 2) they implicitly capture typedef |
| information. Once created, types are immutable (unlike decls). |
| |
| Typedefs in C make semantic analysis a bit more complex than it would be without |
| them. The issue is that we want to capture typedef information and represent it |
| in the AST perfectly, but the semantics of operations need to "see through" |
| typedefs. For example, consider this code: |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| void func() { |
| typedef int foo; |
| foo X, *Y; |
| typedef foo *bar; |
| bar Z; |
| *X; // error |
| **Y; // error |
| **Z; // error |
| } |
| |
| The code above is illegal, and thus we expect there to be diagnostics emitted |
| on the annotated lines. In this example, we expect to get: |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| test.c:6:1: error: indirection requires pointer operand ('foo' invalid) |
| *X; // error |
| ^~ |
| test.c:7:1: error: indirection requires pointer operand ('foo' invalid) |
| **Y; // error |
| ^~~ |
| test.c:8:1: error: indirection requires pointer operand ('foo' invalid) |
| **Z; // error |
| ^~~ |
| |
| While this example is somewhat silly, it illustrates the point: we want to |
| retain typedef information where possible, so that we can emit errors about |
| "``std::string``" instead of "``std::basic_string<char, std:...``". Doing this |
| requires properly keeping typedef information (for example, the type of ``X`` |
| is "``foo``", not "``int``"), and requires properly propagating it through the |
| various operators (for example, the type of ``*Y`` is "``foo``", not |
| "``int``"). In order to retain this information, the type of these expressions |
| is an instance of the ``TypedefType`` class, which indicates that the type of |
| these expressions is a typedef for "``foo``". |
| |
| Representing types like this is great for diagnostics, because the |
| user-specified type is always immediately available. There are two problems |
| with this: first, various semantic checks need to make judgements about the |
| *actual structure* of a type, ignoring typedefs. Second, we need an efficient |
| way to query whether two types are structurally identical to each other, |
| ignoring typedefs. The solution to both of these problems is the idea of |
| canonical types. |
| |
| Canonical Types |
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| |
| Every instance of the ``Type`` class contains a canonical type pointer. For |
| simple types with no typedefs involved (e.g., "``int``", "``int*``", |
| "``int**``"), the type just points to itself. For types that have a typedef |
| somewhere in their structure (e.g., "``foo``", "``foo*``", "``foo**``", |
| "``bar``"), the canonical type pointer points to their structurally equivalent |
| type without any typedefs (e.g., "``int``", "``int*``", "``int**``", and |
| "``int*``" respectively). |
| |
| This design provides a constant time operation (dereferencing the canonical type |
| pointer) that gives us access to the structure of types. For example, we can |
| trivially tell that "``bar``" and "``foo*``" are the same type by dereferencing |
| their canonical type pointers and doing a pointer comparison (they both point |
| to the single "``int*``" type). |
| |
| Canonical types and typedef types bring up some complexities that must be |
| carefully managed. Specifically, the ``isa``/``cast``/``dyn_cast`` operators |
| generally shouldn't be used in code that is inspecting the AST. For example, |
| when type checking the indirection operator (unary "``*``" on a pointer), the |
| type checker must verify that the operand has a pointer type. It would not be |
| correct to check that with "``isa<PointerType>(SubExpr->getType())``", because |
| this predicate would fail if the subexpression had a typedef type. |
| |
| The solution to this problem are a set of helper methods on ``Type``, used to |
| check their properties. In this case, it would be correct to use |
| "``SubExpr->getType()->isPointerType()``" to do the check. This predicate will |
| return true if the *canonical type is a pointer*, which is true any time the |
| type is structurally a pointer type. The only hard part here is remembering |
| not to use the ``isa``/``cast``/``dyn_cast`` operations. |
| |
| The second problem we face is how to get access to the pointer type once we |
| know it exists. To continue the example, the result type of the indirection |
| operator is the pointee type of the subexpression. In order to determine the |
| type, we need to get the instance of ``PointerType`` that best captures the |
| typedef information in the program. If the type of the expression is literally |
| a ``PointerType``, we can return that, otherwise we have to dig through the |
| typedefs to find the pointer type. For example, if the subexpression had type |
| "``foo*``", we could return that type as the result. If the subexpression had |
| type "``bar``", we want to return "``foo*``" (note that we do *not* want |
| "``int*``"). In order to provide all of this, ``Type`` has a |
| ``getAsPointerType()`` method that checks whether the type is structurally a |
| ``PointerType`` and, if so, returns the best one. If not, it returns a null |
| pointer. |
| |
| This structure is somewhat mystical, but after meditating on it, it will make |
| sense to you :). |
| |
| .. _QualType: |
| |
| The ``QualType`` class |
| ---------------------- |
| |
| The ``QualType`` class is designed as a trivial value class that is small, |
| passed by-value and is efficient to query. The idea of ``QualType`` is that it |
| stores the type qualifiers (``const``, ``volatile``, ``restrict``, plus some |
| extended qualifiers required by language extensions) separately from the types |
| themselves. ``QualType`` is conceptually a pair of "``Type*``" and the bits |
| for these type qualifiers. |
| |
| By storing the type qualifiers as bits in the conceptual pair, it is extremely |
| efficient to get the set of qualifiers on a ``QualType`` (just return the field |
| of the pair), add a type qualifier (which is a trivial constant-time operation |
| that sets a bit), and remove one or more type qualifiers (just return a |
| ``QualType`` with the bitfield set to empty). |
| |
| Further, because the bits are stored outside of the type itself, we do not need |
| to create duplicates of types with different sets of qualifiers (i.e. there is |
| only a single heap allocated "``int``" type: "``const int``" and "``volatile |
| const int``" both point to the same heap allocated "``int``" type). This |
| reduces the heap size used to represent bits and also means we do not have to |
| consider qualifiers when uniquing types (:ref:`Type <Type>` does not even |
| contain qualifiers). |
| |
| In practice, the two most common type qualifiers (``const`` and ``restrict``) |
| are stored in the low bits of the pointer to the ``Type`` object, together with |
| a flag indicating whether extended qualifiers are present (which must be |
| heap-allocated). This means that ``QualType`` is exactly the same size as a |
| pointer. |
| |
| .. _DeclarationName: |
| |
| Declaration names |
| ----------------- |
| |
| The ``DeclarationName`` class represents the name of a declaration in Clang. |
| Declarations in the C family of languages can take several different forms. |
| Most declarations are named by simple identifiers, e.g., "``f``" and "``x``" in |
| the function declaration ``f(int x)``. In C++, declaration names can also name |
| class constructors ("``Class``" in ``struct Class { Class(); }``), class |
| destructors ("``~Class``"), overloaded operator names ("``operator+``"), and |
| conversion functions ("``operator void const *``"). In Objective-C, |
| declaration names can refer to the names of Objective-C methods, which involve |
| the method name and the parameters, collectively called a *selector*, e.g., |
| "``setWidth:height:``". Since all of these kinds of entities --- variables, |
| functions, Objective-C methods, C++ constructors, destructors, and operators |
| --- are represented as subclasses of Clang's common ``NamedDecl`` class, |
| ``DeclarationName`` is designed to efficiently represent any kind of name. |
| |
| Given a ``DeclarationName`` ``N``, ``N.getNameKind()`` will produce a value |
| that describes what kind of name ``N`` stores. There are 10 options (all of |
| the names are inside the ``DeclarationName`` class). |
| |
| ``Identifier`` |
| |
| The name is a simple identifier. Use ``N.getAsIdentifierInfo()`` to retrieve |
| the corresponding ``IdentifierInfo*`` pointing to the actual identifier. |
| |
| ``ObjCZeroArgSelector``, ``ObjCOneArgSelector``, ``ObjCMultiArgSelector`` |
| |
| The name is an Objective-C selector, which can be retrieved as a ``Selector`` |
| instance via ``N.getObjCSelector()``. The three possible name kinds for |
| Objective-C reflect an optimization within the ``DeclarationName`` class: |
| both zero- and one-argument selectors are stored as a masked |
| ``IdentifierInfo`` pointer, and therefore require very little space, since |
| zero- and one-argument selectors are far more common than multi-argument |
| selectors (which use a different structure). |
| |
| ``CXXConstructorName`` |
| |
| The name is a C++ constructor name. Use ``N.getCXXNameType()`` to retrieve |
| the :ref:`type <QualType>` that this constructor is meant to construct. The |
| type is always the canonical type, since all constructors for a given type |
| have the same name. |
| |
| ``CXXDestructorName`` |
| |
| The name is a C++ destructor name. Use ``N.getCXXNameType()`` to retrieve |
| the :ref:`type <QualType>` whose destructor is being named. This type is |
| always a canonical type. |
| |
| ``CXXConversionFunctionName`` |
| |
| The name is a C++ conversion function. Conversion functions are named |
| according to the type they convert to, e.g., "``operator void const *``". |
| Use ``N.getCXXNameType()`` to retrieve the type that this conversion function |
| converts to. This type is always a canonical type. |
| |
| ``CXXOperatorName`` |
| |
| The name is a C++ overloaded operator name. Overloaded operators are named |
| according to their spelling, e.g., "``operator+``" or "``operator new []``". |
| Use ``N.getCXXOverloadedOperator()`` to retrieve the overloaded operator (a |
| value of type ``OverloadedOperatorKind``). |
| |
| ``CXXLiteralOperatorName`` |
| |
| The name is a C++11 user defined literal operator. User defined |
| Literal operators are named according to the suffix they define, |
| e.g., "``_foo``" for "``operator "" _foo``". Use |
| ``N.getCXXLiteralIdentifier()`` to retrieve the corresponding |
| ``IdentifierInfo*`` pointing to the identifier. |
| |
| ``CXXUsingDirective`` |
| |
| The name is a C++ using directive. Using directives are not really |
| NamedDecls, in that they all have the same name, but they are |
| implemented as such in order to store them in DeclContext |
| effectively. |
| |
| ``DeclarationName``\ s are cheap to create, copy, and compare. They require |
| only a single pointer's worth of storage in the common cases (identifiers, |
| zero- and one-argument Objective-C selectors) and use dense, uniqued storage |
| for the other kinds of names. Two ``DeclarationName``\ s can be compared for |
| equality (``==``, ``!=``) using a simple bitwise comparison, can be ordered |
| with ``<``, ``>``, ``<=``, and ``>=`` (which provide a lexicographical ordering |
| for normal identifiers but an unspecified ordering for other kinds of names), |
| and can be placed into LLVM ``DenseMap``\ s and ``DenseSet``\ s. |
| |
| ``DeclarationName`` instances can be created in different ways depending on |
| what kind of name the instance will store. Normal identifiers |
| (``IdentifierInfo`` pointers) and Objective-C selectors (``Selector``) can be |
| implicitly converted to ``DeclarationNames``. Names for C++ constructors, |
| destructors, conversion functions, and overloaded operators can be retrieved |
| from the ``DeclarationNameTable``, an instance of which is available as |
| ``ASTContext::DeclarationNames``. The member functions |
| ``getCXXConstructorName``, ``getCXXDestructorName``, |
| ``getCXXConversionFunctionName``, and ``getCXXOperatorName``, respectively, |
| return ``DeclarationName`` instances for the four kinds of C++ special function |
| names. |
| |
| .. _DeclContext: |
| |
| Declaration contexts |
| -------------------- |
| |
| Every declaration in a program exists within some *declaration context*, such |
| as a translation unit, namespace, class, or function. Declaration contexts in |
| Clang are represented by the ``DeclContext`` class, from which the various |
| declaration-context AST nodes (``TranslationUnitDecl``, ``NamespaceDecl``, |
| ``RecordDecl``, ``FunctionDecl``, etc.) will derive. The ``DeclContext`` class |
| provides several facilities common to each declaration context: |
| |
| Source-centric vs. Semantics-centric View of Declarations |
| |
| ``DeclContext`` provides two views of the declarations stored within a |
| declaration context. The source-centric view accurately represents the |
| program source code as written, including multiple declarations of entities |
| where present (see the section :ref:`Redeclarations and Overloads |
| <Redeclarations>`), while the semantics-centric view represents the program |
| semantics. The two views are kept synchronized by semantic analysis while |
| the ASTs are being constructed. |
| |
| Storage of declarations within that context |
| |
| Every declaration context can contain some number of declarations. For |
| example, a C++ class (represented by ``RecordDecl``) contains various member |
| functions, fields, nested types, and so on. All of these declarations will |
| be stored within the ``DeclContext``, and one can iterate over the |
| declarations via [``DeclContext::decls_begin()``, |
| ``DeclContext::decls_end()``). This mechanism provides the source-centric |
| view of declarations in the context. |
| |
| Lookup of declarations within that context |
| |
| The ``DeclContext`` structure provides efficient name lookup for names within |
| that declaration context. For example, if ``N`` is a namespace we can look |
| for the name ``N::f`` using ``DeclContext::lookup``. The lookup itself is |
| based on a lazily-constructed array (for declaration contexts with a small |
| number of declarations) or hash table (for declaration contexts with more |
| declarations). The lookup operation provides the semantics-centric view of |
| the declarations in the context. |
| |
| Ownership of declarations |
| |
| The ``DeclContext`` owns all of the declarations that were declared within |
| its declaration context, and is responsible for the management of their |
| memory as well as their (de-)serialization. |
| |
| All declarations are stored within a declaration context, and one can query |
| information about the context in which each declaration lives. One can |
| retrieve the ``DeclContext`` that contains a particular ``Decl`` using |
| ``Decl::getDeclContext``. However, see the section |
| :ref:`LexicalAndSemanticContexts` for more information about how to interpret |
| this context information. |
| |
| .. _Redeclarations: |
| |
| Redeclarations and Overloads |
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| |
| Within a translation unit, it is common for an entity to be declared several |
| times. For example, we might declare a function "``f``" and then later |
| re-declare it as part of an inlined definition: |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| void f(int x, int y, int z = 1); |
| |
| inline void f(int x, int y, int z) { /* ... */ } |
| |
| The representation of "``f``" differs in the source-centric and |
| semantics-centric views of a declaration context. In the source-centric view, |
| all redeclarations will be present, in the order they occurred in the source |
| code, making this view suitable for clients that wish to see the structure of |
| the source code. In the semantics-centric view, only the most recent "``f``" |
| will be found by the lookup, since it effectively replaces the first |
| declaration of "``f``". |
| |
| In the semantics-centric view, overloading of functions is represented |
| explicitly. For example, given two declarations of a function "``g``" that are |
| overloaded, e.g., |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| void g(); |
| void g(int); |
| |
| the ``DeclContext::lookup`` operation will return a |
| ``DeclContext::lookup_result`` that contains a range of iterators over |
| declarations of "``g``". Clients that perform semantic analysis on a program |
| that is not concerned with the actual source code will primarily use this |
| semantics-centric view. |
| |
| .. _LexicalAndSemanticContexts: |
| |
| Lexical and Semantic Contexts |
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| |
| Each declaration has two potentially different declaration contexts: a |
| *lexical* context, which corresponds to the source-centric view of the |
| declaration context, and a *semantic* context, which corresponds to the |
| semantics-centric view. The lexical context is accessible via |
| ``Decl::getLexicalDeclContext`` while the semantic context is accessible via |
| ``Decl::getDeclContext``, both of which return ``DeclContext`` pointers. For |
| most declarations, the two contexts are identical. For example: |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| class X { |
| public: |
| void f(int x); |
| }; |
| |
| Here, the semantic and lexical contexts of ``X::f`` are the ``DeclContext`` |
| associated with the class ``X`` (itself stored as a ``RecordDecl`` AST node). |
| However, we can now define ``X::f`` out-of-line: |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| void X::f(int x = 17) { /* ... */ } |
| |
| This definition of "``f``" has different lexical and semantic contexts. The |
| lexical context corresponds to the declaration context in which the actual |
| declaration occurred in the source code, e.g., the translation unit containing |
| ``X``. Thus, this declaration of ``X::f`` can be found by traversing the |
| declarations provided by [``decls_begin()``, ``decls_end()``) in the |
| translation unit. |
| |
| The semantic context of ``X::f`` corresponds to the class ``X``, since this |
| member function is (semantically) a member of ``X``. Lookup of the name ``f`` |
| into the ``DeclContext`` associated with ``X`` will then return the definition |
| of ``X::f`` (including information about the default argument). |
| |
| Transparent Declaration Contexts |
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| |
| In C and C++, there are several contexts in which names that are logically |
| declared inside another declaration will actually "leak" out into the enclosing |
| scope from the perspective of name lookup. The most obvious instance of this |
| behavior is in enumeration types, e.g., |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| enum Color { |
| Red, |
| Green, |
| Blue |
| }; |
| |
| Here, ``Color`` is an enumeration, which is a declaration context that contains |
| the enumerators ``Red``, ``Green``, and ``Blue``. Thus, traversing the list of |
| declarations contained in the enumeration ``Color`` will yield ``Red``, |
| ``Green``, and ``Blue``. However, outside of the scope of ``Color`` one can |
| name the enumerator ``Red`` without qualifying the name, e.g., |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| Color c = Red; |
| |
| There are other entities in C++ that provide similar behavior. For example, |
| linkage specifications that use curly braces: |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| extern "C" { |
| void f(int); |
| void g(int); |
| } |
| // f and g are visible here |
| |
| For source-level accuracy, we treat the linkage specification and enumeration |
| type as a declaration context in which its enclosed declarations ("``Red``", |
| "``Green``", and "``Blue``"; "``f``" and "``g``") are declared. However, these |
| declarations are visible outside of the scope of the declaration context. |
| |
| These language features (and several others, described below) have roughly the |
| same set of requirements: declarations are declared within a particular lexical |
| context, but the declarations are also found via name lookup in scopes |
| enclosing the declaration itself. This feature is implemented via |
| *transparent* declaration contexts (see |
| ``DeclContext::isTransparentContext()``), whose declarations are visible in the |
| nearest enclosing non-transparent declaration context. This means that the |
| lexical context of the declaration (e.g., an enumerator) will be the |
| transparent ``DeclContext`` itself, as will the semantic context, but the |
| declaration will be visible in every outer context up to and including the |
| first non-transparent declaration context (since transparent declaration |
| contexts can be nested). |
| |
| The transparent ``DeclContext``\ s are: |
| |
| * Enumerations (but not C++11 "scoped enumerations"): |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| enum Color { |
| Red, |
| Green, |
| Blue |
| }; |
| // Red, Green, and Blue are in scope |
| |
| * C++ linkage specifications: |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| extern "C" { |
| void f(int); |
| void g(int); |
| } |
| // f and g are in scope |
| |
| * Anonymous unions and structs: |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| struct LookupTable { |
| bool IsVector; |
| union { |
| std::vector<Item> *Vector; |
| std::set<Item> *Set; |
| }; |
| }; |
| |
| LookupTable LT; |
| LT.Vector = 0; // Okay: finds Vector inside the unnamed union |
| |
| * C++11 inline namespaces: |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| namespace mylib { |
| inline namespace debug { |
| class X; |
| } |
| } |
| mylib::X *xp; // okay: mylib::X refers to mylib::debug::X |
| |
| .. _MultiDeclContext: |
| |
| Multiply-Defined Declaration Contexts |
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| |
| C++ namespaces have the interesting --- and, so far, unique --- property that |
| the namespace can be defined multiple times, and the declarations provided by |
| each namespace definition are effectively merged (from the semantic point of |
| view). For example, the following two code snippets are semantically |
| indistinguishable: |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| // Snippet #1: |
| namespace N { |
| void f(); |
| } |
| namespace N { |
| void f(int); |
| } |
| |
| // Snippet #2: |
| namespace N { |
| void f(); |
| void f(int); |
| } |
| |
| In Clang's representation, the source-centric view of declaration contexts will |
| actually have two separate ``NamespaceDecl`` nodes in Snippet #1, each of which |
| is a declaration context that contains a single declaration of "``f``". |
| However, the semantics-centric view provided by name lookup into the namespace |
| ``N`` for "``f``" will return a ``DeclContext::lookup_result`` that contains a |
| range of iterators over declarations of "``f``". |
| |
| ``DeclContext`` manages multiply-defined declaration contexts internally. The |
| function ``DeclContext::getPrimaryContext`` retrieves the "primary" context for |
| a given ``DeclContext`` instance, which is the ``DeclContext`` responsible for |
| maintaining the lookup table used for the semantics-centric view. Given the |
| primary context, one can follow the chain of ``DeclContext`` nodes that define |
| additional declarations via ``DeclContext::getNextContext``. Note that these |
| functions are used internally within the lookup and insertion methods of the |
| ``DeclContext``, so the vast majority of clients can ignore them. |
| |
| .. _CFG: |
| |
| The ``CFG`` class |
| ----------------- |
| |
| The ``CFG`` class is designed to represent a source-level control-flow graph |
| for a single statement (``Stmt*``). Typically instances of ``CFG`` are |
| constructed for function bodies (usually an instance of ``CompoundStmt``), but |
| can also be instantiated to represent the control-flow of any class that |
| subclasses ``Stmt``, which includes simple expressions. Control-flow graphs |
| are especially useful for performing `flow- or path-sensitive |
| <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_flow_analysis#Sensitivities>`_ program |
| analyses on a given function. |
| |
| Basic Blocks |
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| |
| Concretely, an instance of ``CFG`` is a collection of basic blocks. Each basic |
| block is an instance of ``CFGBlock``, which simply contains an ordered sequence |
| of ``Stmt*`` (each referring to statements in the AST). The ordering of |
| statements within a block indicates unconditional flow of control from one |
| statement to the next. :ref:`Conditional control-flow |
| <ConditionalControlFlow>` is represented using edges between basic blocks. The |
| statements within a given ``CFGBlock`` can be traversed using the |
| ``CFGBlock::*iterator`` interface. |
| |
| A ``CFG`` object owns the instances of ``CFGBlock`` within the control-flow |
| graph it represents. Each ``CFGBlock`` within a CFG is also uniquely numbered |
| (accessible via ``CFGBlock::getBlockID()``). Currently the number is based on |
| the ordering the blocks were created, but no assumptions should be made on how |
| ``CFGBlocks`` are numbered other than their numbers are unique and that they |
| are numbered from 0..N-1 (where N is the number of basic blocks in the CFG). |
| |
| Entry and Exit Blocks |
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| |
| Each instance of ``CFG`` contains two special blocks: an *entry* block |
| (accessible via ``CFG::getEntry()``), which has no incoming edges, and an |
| *exit* block (accessible via ``CFG::getExit()``), which has no outgoing edges. |
| Neither block contains any statements, and they serve the role of providing a |
| clear entrance and exit for a body of code such as a function body. The |
| presence of these empty blocks greatly simplifies the implementation of many |
| analyses built on top of CFGs. |
| |
| .. _ConditionalControlFlow: |
| |
| Conditional Control-Flow |
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| |
| Conditional control-flow (such as those induced by if-statements and loops) is |
| represented as edges between ``CFGBlocks``. Because different C language |
| constructs can induce control-flow, each ``CFGBlock`` also records an extra |
| ``Stmt*`` that represents the *terminator* of the block. A terminator is |
| simply the statement that caused the control-flow, and is used to identify the |
| nature of the conditional control-flow between blocks. For example, in the |
| case of an if-statement, the terminator refers to the ``IfStmt`` object in the |
| AST that represented the given branch. |
| |
| To illustrate, consider the following code example: |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| int foo(int x) { |
| x = x + 1; |
| if (x > 2) |
| x++; |
| else { |
| x += 2; |
| x *= 2; |
| } |
| |
| return x; |
| } |
| |
| After invoking the parser+semantic analyzer on this code fragment, the AST of |
| the body of ``foo`` is referenced by a single ``Stmt*``. We can then construct |
| an instance of ``CFG`` representing the control-flow graph of this function |
| body by single call to a static class method: |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| Stmt *FooBody = ... |
| CFG *FooCFG = CFG::buildCFG(FooBody); |
| |
| It is the responsibility of the caller of ``CFG::buildCFG`` to ``delete`` the |
| returned ``CFG*`` when the CFG is no longer needed. |
| |
| Along with providing an interface to iterate over its ``CFGBlocks``, the |
| ``CFG`` class also provides methods that are useful for debugging and |
| visualizing CFGs. For example, the method ``CFG::dump()`` dumps a |
| pretty-printed version of the CFG to standard error. This is especially useful |
| when one is using a debugger such as gdb. For example, here is the output of |
| ``FooCFG->dump()``: |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| [ B5 (ENTRY) ] |
| Predecessors (0): |
| Successors (1): B4 |
| |
| [ B4 ] |
| 1: x = x + 1 |
| 2: (x > 2) |
| T: if [B4.2] |
| Predecessors (1): B5 |
| Successors (2): B3 B2 |
| |
| [ B3 ] |
| 1: x++ |
| Predecessors (1): B4 |
| Successors (1): B1 |
| |
| [ B2 ] |
| 1: x += 2 |
| 2: x *= 2 |
| Predecessors (1): B4 |
| Successors (1): B1 |
| |
| [ B1 ] |
| 1: return x; |
| Predecessors (2): B2 B3 |
| Successors (1): B0 |
| |
| [ B0 (EXIT) ] |
| Predecessors (1): B1 |
| Successors (0): |
| |
| For each block, the pretty-printed output displays for each block the number of |
| *predecessor* blocks (blocks that have outgoing control-flow to the given |
| block) and *successor* blocks (blocks that have control-flow that have incoming |
| control-flow from the given block). We can also clearly see the special entry |
| and exit blocks at the beginning and end of the pretty-printed output. For the |
| entry block (block B5), the number of predecessor blocks is 0, while for the |
| exit block (block B0) the number of successor blocks is 0. |
| |
| The most interesting block here is B4, whose outgoing control-flow represents |
| the branching caused by the sole if-statement in ``foo``. Of particular |
| interest is the second statement in the block, ``(x > 2)``, and the terminator, |
| printed as ``if [B4.2]``. The second statement represents the evaluation of |
| the condition of the if-statement, which occurs before the actual branching of |
| control-flow. Within the ``CFGBlock`` for B4, the ``Stmt*`` for the second |
| statement refers to the actual expression in the AST for ``(x > 2)``. Thus |
| pointers to subclasses of ``Expr`` can appear in the list of statements in a |
| block, and not just subclasses of ``Stmt`` that refer to proper C statements. |
| |
| The terminator of block B4 is a pointer to the ``IfStmt`` object in the AST. |
| The pretty-printer outputs ``if [B4.2]`` because the condition expression of |
| the if-statement has an actual place in the basic block, and thus the |
| terminator is essentially *referring* to the expression that is the second |
| statement of block B4 (i.e., B4.2). In this manner, conditions for |
| control-flow (which also includes conditions for loops and switch statements) |
| are hoisted into the actual basic block. |
| |
| .. Implicit Control-Flow |
| .. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| |
| .. A key design principle of the ``CFG`` class was to not require any |
| .. transformations to the AST in order to represent control-flow. Thus the |
| .. ``CFG`` does not perform any "lowering" of the statements in an AST: loops |
| .. are not transformed into guarded gotos, short-circuit operations are not |
| .. converted to a set of if-statements, and so on. |
| |
| Constant Folding in the Clang AST |
| --------------------------------- |
| |
| There are several places where constants and constant folding matter a lot to |
| the Clang front-end. First, in general, we prefer the AST to retain the source |
| code as close to how the user wrote it as possible. This means that if they |
| wrote "``5+4``", we want to keep the addition and two constants in the AST, we |
| don't want to fold to "``9``". This means that constant folding in various |
| ways turns into a tree walk that needs to handle the various cases. |
| |
| However, there are places in both C and C++ that require constants to be |
| folded. For example, the C standard defines what an "integer constant |
| expression" (i-c-e) is with very precise and specific requirements. The |
| language then requires i-c-e's in a lot of places (for example, the size of a |
| bitfield, the value for a case statement, etc). For these, we have to be able |
| to constant fold the constants, to do semantic checks (e.g., verify bitfield |
| size is non-negative and that case statements aren't duplicated). We aim for |
| Clang to be very pedantic about this, diagnosing cases when the code does not |
| use an i-c-e where one is required, but accepting the code unless running with |
| ``-pedantic-errors``. |
| |
| Things get a little bit more tricky when it comes to compatibility with |
| real-world source code. Specifically, GCC has historically accepted a huge |
| superset of expressions as i-c-e's, and a lot of real world code depends on |
| this unfortuate accident of history (including, e.g., the glibc system |
| headers). GCC accepts anything its "fold" optimizer is capable of reducing to |
| an integer constant, which means that the definition of what it accepts changes |
| as its optimizer does. One example is that GCC accepts things like "``case |
| X-X:``" even when ``X`` is a variable, because it can fold this to 0. |
| |
| Another issue are how constants interact with the extensions we support, such |
| as ``__builtin_constant_p``, ``__builtin_inf``, ``__extension__`` and many |
| others. C99 obviously does not specify the semantics of any of these |
| extensions, and the definition of i-c-e does not include them. However, these |
| extensions are often used in real code, and we have to have a way to reason |
| about them. |
| |
| Finally, this is not just a problem for semantic analysis. The code generator |
| and other clients have to be able to fold constants (e.g., to initialize global |
| variables) and has to handle a superset of what C99 allows. Further, these |
| clients can benefit from extended information. For example, we know that |
| "``foo() || 1``" always evaluates to ``true``, but we can't replace the |
| expression with ``true`` because it has side effects. |
| |
| Implementation Approach |
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| |
| After trying several different approaches, we've finally converged on a design |
| (Note, at the time of this writing, not all of this has been implemented, |
| consider this a design goal!). Our basic approach is to define a single |
| recursive method evaluation method (``Expr::Evaluate``), which is implemented |
| in ``AST/ExprConstant.cpp``. Given an expression with "scalar" type (integer, |
| fp, complex, or pointer) this method returns the following information: |
| |
| * Whether the expression is an integer constant expression, a general constant |
| that was folded but has no side effects, a general constant that was folded |
| but that does have side effects, or an uncomputable/unfoldable value. |
| * If the expression was computable in any way, this method returns the |
| ``APValue`` for the result of the expression. |
| * If the expression is not evaluatable at all, this method returns information |
| on one of the problems with the expression. This includes a |
| ``SourceLocation`` for where the problem is, and a diagnostic ID that explains |
| the problem. The diagnostic should have ``ERROR`` type. |
| * If the expression is not an integer constant expression, this method returns |
| information on one of the problems with the expression. This includes a |
| ``SourceLocation`` for where the problem is, and a diagnostic ID that |
| explains the problem. The diagnostic should have ``EXTENSION`` type. |
| |
| This information gives various clients the flexibility that they want, and we |
| will eventually have some helper methods for various extensions. For example, |
| ``Sema`` should have a ``Sema::VerifyIntegerConstantExpression`` method, which |
| calls ``Evaluate`` on the expression. If the expression is not foldable, the |
| error is emitted, and it would return ``true``. If the expression is not an |
| i-c-e, the ``EXTENSION`` diagnostic is emitted. Finally it would return |
| ``false`` to indicate that the AST is OK. |
| |
| Other clients can use the information in other ways, for example, codegen can |
| just use expressions that are foldable in any way. |
| |
| Extensions |
| ^^^^^^^^^^ |
| |
| This section describes how some of the various extensions Clang supports |
| interacts with constant evaluation: |
| |
| * ``__extension__``: The expression form of this extension causes any |
| evaluatable subexpression to be accepted as an integer constant expression. |
| * ``__builtin_constant_p``: This returns true (as an integer constant |
| expression) if the operand evaluates to either a numeric value (that is, not |
| a pointer cast to integral type) of integral, enumeration, floating or |
| complex type, or if it evaluates to the address of the first character of a |
| string literal (possibly cast to some other type). As a special case, if |
| ``__builtin_constant_p`` is the (potentially parenthesized) condition of a |
| conditional operator expression ("``?:``"), only the true side of the |
| conditional operator is considered, and it is evaluated with full constant |
| folding. |
| * ``__builtin_choose_expr``: The condition is required to be an integer |
| constant expression, but we accept any constant as an "extension of an |
| extension". This only evaluates one operand depending on which way the |
| condition evaluates. |
| * ``__builtin_classify_type``: This always returns an integer constant |
| expression. |
| * ``__builtin_inf, nan, ...``: These are treated just like a floating-point |
| literal. |
| * ``__builtin_abs, copysign, ...``: These are constant folded as general |
| constant expressions. |
| * ``__builtin_strlen`` and ``strlen``: These are constant folded as integer |
| constant expressions if the argument is a string literal. |
| |
| How to change Clang |
| =================== |
| |
| How to add an attribute |
| ----------------------- |
| |
| Attribute Basics |
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| |
| Attributes in clang come in two forms: parsed form, and semantic form. Both |
| forms are represented via a tablegen definition of the attribute, specified in |
| Attr.td. |
| |
| |
| ``include/clang/Basic/Attr.td`` |
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| |
| First, add your attribute to the `include/clang/Basic/Attr.td |
| <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/Attr.td?view=markup>`_ |
| file. |
| |
| Each attribute gets a ``def`` inheriting from ``Attr`` or one of its |
| subclasses. ``InheritableAttr`` means that the attribute also applies to |
| subsequent declarations of the same name. ``InheritableParamAttr`` is similar |
| to ``InheritableAttr``, except that the attribute is written on a parameter |
| instead of a declaration, type or statement. Attributes inheriting from |
| ``TypeAttr`` are pure type attributes which generally are not given a |
| representation in the AST. Attributes inheriting from ``TargetSpecificAttr`` |
| are attributes specific to one or more target architectures. An attribute that |
| inherits from ``IgnoredAttr`` is parsed, but will generate an ignored attribute |
| diagnostic when used. The attribute type may be useful when an attribute is |
| supported by another vendor, but not supported by clang. |
| |
| ``Spellings`` lists the strings that can appear in ``__attribute__((here))`` or |
| ``[[here]]``. All such strings will be synonymous. Possible ``Spellings`` |
| are: ``GNU`` (for use with GNU-style __attribute__ spellings), ``Declspec`` |
| (for use with Microsoft Visual Studio-style __declspec spellings), ``CXX11` |
| (for use with C++11-style [[foo]] and [[foo::bar]] spellings), and ``Keyword`` |
| (for use with attributes that are implemented as keywords, like C++11's |
| ``override`` or ``final``). If you want to allow the ``[[]]`` C++11 syntax, you |
| have to define a list of ``Namespaces``, which will let users write |
| ``[[namespace::spelling]]``. Using the empty string for a namespace will allow |
| users to write just the spelling with no "``::``". Attributes which g++-4.8 |
| or later accepts should also have a ``CXX11<"gnu", "spelling">`` spelling. |
| |
| ``Subjects`` restricts what kinds of AST node to which this attribute can |
| appertain (roughly, attach). The subjects are specified via a ``SubjectList``, |
| which specify the list of subjects. Additionally, subject-related diagnostics |
| can be specified to be warnings or errors, with the default being a warning. |
| The diagnostics displayed to the user are automatically determined based on |
| the subjects in the list, but a custom diagnostic parameter can also be |
| specified in the ``SubjectList``. The diagnostics generated for subject list |
| violations are either ``diag::warn_attribute_wrong_decl_type`` or |
| ``diag::err_attribute_wrong_decl_type``, and the parameter enumeration is |
| found in `include/clang/Sema/AttributeList.h |
| <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/include/clang/Sema/AttributeList.h?view=markup>`_ |
| If you add new Decl nodes to the ``SubjectList``, you may need to update the |
| logic used to automatically determine the diagnostic parameter in `utils/TableGen/ClangAttrEmitter.cpp |
| <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/utils/TableGen/ClangAttrEmitter.cpp?view=markup>`_. |
| |
| Diagnostic checking for attribute subject lists is automated except when |
| ``HasCustomParsing`` is set to ``1``. |
| |
| By default, all subjects in the SubjectList must either be a Decl node defined |
| in ``DeclNodes.td``, or a statement node defined in ``StmtNodes.td``. However, |
| more complex subjects can be created by creating a ``SubsetSubject`` object. |
| Each such object has a base subject which it appertains to (which must be a |
| Decl or Stmt node, and not a SubsetSubject node), and some custom code which is |
| called when determining whether an attribute appertains to the subject. For |
| instance, a ``NonBitField`` SubsetSubject appertains to a ``FieldDecl``, and |
| tests whether the given FieldDecl is a bit field. When a SubsetSubject is |
| specified in a SubjectList, a custom diagnostic parameter must also be provided. |
| |
| ``Args`` names the arguments the attribute takes, in order. If ``Args`` is |
| ``[StringArgument<"Arg1">, IntArgument<"Arg2">]`` then |
| ``__attribute__((myattribute("Hello", 3)))`` will be a valid use. Attribute |
| arguments specify both the parsed form and the semantic form of the attribute. |
| The previous example shows an attribute which requires two attributes while |
| parsing, and the Attr subclass' constructor for the attribute will require a |
| string and integer argument. |
| |
| Diagnostic checking for argument counts is automated except when |
| ``HasCustomParsing`` is set to ``1``, or when the attribute uses an optional or |
| variadic argument. Diagnostic checking for argument semantics is not automated. |
| |
| If the parsed form of the attribute is more complex, or differs from the |
| semantic form, the ``HasCustomParsing`` bit can be set to ``1`` for the class, |
| and the parsing code in `Parser::ParseGNUAttributeArgs |
| <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/lib/Parse/ParseDecl.cpp?view=markup>`_ |
| can be updated for the special case. Note that this only applies to arguments |
| with a GNU spelling -- attributes with a __declspec spelling currently ignore |
| this flag and are handled by ``Parser::ParseMicrosoftDeclSpec``. |
| |
| Custom accessors can be generated for an attribute based on the spelling list |
| for that attribute. For instance, if an attribute has two different spellings: |
| 'Foo' and 'Bar', accessors can be created: |
| ``[Accessor<"isFoo", [GNU<"Foo">]>, Accessor<"isBar", [GNU<"Bar">]>]`` |
| These accessors will be generated on the semantic form of the attribute, |
| accepting no arguments and returning a Boolean. |
| |
| Attributes which do not require an AST node should set the ``ASTNode`` field to |
| ``0`` to avoid polluting the AST. Note that anything inheriting from |
| ``TypeAttr`` or ``IgnoredAttr`` automatically do not generate an AST node. All |
| other attributes generate an AST node by default. The AST node is the semantic |
| representation of the attribute. |
| |
| Attributes which do not require custom semantic handling should set the |
| ``SemaHandler`` field to ``0``. Note that anything inheriting from |
| ``IgnoredAttr`` automatically do not get a semantic handler. All other |
| attributes are assumed to use a semantic handler by default. Attributes |
| without a semantic handler are not given a parsed attribute Kind enumeration. |
| |
| The ``LangOpts`` field can be used to specify a list of language options |
| required by the attribute. For instance, all of the CUDA-specific attributes |
| specify ``[CUDA]`` for the ``LangOpts`` field, and when the CUDA language |
| option is not enabled, an "attribute ignored" warning diagnostic is emitted. |
| Since language options are not table generated nodes, new language options must |
| be created manually and should specify the spelling used by ``LangOptions`` class. |
| |
| Target-specific attribute sometimes share a spelling with other attributes in |
| different targets. For instance, the ARM and MSP430 targets both have an |
| attribute spelled ``GNU<"interrupt">``, but with different parsing and semantic |
| requirements. To support this feature, an attribute inheriting from |
| ``TargetSpecificAttribute`` make specify a ``ParseKind`` field. This field |
| should be the same value between all arguments sharing a spelling, and |
| corresponds to the parsed attribute's Kind enumeration. This allows attributes |
| to share a parsed attribute kind, but have distinct semantic attribute classes. |
| For instance, ``AttributeList::AT_Interrupt`` is the shared parsed attribute |
| kind, but ARMInterruptAttr and MSP430InterruptAttr are the semantic attributes |
| generated. |
| |
| By default, when declarations are merging attributes, an attribute will not be |
| duplicated. However, if an attribute can be duplicated during this merging |
| stage, set ``DuplicatesAllowedWhileMerging`` to ``1``, and the attribute will |
| be merged. |
| |
| By default, attribute arguments are parsed in an evaluated context. If the |
| arguments for an attribute should be parsed in an unevaluated context (akin to |
| the way the argument to a ``sizeof`` expression is parsed), you can set |
| ``ParseArgumentsAsUnevaluated`` to ``1``. |
| |
| If additional functionality is desired for the semantic form of the attribute, |
| the ``AdditionalMembers`` field specifies code to be copied verbatim into the |
| semantic attribute class object. |
| |
| All attributes must have one or more form of documentation, which is provided |
| in the ``Documentation`` list. Generally, the documentation for an attribute |
| is a stand-alone definition in `include/clang/Basic/AttrDocs.td |
| <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/AttdDocs.td?view=markup>`_ |
| that is named after the attribute being documented. Each documentation element |
| is given a ``Category`` (variable, function, or type) and ``Content``. A single |
| attribute may contain multiple documentation elements for distinct categories. |
| For instance, an attribute which can appertain to both function and types (such |
| as a calling convention attribute), should contain two documentation elements. |
| The ``Content`` for an attribute uses reStructuredText (RST) syntax. |
| |
| If an attribute is used internally by the compiler, but is not written by users |
| (such as attributes with an empty spelling list), it can use the |
| ``Undocumented`` documentation element. |
| |
| Boilerplate |
| ^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| |
| All semantic processing of declaration attributes happens in `lib/Sema/SemaDeclAttr.cpp |
| <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaDeclAttr.cpp?view=markup>`_, |
| and generally starts in the ``ProcessDeclAttribute`` function. If your |
| attribute is a "simple" attribute -- meaning that it requires no custom |
| semantic processing aside from what is automatically provided for you, you can |
| add a call to ``handleSimpleAttribute<YourAttr>(S, D, Attr);`` to the switch |
| statement. Otherwise, write a new ``handleYourAttr()`` function, and add that |
| to the switch statement. |
| |
| If your attribute causes extra warnings to fire, define a ``DiagGroup`` in |
| `include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticGroups.td |
| <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticGroups.td?view=markup>`_ |
| named after the attribute's ``Spelling`` with "_"s replaced by "-"s. If you're |
| only defining one diagnostic, you can skip ``DiagnosticGroups.td`` and use |
| ``InGroup<DiagGroup<"your-attribute">>`` directly in `DiagnosticSemaKinds.td |
| <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td?view=markup>`_ |
| |
| All semantic diagnostics generated for your attribute, including automatically- |
| generated ones (such as subjects and argument counts), should have a |
| corresponding test case. |
| |
| The meat of your attribute |
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| |
| Find an appropriate place in Clang to do whatever your attribute needs to do. |
| Check for the attribute's presence using ``Decl::getAttr<YourAttr>()``. |
| |
| Update the :doc:`LanguageExtensions` document to describe your new attribute. |
| |
| How to add an expression or statement |
| ------------------------------------- |
| |
| Expressions and statements are one of the most fundamental constructs within a |
| compiler, because they interact with many different parts of the AST, semantic |
| analysis, and IR generation. Therefore, adding a new expression or statement |
| kind into Clang requires some care. The following list details the various |
| places in Clang where an expression or statement needs to be introduced, along |
| with patterns to follow to ensure that the new expression or statement works |
| well across all of the C languages. We focus on expressions, but statements |
| are similar. |
| |
| #. Introduce parsing actions into the parser. Recursive-descent parsing is |
| mostly self-explanatory, but there are a few things that are worth keeping |
| in mind: |
| |
| * Keep as much source location information as possible! You'll want it later |
| to produce great diagnostics and support Clang's various features that map |
| between source code and the AST. |
| * Write tests for all of the "bad" parsing cases, to make sure your recovery |
| is good. If you have matched delimiters (e.g., parentheses, square |
| brackets, etc.), use ``Parser::BalancedDelimiterTracker`` to give nice |
| diagnostics when things go wrong. |
| |
| #. Introduce semantic analysis actions into ``Sema``. Semantic analysis should |
| always involve two functions: an ``ActOnXXX`` function that will be called |
| directly from the parser, and a ``BuildXXX`` function that performs the |
| actual semantic analysis and will (eventually!) build the AST node. It's |
| fairly common for the ``ActOnCXX`` function to do very little (often just |
| some minor translation from the parser's representation to ``Sema``'s |
| representation of the same thing), but the separation is still important: |
| C++ template instantiation, for example, should always call the ``BuildXXX`` |
| variant. Several notes on semantic analysis before we get into construction |
| of the AST: |
| |
| * Your expression probably involves some types and some subexpressions. |
| Make sure to fully check that those types, and the types of those |
| subexpressions, meet your expectations. Add implicit conversions where |
| necessary to make sure that all of the types line up exactly the way you |
| want them. Write extensive tests to check that you're getting good |
| diagnostics for mistakes and that you can use various forms of |
| subexpressions with your expression. |
| * When type-checking a type or subexpression, make sure to first check |
| whether the type is "dependent" (``Type::isDependentType()``) or whether a |
| subexpression is type-dependent (``Expr::isTypeDependent()``). If any of |
| these return ``true``, then you're inside a template and you can't do much |
| type-checking now. That's normal, and your AST node (when you get there) |
| will have to deal with this case. At this point, you can write tests that |
| use your expression within templates, but don't try to instantiate the |
| templates. |
| * For each subexpression, be sure to call ``Sema::CheckPlaceholderExpr()`` |
| to deal with "weird" expressions that don't behave well as subexpressions. |
| Then, determine whether you need to perform lvalue-to-rvalue conversions |
| (``Sema::DefaultLvalueConversions``) or the usual unary conversions |
| (``Sema::UsualUnaryConversions``), for places where the subexpression is |
| producing a value you intend to use. |
| * Your ``BuildXXX`` function will probably just return ``ExprError()`` at |
| this point, since you don't have an AST. That's perfectly fine, and |
| shouldn't impact your testing. |
| |
| #. Introduce an AST node for your new expression. This starts with declaring |
| the node in ``include/Basic/StmtNodes.td`` and creating a new class for your |
| expression in the appropriate ``include/AST/Expr*.h`` header. It's best to |
| look at the class for a similar expression to get ideas, and there are some |
| specific things to watch for: |
| |
| * If you need to allocate memory, use the ``ASTContext`` allocator to |
| allocate memory. Never use raw ``malloc`` or ``new``, and never hold any |
| resources in an AST node, because the destructor of an AST node is never |
| called. |
| * Make sure that ``getSourceRange()`` covers the exact source range of your |
| expression. This is needed for diagnostics and for IDE support. |
| * Make sure that ``children()`` visits all of the subexpressions. This is |
| important for a number of features (e.g., IDE support, C++ variadic |
| templates). If you have sub-types, you'll also need to visit those |
| sub-types in the ``RecursiveASTVisitor``. |
| * Add printing support (``StmtPrinter.cpp``) and dumping support |
| (``StmtDumper.cpp``) for your expression. |
| * Add profiling support (``StmtProfile.cpp``) for your AST node, noting the |
| distinguishing (non-source location) characteristics of an instance of |
| your expression. Omitting this step will lead to hard-to-diagnose |
| failures regarding matching of template declarations. |
| |
| #. Teach semantic analysis to build your AST node. At this point, you can wire |
| up your ``Sema::BuildXXX`` function to actually create your AST. A few |
| things to check at this point: |
| |
| * If your expression can construct a new C++ class or return a new |
| Objective-C object, be sure to update and then call |
| ``Sema::MaybeBindToTemporary`` for your just-created AST node to be sure |
| that the object gets properly destructed. An easy way to test this is to |
| return a C++ class with a private destructor: semantic analysis should |
| flag an error here with the attempt to call the destructor. |
| * Inspect the generated AST by printing it using ``clang -cc1 -ast-print``, |
| to make sure you're capturing all of the important information about how |
| the AST was written. |
| * Inspect the generated AST under ``clang -cc1 -ast-dump`` to verify that |
| all of the types in the generated AST line up the way you want them. |
| Remember that clients of the AST should never have to "think" to |
| understand what's going on. For example, all implicit conversions should |
| show up explicitly in the AST. |
| * Write tests that use your expression as a subexpression of other, |
| well-known expressions. Can you call a function using your expression as |
| an argument? Can you use the ternary operator? |
| |
| #. Teach code generation to create IR to your AST node. This step is the first |
| (and only) that requires knowledge of LLVM IR. There are several things to |
| keep in mind: |
| |
| * Code generation is separated into scalar/aggregate/complex and |
| lvalue/rvalue paths, depending on what kind of result your expression |
| produces. On occasion, this requires some careful factoring of code to |
| avoid duplication. |
| * ``CodeGenFunction`` contains functions ``ConvertType`` and |
| ``ConvertTypeForMem`` that convert Clang's types (``clang::Type*`` or |
| ``clang::QualType``) to LLVM types. Use the former for values, and the |
| later for memory locations: test with the C++ "``bool``" type to check |
| this. If you find that you are having to use LLVM bitcasts to make the |
| subexpressions of your expression have the type that your expression |
| expects, STOP! Go fix semantic analysis and the AST so that you don't |
| need these bitcasts. |
| * The ``CodeGenFunction`` class has a number of helper functions to make |
| certain operations easy, such as generating code to produce an lvalue or |
| an rvalue, or to initialize a memory location with a given value. Prefer |
| to use these functions rather than directly writing loads and stores, |
| because these functions take care of some of the tricky details for you |
| (e.g., for exceptions). |
| * If your expression requires some special behavior in the event of an |
| exception, look at the ``push*Cleanup`` functions in ``CodeGenFunction`` |
| to introduce a cleanup. You shouldn't have to deal with |
| exception-handling directly. |
| * Testing is extremely important in IR generation. Use ``clang -cc1 |
| -emit-llvm`` and `FileCheck |
| <http://llvm.org/docs/CommandGuide/FileCheck.html>`_ to verify that you're |
| generating the right IR. |
| |
| #. Teach template instantiation how to cope with your AST node, which requires |
| some fairly simple code: |
| |
| * Make sure that your expression's constructor properly computes the flags |
| for type dependence (i.e., the type your expression produces can change |
| from one instantiation to the next), value dependence (i.e., the constant |
| value your expression produces can change from one instantiation to the |
| next), instantiation dependence (i.e., a template parameter occurs |
| anywhere in your expression), and whether your expression contains a |
| parameter pack (for variadic templates). Often, computing these flags |
| just means combining the results from the various types and |
| subexpressions. |
| * Add ``TransformXXX`` and ``RebuildXXX`` functions to the ``TreeTransform`` |
| class template in ``Sema``. ``TransformXXX`` should (recursively) |
| transform all of the subexpressions and types within your expression, |
| using ``getDerived().TransformYYY``. If all of the subexpressions and |
| types transform without error, it will then call the ``RebuildXXX`` |
| function, which will in turn call ``getSema().BuildXXX`` to perform |
| semantic analysis and build your expression. |
| * To test template instantiation, take those tests you wrote to make sure |
| that you were type checking with type-dependent expressions and dependent |
| types (from step #2) and instantiate those templates with various types, |
| some of which type-check and some that don't, and test the error messages |
| in each case. |
| |
| #. There are some "extras" that make other features work better. It's worth |
| handling these extras to give your expression complete integration into |
| Clang: |
| |
| * Add code completion support for your expression in |
| ``SemaCodeComplete.cpp``. |
| * If your expression has types in it, or has any "interesting" features |
| other than subexpressions, extend libclang's ``CursorVisitor`` to provide |
| proper visitation for your expression, enabling various IDE features such |
| as syntax highlighting, cross-referencing, and so on. The |
| ``c-index-test`` helper program can be used to test these features. |
| |