1 ============================
2 "Clang" CFE Internals Manual
3 ============================
11 This document describes some of the more important APIs and internal design
12 decisions made in the Clang C front-end. The purpose of this document is to
13 both capture some of this high level information and also describe some of the
14 design decisions behind it. This is meant for people interested in hacking on
15 Clang, not for end-users. The description below is categorized by libraries,
16 and does not describe any of the clients of the libraries.
21 The LLVM ``libSupport`` library provides many underlying libraries and
22 `data-structures <https://llvm.org/docs/ProgrammersManual.html>`_, including
23 command line option processing, various containers and a system abstraction
24 layer, which is used for file system access.
26 The Clang "Basic" Library
27 =========================
29 This library certainly needs a better name. The "basic" library contains a
30 number of low-level utilities for tracking and manipulating source buffers,
31 locations within the source buffers, diagnostics, tokens, target abstraction,
32 and information about the subset of the language being compiled for.
34 Part of this infrastructure is specific to C (such as the ``TargetInfo``
35 class), other parts could be reused for other non-C-based languages
36 (``SourceLocation``, ``SourceManager``, ``Diagnostics``, ``FileManager``).
37 When and if there is future demand we can figure out if it makes sense to
38 introduce a new library, move the general classes somewhere else, or introduce
41 We describe the roles of these classes in order of their dependencies.
43 The Diagnostics Subsystem
44 -------------------------
46 The Clang Diagnostics subsystem is an important part of how the compiler
47 communicates with the human. Diagnostics are the warnings and errors produced
48 when the code is incorrect or dubious. In Clang, each diagnostic produced has
49 (at the minimum) a unique ID, an English translation associated with it, a
50 :ref:`SourceLocation <SourceLocation>` to "put the caret", and a severity
51 (e.g., ``WARNING`` or ``ERROR``). They can also optionally include a number of
52 arguments to the diagnostic (which fill in "%0"'s in the string) as well as a
53 number of source ranges that related to the diagnostic.
55 In this section, we'll be giving examples produced by the Clang command line
56 driver, but diagnostics can be :ref:`rendered in many different ways
57 <DiagnosticConsumer>` depending on how the ``DiagnosticConsumer`` interface is
58 implemented. A representative example of a diagnostic is:
62 t.c:38:15: error: invalid operands to binary expression ('int *' and '_Complex float')
66 In this example, you can see the English translation, the severity (error), you
67 can see the source location (the caret ("``^``") and file/line/column info),
68 the source ranges "``~~~~``", arguments to the diagnostic ("``int*``" and
69 "``_Complex float``"). You'll have to believe me that there is a unique ID
70 backing the diagnostic :).
72 Getting all of this to happen has several steps and involves many moving
73 pieces, this section describes them and talks about best practices when adding
76 The ``Diagnostic*Kinds.td`` files
77 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
79 Diagnostics are created by adding an entry to one of the
80 ``clang/Basic/Diagnostic*Kinds.td`` files, depending on what library will be
81 using it. From this file, :program:`tblgen` generates the unique ID of the
82 diagnostic, the severity of the diagnostic and the English translation + format
85 There is little sanity with the naming of the unique ID's right now. Some
86 start with ``err_``, ``warn_``, ``ext_`` to encode the severity into the name.
87 Since the enum is referenced in the C++ code that produces the diagnostic, it
88 is somewhat useful for it to be reasonably short.
90 The severity of the diagnostic comes from the set {``NOTE``, ``REMARK``,
92 ``EXTENSION``, ``EXTWARN``, ``ERROR``}. The ``ERROR`` severity is used for
93 diagnostics indicating the program is never acceptable under any circumstances.
94 When an error is emitted, the AST for the input code may not be fully built.
95 The ``EXTENSION`` and ``EXTWARN`` severities are used for extensions to the
96 language that Clang accepts. This means that Clang fully understands and can
97 represent them in the AST, but we produce diagnostics to tell the user their
98 code is non-portable. The difference is that the former are ignored by
99 default, and the later warn by default. The ``WARNING`` severity is used for
100 constructs that are valid in the currently selected source language but that
101 are dubious in some way. The ``REMARK`` severity provides generic information
102 about the compilation that is not necessarily related to any dubious code. The
103 ``NOTE`` level is used to staple more information onto previous diagnostics.
105 These *severities* are mapped into a smaller set (the ``Diagnostic::Level``
106 enum, {``Ignored``, ``Note``, ``Remark``, ``Warning``, ``Error``, ``Fatal``}) of
108 *levels* by the diagnostics subsystem based on various configuration options.
109 Clang internally supports a fully fine grained mapping mechanism that allows
110 you to map almost any diagnostic to the output level that you want. The only
111 diagnostics that cannot be mapped are ``NOTE``\ s, which always follow the
112 severity of the previously emitted diagnostic and ``ERROR``\ s, which can only
113 be mapped to ``Fatal`` (it is not possible to turn an error into a warning, for
116 Diagnostic mappings are used in many ways. For example, if the user specifies
117 ``-pedantic``, ``EXTENSION`` maps to ``Warning``, if they specify
118 ``-pedantic-errors``, it turns into ``Error``. This is used to implement
119 options like ``-Wunused_macros``, ``-Wundef`` etc.
121 Mapping to ``Fatal`` should only be used for diagnostics that are considered so
122 severe that error recovery won't be able to recover sensibly from them (thus
123 spewing a ton of bogus errors). One example of this class of error are failure
124 to ``#include`` a file.
129 The format string for the diagnostic is very simple, but it has some power. It
130 takes the form of a string in English with markers that indicate where and how
131 arguments to the diagnostic are inserted and formatted. For example, here are
132 some simple format strings:
136 "binary integer literals are an extension"
137 "format string contains '\\0' within the string body"
138 "more '%%' conversions than data arguments"
139 "invalid operands to binary expression (%0 and %1)"
140 "overloaded '%0' must be a %select{unary|binary|unary or binary}2 operator"
141 " (has %1 parameter%s1)"
143 These examples show some important points of format strings. You can use any
144 plain ASCII character in the diagnostic string except "``%``" without a
145 problem, but these are C strings, so you have to use and be aware of all the C
146 escape sequences (as in the second example). If you want to produce a "``%``"
147 in the output, use the "``%%``" escape sequence, like the third diagnostic.
148 Finally, Clang uses the "``%...[digit]``" sequences to specify where and how
149 arguments to the diagnostic are formatted.
151 Arguments to the diagnostic are numbered according to how they are specified by
152 the C++ code that :ref:`produces them <internals-producing-diag>`, and are
153 referenced by ``%0`` .. ``%9``. If you have more than 10 arguments to your
154 diagnostic, you are doing something wrong :). Unlike ``printf``, there is no
155 requirement that arguments to the diagnostic end up in the output in the same
156 order as they are specified, you could have a format string with "``%1 %0``"
157 that swaps them, for example. The text in between the percent and digit are
158 formatting instructions. If there are no instructions, the argument is just
159 turned into a string and substituted in.
161 Here are some "best practices" for writing the English format string:
163 * Keep the string short. It should ideally fit in the 80 column limit of the
164 ``DiagnosticKinds.td`` file. This avoids the diagnostic wrapping when
165 printed, and forces you to think about the important point you are conveying
167 * Take advantage of location information. The user will be able to see the
168 line and location of the caret, so you don't need to tell them that the
169 problem is with the 4th argument to the function: just point to it.
170 * Do not capitalize the diagnostic string, and do not end it with a period.
171 * If you need to quote something in the diagnostic string, use single quotes.
173 Diagnostics should never take random English strings as arguments: you
174 shouldn't use "``you have a problem with %0``" and pass in things like "``your
175 argument``" or "``your return value``" as arguments. Doing this prevents
176 :ref:`translating <internals-diag-translation>` the Clang diagnostics to other
177 languages (because they'll get random English words in their otherwise
178 localized diagnostic). The exceptions to this are C/C++ language keywords
179 (e.g., ``auto``, ``const``, ``mutable``, etc) and C/C++ operators (``/=``).
180 Note that things like "pointer" and "reference" are not keywords. On the other
181 hand, you *can* include anything that comes from the user's source code,
182 including variable names, types, labels, etc. The "``select``" format can be
183 used to achieve this sort of thing in a localizable way, see below.
185 Formatting a Diagnostic Argument
186 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
188 Arguments to diagnostics are fully typed internally, and come from a couple
189 different classes: integers, types, names, and random strings. Depending on
190 the class of the argument, it can be optionally formatted in different ways.
191 This gives the ``DiagnosticConsumer`` information about what the argument means
192 without requiring it to use a specific presentation (consider this MVC for
195 Here are the different diagnostic argument formats currently supported by
201 ``"requires %1 parameter%s1"``
205 This is a simple formatter for integers that is useful when producing English
206 diagnostics. When the integer is 1, it prints as nothing. When the integer
207 is not 1, it prints as "``s``". This allows some simple grammatical forms to
208 be to be handled correctly, and eliminates the need to use gross things like
209 ``"requires %1 parameter(s)"``.
214 ``"must be a %select{unary|binary|unary or binary}2 operator"``
218 This format specifier is used to merge multiple related diagnostics together
219 into one common one, without requiring the difference to be specified as an
220 English string argument. Instead of specifying the string, the diagnostic
221 gets an integer argument and the format string selects the numbered option.
222 In this case, the "``%2``" value must be an integer in the range [0..2]. If
223 it is 0, it prints "unary", if it is 1 it prints "binary" if it is 2, it
224 prints "unary or binary". This allows other language translations to
225 substitute reasonable words (or entire phrases) based on the semantics of the
226 diagnostic instead of having to do things textually. The selected string
227 does undergo formatting.
232 ``"you have %1 %plural{1:mouse|:mice}1 connected to your computer"``
236 This is a formatter for complex plural forms. It is designed to handle even
237 the requirements of languages with very complex plural forms, as many Baltic
238 languages have. The argument consists of a series of expression/form pairs,
239 separated by ":", where the first form whose expression evaluates to true is
240 the result of the modifier.
242 An expression can be empty, in which case it is always true. See the example
243 at the top. Otherwise, it is a series of one or more numeric conditions,
244 separated by ",". If any condition matches, the expression matches. Each
245 numeric condition can take one of three forms.
247 * number: A simple decimal number matches if the argument is the same as the
248 number. Example: ``"%plural{1:mouse|:mice}4"``
249 * range: A range in square brackets matches if the argument is within the
250 range. Then range is inclusive on both ends. Example:
251 ``"%plural{0:none|1:one|[2,5]:some|:many}2"``
252 * modulo: A modulo operator is followed by a number, and equals sign and
253 either a number or a range. The tests are the same as for plain numbers
254 and ranges, but the argument is taken modulo the number first. Example:
255 ``"%plural{%100=0:even hundred|%100=[1,50]:lower half|:everything else}1"``
257 The parser is very unforgiving. A syntax error, even whitespace, will abort,
258 as will a failure to match the argument against any expression.
263 ``"ambiguity in %ordinal0 argument"``
267 This is a formatter which represents the argument number as an ordinal: the
268 value ``1`` becomes ``1st``, ``3`` becomes ``3rd``, and so on. Values less
269 than ``1`` are not supported. This formatter is currently hard-coded to use
272 **"objcclass" format**
275 ``"method %objcclass0 not found"``
279 This is a simple formatter that indicates the ``DeclarationName`` corresponds
280 to an Objective-C class method selector. As such, it prints the selector
281 with a leading "``+``".
283 **"objcinstance" format**
286 ``"method %objcinstance0 not found"``
290 This is a simple formatter that indicates the ``DeclarationName`` corresponds
291 to an Objective-C instance method selector. As such, it prints the selector
292 with a leading "``-``".
297 ``"candidate found by name lookup is %q0"``
301 This formatter indicates that the fully-qualified name of the declaration
302 should be printed, e.g., "``std::vector``" rather than "``vector``".
307 ``"no known conversion %diff{from $ to $|from argument type to parameter type}1,2"``
311 This formatter takes two ``QualType``\ s and attempts to print a template
312 difference between the two. If tree printing is off, the text inside the
313 braces before the pipe is printed, with the formatted text replacing the $.
314 If tree printing is on, the text after the pipe is printed and a type tree is
315 printed after the diagnostic message.
317 It is really easy to add format specifiers to the Clang diagnostics system, but
318 they should be discussed before they are added. If you are creating a lot of
319 repetitive diagnostics and/or have an idea for a useful formatter, please bring
320 it up on the cfe-dev mailing list.
325 Given the following record definition of type ``TextSubstitution``:
329 def select_ovl_candidate : TextSubstitution<
330 "%select{function|constructor}0%select{| template| %2}1">;
336 def note_ovl_candidate : Note<
337 "candidate %sub{select_ovl_candidate}3,2,1 not viable">;
339 and will act as if it was written
340 ``"candidate %select{function|constructor}3%select{| template| %1}2 not viable"``.
342 This format specifier is used to avoid repeating strings verbatim in multiple
343 diagnostics. The argument to ``%sub`` must name a ``TextSubstitution`` tblgen
344 record. The substitution must specify all arguments used by the substitution,
345 and the modifier indexes in the substitution are re-numbered accordingly. The
346 substituted text must itself be a valid format string before substitution.
348 .. _internals-producing-diag:
350 Producing the Diagnostic
351 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
353 Now that you've created the diagnostic in the ``Diagnostic*Kinds.td`` file, you
354 need to write the code that detects the condition in question and emits the new
355 diagnostic. Various components of Clang (e.g., the preprocessor, ``Sema``,
356 etc.) provide a helper function named "``Diag``". It creates a diagnostic and
357 accepts the arguments, ranges, and other information that goes along with it.
359 For example, the binary expression error comes from code like this:
363 if (various things that are bad)
364 Diag(Loc, diag::err_typecheck_invalid_operands)
365 << lex->getType() << rex->getType()
366 << lex->getSourceRange() << rex->getSourceRange();
368 This shows that use of the ``Diag`` method: it takes a location (a
369 :ref:`SourceLocation <SourceLocation>` object) and a diagnostic enum value
370 (which matches the name from ``Diagnostic*Kinds.td``). If the diagnostic takes
371 arguments, they are specified with the ``<<`` operator: the first argument
372 becomes ``%0``, the second becomes ``%1``, etc. The diagnostic interface
373 allows you to specify arguments of many different types, including ``int`` and
374 ``unsigned`` for integer arguments, ``const char*`` and ``std::string`` for
375 string arguments, ``DeclarationName`` and ``const IdentifierInfo *`` for names,
376 ``QualType`` for types, etc. ``SourceRange``\ s are also specified with the
377 ``<<`` operator, but do not have a specific ordering requirement.
379 As you can see, adding and producing a diagnostic is pretty straightforward.
380 The hard part is deciding exactly what you need to say to help the user,
381 picking a suitable wording, and providing the information needed to format it
382 correctly. The good news is that the call site that issues a diagnostic should
383 be completely independent of how the diagnostic is formatted and in what
384 language it is rendered.
389 In some cases, the front end emits diagnostics when it is clear that some small
390 change to the source code would fix the problem. For example, a missing
391 semicolon at the end of a statement or a use of deprecated syntax that is
392 easily rewritten into a more modern form. Clang tries very hard to emit the
393 diagnostic and recover gracefully in these and other cases.
395 However, for these cases where the fix is obvious, the diagnostic can be
396 annotated with a hint (referred to as a "fix-it hint") that describes how to
397 change the code referenced by the diagnostic to fix the problem. For example,
398 it might add the missing semicolon at the end of the statement or rewrite the
399 use of a deprecated construct into something more palatable. Here is one such
400 example from the C++ front end, where we warn about the right-shift operator
401 changing meaning from C++98 to C++11:
405 test.cpp:3:7: warning: use of right-shift operator ('>>') in template argument
406 will require parentheses in C++11
411 Here, the fix-it hint is suggesting that parentheses be added, and showing
412 exactly where those parentheses would be inserted into the source code. The
413 fix-it hints themselves describe what changes to make to the source code in an
414 abstract manner, which the text diagnostic printer renders as a line of
415 "insertions" below the caret line. :ref:`Other diagnostic clients
416 <DiagnosticConsumer>` might choose to render the code differently (e.g., as
417 markup inline) or even give the user the ability to automatically fix the
420 Fix-it hints on errors and warnings need to obey these rules:
422 * Since they are automatically applied if ``-Xclang -fixit`` is passed to the
423 driver, they should only be used when it's very likely they match the user's
425 * Clang must recover from errors as if the fix-it had been applied.
426 * Fix-it hints on a warning must not change the meaning of the code.
427 However, a hint may clarify the meaning as intentional, for example by adding
428 parentheses when the precedence of operators isn't obvious.
430 If a fix-it can't obey these rules, put the fix-it on a note. Fix-its on notes
431 are not applied automatically.
433 All fix-it hints are described by the ``FixItHint`` class, instances of which
434 should be attached to the diagnostic using the ``<<`` operator in the same way
435 that highlighted source ranges and arguments are passed to the diagnostic.
436 Fix-it hints can be created with one of three constructors:
438 * ``FixItHint::CreateInsertion(Loc, Code)``
440 Specifies that the given ``Code`` (a string) should be inserted before the
441 source location ``Loc``.
443 * ``FixItHint::CreateRemoval(Range)``
445 Specifies that the code in the given source ``Range`` should be removed.
447 * ``FixItHint::CreateReplacement(Range, Code)``
449 Specifies that the code in the given source ``Range`` should be removed,
450 and replaced with the given ``Code`` string.
452 .. _DiagnosticConsumer:
454 The ``DiagnosticConsumer`` Interface
455 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
457 Once code generates a diagnostic with all of the arguments and the rest of the
458 relevant information, Clang needs to know what to do with it. As previously
459 mentioned, the diagnostic machinery goes through some filtering to map a
460 severity onto a diagnostic level, then (assuming the diagnostic is not mapped
461 to "``Ignore``") it invokes an object that implements the ``DiagnosticConsumer``
462 interface with the information.
464 It is possible to implement this interface in many different ways. For
465 example, the normal Clang ``DiagnosticConsumer`` (named
466 ``TextDiagnosticPrinter``) turns the arguments into strings (according to the
467 various formatting rules), prints out the file/line/column information and the
468 string, then prints out the line of code, the source ranges, and the caret.
469 However, this behavior isn't required.
471 Another implementation of the ``DiagnosticConsumer`` interface is the
472 ``TextDiagnosticBuffer`` class, which is used when Clang is in ``-verify``
473 mode. Instead of formatting and printing out the diagnostics, this
474 implementation just captures and remembers the diagnostics as they fly by.
475 Then ``-verify`` compares the list of produced diagnostics to the list of
476 expected ones. If they disagree, it prints out its own output. Full
477 documentation for the ``-verify`` mode can be found in the Clang API
478 documentation for `VerifyDiagnosticConsumer
479 </doxygen/classclang_1_1VerifyDiagnosticConsumer.html#details>`_.
481 There are many other possible implementations of this interface, and this is
482 why we prefer diagnostics to pass down rich structured information in
483 arguments. For example, an HTML output might want declaration names be
484 linkified to where they come from in the source. Another example is that a GUI
485 might let you click on typedefs to expand them. This application would want to
486 pass significantly more information about types through to the GUI than a
487 simple flat string. The interface allows this to happen.
489 .. _internals-diag-translation:
491 Adding Translations to Clang
492 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
494 Not possible yet! Diagnostic strings should be written in UTF-8, the client can
495 translate to the relevant code page if needed. Each translation completely
496 replaces the format string for the diagnostic.
501 The ``SourceLocation`` and ``SourceManager`` classes
502 ----------------------------------------------------
504 Strangely enough, the ``SourceLocation`` class represents a location within the
505 source code of the program. Important design points include:
507 #. ``sizeof(SourceLocation)`` must be extremely small, as these are embedded
508 into many AST nodes and are passed around often. Currently it is 32 bits.
509 #. ``SourceLocation`` must be a simple value object that can be efficiently
511 #. We should be able to represent a source location for any byte of any input
512 file. This includes in the middle of tokens, in whitespace, in trigraphs,
514 #. A ``SourceLocation`` must encode the current ``#include`` stack that was
515 active when the location was processed. For example, if the location
516 corresponds to a token, it should contain the set of ``#include``\ s active
517 when the token was lexed. This allows us to print the ``#include`` stack
519 #. ``SourceLocation`` must be able to describe macro expansions, capturing both
520 the ultimate instantiation point and the source of the original character
523 In practice, the ``SourceLocation`` works together with the ``SourceManager``
524 class to encode two pieces of information about a location: its spelling
525 location and its expansion location. For most tokens, these will be the
526 same. However, for a macro expansion (or tokens that came from a ``_Pragma``
527 directive) these will describe the location of the characters corresponding to
528 the token and the location where the token was used (i.e., the macro
529 expansion point or the location of the ``_Pragma`` itself).
531 The Clang front-end inherently depends on the location of a token being tracked
532 correctly. If it is ever incorrect, the front-end may get confused and die.
533 The reason for this is that the notion of the "spelling" of a ``Token`` in
534 Clang depends on being able to find the original input characters for the
535 token. This concept maps directly to the "spelling location" for the token.
537 ``SourceRange`` and ``CharSourceRange``
538 ---------------------------------------
540 .. mostly taken from https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2010-August/010595.html
542 Clang represents most source ranges by [first, last], where "first" and "last"
543 each point to the beginning of their respective tokens. For example consider
544 the ``SourceRange`` of the following statement:
551 To map from this representation to a character-based representation, the "last"
552 location needs to be adjusted to point to (or past) the end of that token with
553 either ``Lexer::MeasureTokenLength()`` or ``Lexer::getLocForEndOfToken()``. For
554 the rare cases where character-level source ranges information is needed we use
555 the ``CharSourceRange`` class.
560 The clang Driver and library are documented :doc:`here <DriverInternals>`.
565 Clang supports precompiled headers (:doc:`PCH <PCHInternals>`), which uses a
566 serialized representation of Clang's internal data structures, encoded with the
567 `LLVM bitstream format <https://llvm.org/docs/BitCodeFormat.html>`_.
572 The Frontend library contains functionality useful for building tools on top of
573 the Clang libraries, for example several methods for outputting diagnostics.
578 One of the classes provided by the Frontend library is ``CompilerInvocation``,
579 which holds information that describe current invocation of the Clang ``-cc1``
580 frontend. The information typically comes from the command line constructed by
581 the Clang driver or from clients performing custom initialization. The data
582 structure is split into logical units used by different parts of the compiler,
583 for example ``PreprocessorOptions``, ``LanguageOptions`` or ``CodeGenOptions``.
585 Command Line Interface
586 ----------------------
588 The command line interface of the Clang ``-cc1`` frontend is defined alongside
589 the driver options in ``clang/Driver/Options.td``. The information making up an
590 option definition includes its prefix and name (for example ``-std=``), form and
591 position of the option value, help text, aliases and more. Each option may
592 belong to a certain group and can be marked with zero or more flags. Options
593 accepted by the ``-cc1`` frontend are marked with the ``CC1Option`` flag.
598 Option definitions are processed by the ``-gen-opt-parser-defs`` tablegen
599 backend during early stages of the build. Options are then used for querying an
600 instance ``llvm::opt::ArgList``, a wrapper around the command line arguments.
601 This is done in the Clang driver to construct individual jobs based on the
602 driver arguments and also in the ``CompilerInvocation::CreateFromArgs`` function
603 that parses the ``-cc1`` frontend arguments.
605 Command Line Generation
606 -----------------------
608 Any valid ``CompilerInvocation`` created from a ``-cc1`` command line can be
609 also serialized back into semantically equivalent command line in a
610 deterministic manner. This enables features such as implicitly discovered,
611 explicitly built modules.
614 TODO: Create and link corresponding section in Modules.rst.
616 Adding new Command Line Option
617 ------------------------------
619 When adding a new command line option, the first place of interest is the header
620 file declaring the corresponding options class (e.g. ``CodeGenOptions.h`` for
621 command line option that affects the code generation). Create new member
622 variable for the option value:
626 class CodeGenOptions : public CodeGenOptionsBase {
628 + /// List of dynamic shared object files to be loaded as pass plugins.
629 + std::vector<std::string> PassPlugins;
633 Next, declare the command line interface of the option in the tablegen file
634 ``clang/include/clang/Driver/Options.td``. This is done by instantiating the
635 ``Option`` class (defined in ``llvm/include/llvm/Option/OptParser.td``). The
636 instance is typically created through one of the helper classes that encode the
637 acceptable ways to specify the option value on the command line:
639 * ``Flag`` - the option does not accept any value,
640 * ``Joined`` - the value must immediately follow the option name within the same
642 * ``Separate`` - the value must follow the option name in the next command line
644 * ``JoinedOrSeparate`` - the value can be specified either as ``Joined`` or
646 * ``CommaJoined`` - the values are comma-separated and must immediately follow
647 the option name within the same argument (see ``Wl,`` for an example).
649 The helper classes take a list of acceptable prefixes of the option (e.g.
650 ``"-"``, ``"--"`` or ``"/"``) and the option name:
656 + def fpass_plugin_EQ : Joined<["-"], "fpass-plugin=">;
658 Then, specify additional attributes via mix-ins:
660 * ``HelpText`` holds the text that will be printed besides the option name when
661 the user requests help (e.g. via ``clang --help``).
662 * ``Group`` specifies the "category" of options this option belongs to. This is
663 used by various tools to filter certain options of interest.
664 * ``Flags`` may contain a number of "tags" associated with the option. This
665 enables more granular filtering than the ``Group`` attribute.
666 * ``Alias`` denotes that the option is an alias of another option. This may be
667 combined with ``AliasArgs`` that holds the implied value.
673 def fpass_plugin_EQ : Joined<["-"], "fpass-plugin=">,
674 + Group<f_Group>, Flags<[CC1Option]>,
675 + HelpText<"Load pass plugin from a dynamic shared object file.">;
677 New options are recognized by the Clang driver unless marked with the
678 ``NoDriverOption`` flag. On the other hand, options intended for the ``-cc1``
679 frontend must be explicitly marked with the ``CC1Option`` flag.
681 Next, parse (or manufacture) the command line arguments in the Clang driver and
682 use them to construct the ``-cc1`` job:
686 void Clang::ConstructJob(const ArgList &Args /*...*/) const {
687 ArgStringList CmdArgs;
690 + for (const Arg *A : Args.filtered(OPT_fpass_plugin_EQ)) {
691 + CmdArgs.push_back(Args.MakeArgString(Twine("-fpass-plugin=") + A->getValue()));
696 The last step is implementing the ``-cc1`` command line argument
697 parsing/generation that initializes/serializes the option class (in our case
698 ``CodeGenOptions``) stored within ``CompilerInvocation``. This can be done
699 automatically by using the marshalling annotations on the option definition:
705 def fpass_plugin_EQ : Joined<["-"], "fpass-plugin=">,
706 Group<f_Group>, Flags<[CC1Option]>,
707 HelpText<"Load pass plugin from a dynamic shared object file.">,
708 + MarshallingInfoStringVector<CodeGenOpts<"PassPlugins">>;
710 Inner workings of the system are introduced in the :ref:`marshalling
711 infrastructure <OptionMarshalling>` section and the available annotations are
712 listed :ref:`here <OptionMarshallingAnnotations>`.
714 In case the marshalling infrastructure does not support the desired semantics,
715 consider simplifying it to fit the existing model. This makes the command line
716 more uniform and reduces the amount of custom, manually written code. Remember
717 that the ``-cc1`` command line interface is intended only for Clang developers,
718 meaning it does not need to mirror the driver interface, maintain backward
719 compatibility or be compatible with GCC.
721 If the option semantics cannot be encoded via marshalling annotations, you can
722 resort to parsing/serializing the command line arguments manually:
726 // CompilerInvocation.cpp
728 static bool ParseCodeGenArgs(CodeGenOptions &Opts, ArgList &Args /*...*/) {
731 + Opts.PassPlugins = Args.getAllArgValues(OPT_fpass_plugin_EQ);
734 static void GenerateCodeGenArgs(const CodeGenOptions &Opts,
735 SmallVectorImpl<const char *> &Args,
736 CompilerInvocation::StringAllocator SA /*...*/) {
739 + for (const std::string &PassPlugin : Opts.PassPlugins)
740 + GenerateArg(Args, OPT_fpass_plugin_EQ, PassPlugin, SA);
743 Finally, you can specify the argument on the command line:
744 ``clang -fpass-plugin=a -fpass-plugin=b`` and use the new member variable as
749 void EmitAssemblyHelper::EmitAssemblyWithNewPassManager(/*...*/) {
751 + for (auto &PluginFN : CodeGenOpts.PassPlugins)
752 + if (auto PassPlugin = PassPlugin::Load(PluginFN))
753 + PassPlugin->registerPassBuilderCallbacks(PB);
756 .. _OptionMarshalling:
758 Option Marshalling Infrastructure
759 ---------------------------------
761 The option marshalling infrastructure automates the parsing of the Clang
762 ``-cc1`` frontend command line arguments into ``CompilerInvocation`` and their
763 generation from ``CompilerInvocation``. The system replaces lots of repetitive
764 C++ code with simple, declarative tablegen annotations and it's being used for
765 the majority of the ``-cc1`` command line interface. This section provides an
766 overview of the system.
768 **Note:** The marshalling infrastructure is not intended for driver-only
769 options. Only options of the ``-cc1`` frontend need to be marshalled to/from
770 ``CompilerInvocation`` instance.
772 To read and modify contents of ``CompilerInvocation``, the marshalling system
773 uses key paths, which are declared in two steps. First, a tablegen definition
774 for the ``CompilerInvocation`` member is created by inheriting from
781 class LangOpts<string field> : KeyPathAndMacro<"LangOpts->", field, "LANG_"> {}
782 // CompilerInvocation member ^^^^^^^^^^
783 // OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING prefix ^^^^^
785 The first argument to the parent class is the beginning of the key path that
786 references the ``CompilerInvocation`` member. This argument ends with ``->`` if
787 the member is a pointer type or with ``.`` if it's a value type. The child class
788 takes a single parameter ``field`` that is forwarded as the second argument to
789 the base class. The child class can then be used like so:
790 ``LangOpts<"IgnoreExceptions">``, constructing a key path to the field
791 ``LangOpts->IgnoreExceptions``. The third argument passed to the parent class is
792 a string that the tablegen backend uses as a prefix to the
793 ``OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING`` macro. Using the key path as a mix-in on an
794 ``Option`` instance instructs the backend to generate the following code:
800 #ifdef LANG_OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING
801 LANG_OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING([...], LangOpts->IgnoreExceptions, [...])
802 #endif // LANG_OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING
804 Such definition can be used used in the function for parsing and generating
809 // clang/lib/Frontend/CompilerInvoation.cpp
811 bool CompilerInvocation::ParseLangArgs(LangOptions *LangOpts, ArgList &Args,
812 DiagnosticsEngine &Diags) {
815 #define LANG_OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING( \
816 PREFIX_TYPE, NAME, ID, KIND, GROUP, ALIAS, ALIASARGS, FLAGS, PARAM, \
817 HELPTEXT, METAVAR, VALUES, SPELLING, SHOULD_PARSE, ALWAYS_EMIT, KEYPATH, \
818 DEFAULT_VALUE, IMPLIED_CHECK, IMPLIED_VALUE, NORMALIZER, DENORMALIZER, \
819 MERGER, EXTRACTOR, TABLE_INDEX) \
820 PARSE_OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING(Args, Diags, Success, ID, FLAGS, PARAM, \
821 SHOULD_PARSE, KEYPATH, DEFAULT_VALUE, \
822 IMPLIED_CHECK, IMPLIED_VALUE, NORMALIZER, \
824 #include "clang/Driver/Options.inc"
825 #undef LANG_OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING
832 void CompilerInvocation::GenerateLangArgs(LangOptions *LangOpts,
833 SmallVectorImpl<const char *> &Args,
834 StringAllocator SA) {
835 #define LANG_OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING( \
836 PREFIX_TYPE, NAME, ID, KIND, GROUP, ALIAS, ALIASARGS, FLAGS, PARAM, \
837 HELPTEXT, METAVAR, VALUES, SPELLING, SHOULD_PARSE, ALWAYS_EMIT, KEYPATH, \
838 DEFAULT_VALUE, IMPLIED_CHECK, IMPLIED_VALUE, NORMALIZER, DENORMALIZER, \
839 MERGER, EXTRACTOR, TABLE_INDEX) \
840 GENERATE_OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING( \
841 Args, SA, KIND, FLAGS, SPELLING, ALWAYS_EMIT, KEYPATH, DEFAULT_VALUE, \
842 IMPLIED_CHECK, IMPLIED_VALUE, DENORMALIZER, EXTRACTOR, TABLE_INDEX)
843 #include "clang/Driver/Options.inc"
844 #undef LANG_OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING
849 The ``PARSE_OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING`` and ``GENERATE_OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING``
850 macros are defined in ``CompilerInvocation.cpp`` and they implement the generic
851 algorithm for parsing and generating command line arguments.
853 .. _OptionMarshallingAnnotations:
855 Option Marshalling Annotations
856 ------------------------------
858 How does the tablegen backend know what to put in place of ``[...]`` in the
859 generated ``Options.inc``? This is specified by the ``Marshalling`` utilities
860 described below. All of them take a key path argument and possibly other
861 information required for parsing or generating the command line argument.
863 **Note:** The marshalling infrastructure is not intended for driver-only
864 options. Only options of the ``-cc1`` frontend need to be marshalled to/from
865 ``CompilerInvocation`` instance.
869 The key path defaults to ``false`` and is set to ``true`` when the flag is
870 present on command line.
874 def fignore_exceptions : Flag<["-"], "fignore-exceptions">, Flags<[CC1Option]>,
875 MarshallingInfoFlag<LangOpts<"IgnoreExceptions">>;
879 The key path defaults to ``true`` and is set to ``false`` when the flag is
880 present on command line.
884 def fno_verbose_asm : Flag<["-"], "fno-verbose-asm">, Flags<[CC1Option]>,
885 MarshallingInfoNegativeFlag<CodeGenOpts<"AsmVerbose">>;
887 **Negative and Positive Flag**
889 The key path defaults to the specified value (``false``, ``true`` or some
890 boolean value that's statically unknown in the tablegen file). Then, the key
891 path is set to the value associated with the flag that appears last on command
896 defm legacy_pass_manager : BoolOption<"f", "legacy-pass-manager",
897 CodeGenOpts<"LegacyPassManager">, DefaultFalse,
898 PosFlag<SetTrue, [], "Use the legacy pass manager in LLVM">,
899 NegFlag<SetFalse, [], "Use the new pass manager in LLVM">,
900 BothFlags<[CC1Option]>>;
902 With most such pair of flags, the ``-cc1`` frontend accepts only the flag that
903 changes the default key path value. The Clang driver is responsible for
904 accepting both and either forwarding the changing flag or discarding the flag
905 that would just set the key path to its default.
907 The first argument to ``BoolOption`` is a prefix that is used to construct the
908 full names of both flags. The positive flag would then be named
909 ``flegacy-pass-manager`` and the negative ``fno-legacy-pass-manager``.
910 ``BoolOption`` also implies the ``-`` prefix for both flags. It's also possible
911 to use ``BoolFOption`` that implies the ``"f"`` prefix and ``Group<f_Group>``.
912 The ``PosFlag`` and ``NegFlag`` classes hold the associated boolean value, an
913 array of elements passed to the ``Flag`` class and the help text. The optional
914 ``BothFlags`` class holds an array of ``Flag`` elements that are common for both
915 the positive and negative flag and their common help text suffix.
919 The key path defaults to the specified string, or an empty one, if omitted. When
920 the option appears on the command line, the argument value is simply copied.
924 def isysroot : JoinedOrSeparate<["-"], "isysroot">, Flags<[CC1Option]>,
925 MarshallingInfoString<HeaderSearchOpts<"Sysroot">, [{"/"}]>;
929 The key path defaults to an empty ``std::vector<std::string>``. Values specified
930 with each appearance of the option on the command line are appended to the
935 def frewrite_map_file : Separate<["-"], "frewrite-map-file">, Flags<[CC1Option]>,
936 MarshallingInfoStringVector<CodeGenOpts<"RewriteMapFiles">>;
940 The key path defaults to the specified integer value, or ``0`` if omitted. When
941 the option appears on the command line, its value gets parsed by ``llvm::APInt``
942 and the result is assigned to the key path on success.
946 def mstack_probe_size : Joined<["-"], "mstack-probe-size=">, Flags<[CC1Option]>,
947 MarshallingInfoInt<CodeGenOpts<"StackProbeSize">, "4096">;
951 The key path defaults to the value specified in ``MarshallingInfoEnum`` prefixed
952 by the contents of ``NormalizedValuesScope`` and ``::``. This ensures correct
953 reference to an enum case is formed even if the enum resides in different
954 namespace or is an enum class. If the value present on command line does not
955 match any of the comma-separated values from ``Values``, an error diagnostics is
956 issued. Otherwise, the corresponding element from ``NormalizedValues`` at the
957 same index is assigned to the key path (also correctly scoped). The number of
958 comma-separated string values and elements of the array within
959 ``NormalizedValues`` must match.
963 def mthread_model : Separate<["-"], "mthread-model">, Flags<[CC1Option]>,
964 Values<"posix,single">, NormalizedValues<["POSIX", "Single"]>,
965 NormalizedValuesScope<"LangOptions::ThreadModelKind">,
966 MarshallingInfoEnum<LangOpts<"ThreadModel">, "POSIX">;
969 Intentionally omitting MarshallingInfoBitfieldFlag. It's adding some
970 complexity to the marshalling infrastructure and might be removed.
972 It is also possible to define relationships between options.
976 The key path defaults to the default value from the primary ``Marshalling``
977 annotation. Then, if any of the elements of ``ImpliedByAnyOf`` evaluate to true,
978 the key path value is changed to the specified value or ``true`` if missing.
979 Finally, the command line is parsed according to the primary annotation.
983 def fms_extensions : Flag<["-"], "fms-extensions">, Flags<[CC1Option]>,
984 MarshallingInfoFlag<LangOpts<"MicrosoftExt">>,
985 ImpliedByAnyOf<[fms_compatibility.KeyPath], "true">;
989 The option is parsed only if the expression in ``ShouldParseIf`` evaluates to
994 def fopenmp_enable_irbuilder : Flag<["-"], "fopenmp-enable-irbuilder">, Flags<[CC1Option]>,
995 MarshallingInfoFlag<LangOpts<"OpenMPIRBuilder">>,
996 ShouldParseIf<fopenmp.KeyPath>;
998 The Lexer and Preprocessor Library
999 ==================================
1001 The Lexer library contains several tightly-connected classes that are involved
1002 with the nasty process of lexing and preprocessing C source code. The main
1003 interface to this library for outside clients is the large ``Preprocessor``
1004 class. It contains the various pieces of state that are required to coherently
1005 read tokens out of a translation unit.
1007 The core interface to the ``Preprocessor`` object (once it is set up) is the
1008 ``Preprocessor::Lex`` method, which returns the next :ref:`Token <Token>` from
1009 the preprocessor stream. There are two types of token providers that the
1010 preprocessor is capable of reading from: a buffer lexer (provided by the
1011 :ref:`Lexer <Lexer>` class) and a buffered token stream (provided by the
1012 :ref:`TokenLexer <TokenLexer>` class).
1019 The ``Token`` class is used to represent a single lexed token. Tokens are
1020 intended to be used by the lexer/preprocess and parser libraries, but are not
1021 intended to live beyond them (for example, they should not live in the ASTs).
1023 Tokens most often live on the stack (or some other location that is efficient
1024 to access) as the parser is running, but occasionally do get buffered up. For
1025 example, macro definitions are stored as a series of tokens, and the C++
1026 front-end periodically needs to buffer tokens up for tentative parsing and
1027 various pieces of look-ahead. As such, the size of a ``Token`` matters. On a
1028 32-bit system, ``sizeof(Token)`` is currently 16 bytes.
1030 Tokens occur in two forms: :ref:`annotation tokens <AnnotationToken>` and
1031 normal tokens. Normal tokens are those returned by the lexer, annotation
1032 tokens represent semantic information and are produced by the parser, replacing
1033 normal tokens in the token stream. Normal tokens contain the following
1036 * **A SourceLocation** --- This indicates the location of the start of the
1039 * **A length** --- This stores the length of the token as stored in the
1040 ``SourceBuffer``. For tokens that include them, this length includes
1041 trigraphs and escaped newlines which are ignored by later phases of the
1042 compiler. By pointing into the original source buffer, it is always possible
1043 to get the original spelling of a token completely accurately.
1045 * **IdentifierInfo** --- If a token takes the form of an identifier, and if
1046 identifier lookup was enabled when the token was lexed (e.g., the lexer was
1047 not reading in "raw" mode) this contains a pointer to the unique hash value
1048 for the identifier. Because the lookup happens before keyword
1049 identification, this field is set even for language keywords like "``for``".
1051 * **TokenKind** --- This indicates the kind of token as classified by the
1052 lexer. This includes things like ``tok::starequal`` (for the "``*=``"
1053 operator), ``tok::ampamp`` for the "``&&``" token, and keyword values (e.g.,
1054 ``tok::kw_for``) for identifiers that correspond to keywords. Note that
1055 some tokens can be spelled multiple ways. For example, C++ supports
1056 "operator keywords", where things like "``and``" are treated exactly like the
1057 "``&&``" operator. In these cases, the kind value is set to ``tok::ampamp``,
1058 which is good for the parser, which doesn't have to consider both forms. For
1059 something that cares about which form is used (e.g., the preprocessor
1060 "stringize" operator) the spelling indicates the original form.
1062 * **Flags** --- There are currently four flags tracked by the
1063 lexer/preprocessor system on a per-token basis:
1065 #. **StartOfLine** --- This was the first token that occurred on its input
1067 #. **LeadingSpace** --- There was a space character either immediately before
1068 the token or transitively before the token as it was expanded through a
1069 macro. The definition of this flag is very closely defined by the
1070 stringizing requirements of the preprocessor.
1071 #. **DisableExpand** --- This flag is used internally to the preprocessor to
1072 represent identifier tokens which have macro expansion disabled. This
1073 prevents them from being considered as candidates for macro expansion ever
1075 #. **NeedsCleaning** --- This flag is set if the original spelling for the
1076 token includes a trigraph or escaped newline. Since this is uncommon,
1077 many pieces of code can fast-path on tokens that did not need cleaning.
1079 One interesting (and somewhat unusual) aspect of normal tokens is that they
1080 don't contain any semantic information about the lexed value. For example, if
1081 the token was a pp-number token, we do not represent the value of the number
1082 that was lexed (this is left for later pieces of code to decide).
1083 Additionally, the lexer library has no notion of typedef names vs variable
1084 names: both are returned as identifiers, and the parser is left to decide
1085 whether a specific identifier is a typedef or a variable (tracking this
1086 requires scope information among other things). The parser can do this
1087 translation by replacing tokens returned by the preprocessor with "Annotation
1090 .. _AnnotationToken:
1095 Annotation tokens are tokens that are synthesized by the parser and injected
1096 into the preprocessor's token stream (replacing existing tokens) to record
1097 semantic information found by the parser. For example, if "``foo``" is found
1098 to be a typedef, the "``foo``" ``tok::identifier`` token is replaced with an
1099 ``tok::annot_typename``. This is useful for a couple of reasons: 1) this makes
1100 it easy to handle qualified type names (e.g., "``foo::bar::baz<42>::t``") in
1101 C++ as a single "token" in the parser. 2) if the parser backtracks, the
1102 reparse does not need to redo semantic analysis to determine whether a token
1103 sequence is a variable, type, template, etc.
1105 Annotation tokens are created by the parser and reinjected into the parser's
1106 token stream (when backtracking is enabled). Because they can only exist in
1107 tokens that the preprocessor-proper is done with, it doesn't need to keep
1108 around flags like "start of line" that the preprocessor uses to do its job.
1109 Additionally, an annotation token may "cover" a sequence of preprocessor tokens
1110 (e.g., "``a::b::c``" is five preprocessor tokens). As such, the valid fields
1111 of an annotation token are different than the fields for a normal token (but
1112 they are multiplexed into the normal ``Token`` fields):
1114 * **SourceLocation "Location"** --- The ``SourceLocation`` for the annotation
1115 token indicates the first token replaced by the annotation token. In the
1116 example above, it would be the location of the "``a``" identifier.
1117 * **SourceLocation "AnnotationEndLoc"** --- This holds the location of the last
1118 token replaced with the annotation token. In the example above, it would be
1119 the location of the "``c``" identifier.
1120 * **void* "AnnotationValue"** --- This contains an opaque object that the
1121 parser gets from ``Sema``. The parser merely preserves the information for
1122 ``Sema`` to later interpret based on the annotation token kind.
1123 * **TokenKind "Kind"** --- This indicates the kind of Annotation token this is.
1124 See below for the different valid kinds.
1126 Annotation tokens currently come in three kinds:
1128 #. **tok::annot_typename**: This annotation token represents a resolved
1129 typename token that is potentially qualified. The ``AnnotationValue`` field
1130 contains the ``QualType`` returned by ``Sema::getTypeName()``, possibly with
1131 source location information attached.
1132 #. **tok::annot_cxxscope**: This annotation token represents a C++ scope
1133 specifier, such as "``A::B::``". This corresponds to the grammar
1134 productions "*::*" and "*:: [opt] nested-name-specifier*". The
1135 ``AnnotationValue`` pointer is a ``NestedNameSpecifier *`` returned by the
1136 ``Sema::ActOnCXXGlobalScopeSpecifier`` and
1137 ``Sema::ActOnCXXNestedNameSpecifier`` callbacks.
1138 #. **tok::annot_template_id**: This annotation token represents a C++
1139 template-id such as "``foo<int, 4>``", where "``foo``" is the name of a
1140 template. The ``AnnotationValue`` pointer is a pointer to a ``malloc``'d
1141 ``TemplateIdAnnotation`` object. Depending on the context, a parsed
1142 template-id that names a type might become a typename annotation token (if
1143 all we care about is the named type, e.g., because it occurs in a type
1144 specifier) or might remain a template-id token (if we want to retain more
1145 source location information or produce a new type, e.g., in a declaration of
1146 a class template specialization). template-id annotation tokens that refer
1147 to a type can be "upgraded" to typename annotation tokens by the parser.
1149 As mentioned above, annotation tokens are not returned by the preprocessor,
1150 they are formed on demand by the parser. This means that the parser has to be
1151 aware of cases where an annotation could occur and form it where appropriate.
1152 This is somewhat similar to how the parser handles Translation Phase 6 of C99:
1153 String Concatenation (see C99 5.1.1.2). In the case of string concatenation,
1154 the preprocessor just returns distinct ``tok::string_literal`` and
1155 ``tok::wide_string_literal`` tokens and the parser eats a sequence of them
1156 wherever the grammar indicates that a string literal can occur.
1158 In order to do this, whenever the parser expects a ``tok::identifier`` or
1159 ``tok::coloncolon``, it should call the ``TryAnnotateTypeOrScopeToken`` or
1160 ``TryAnnotateCXXScopeToken`` methods to form the annotation token. These
1161 methods will maximally form the specified annotation tokens and replace the
1162 current token with them, if applicable. If the current tokens is not valid for
1163 an annotation token, it will remain an identifier or "``::``" token.
1170 The ``Lexer`` class provides the mechanics of lexing tokens out of a source
1171 buffer and deciding what they mean. The ``Lexer`` is complicated by the fact
1172 that it operates on raw buffers that have not had spelling eliminated (this is
1173 a necessity to get decent performance), but this is countered with careful
1174 coding as well as standard performance techniques (for example, the comment
1175 handling code is vectorized on X86 and PowerPC hosts).
1177 The lexer has a couple of interesting modal features:
1179 * The lexer can operate in "raw" mode. This mode has several features that
1180 make it possible to quickly lex the file (e.g., it stops identifier lookup,
1181 doesn't specially handle preprocessor tokens, handles EOF differently, etc).
1182 This mode is used for lexing within an "``#if 0``" block, for example.
1183 * The lexer can capture and return comments as tokens. This is required to
1184 support the ``-C`` preprocessor mode, which passes comments through, and is
1185 used by the diagnostic checker to identifier expect-error annotations.
1186 * The lexer can be in ``ParsingFilename`` mode, which happens when
1187 preprocessing after reading a ``#include`` directive. This mode changes the
1188 parsing of "``<``" to return an "angled string" instead of a bunch of tokens
1189 for each thing within the filename.
1190 * When parsing a preprocessor directive (after "``#``") the
1191 ``ParsingPreprocessorDirective`` mode is entered. This changes the parser to
1192 return EOD at a newline.
1193 * The ``Lexer`` uses a ``LangOptions`` object to know whether trigraphs are
1194 enabled, whether C++ or ObjC keywords are recognized, etc.
1196 In addition to these modes, the lexer keeps track of a couple of other features
1197 that are local to a lexed buffer, which change as the buffer is lexed:
1199 * The ``Lexer`` uses ``BufferPtr`` to keep track of the current character being
1201 * The ``Lexer`` uses ``IsAtStartOfLine`` to keep track of whether the next
1202 lexed token will start with its "start of line" bit set.
1203 * The ``Lexer`` keeps track of the current "``#if``" directives that are active
1204 (which can be nested).
1205 * The ``Lexer`` keeps track of an :ref:`MultipleIncludeOpt
1206 <MultipleIncludeOpt>` object, which is used to detect whether the buffer uses
1207 the standard "``#ifndef XX`` / ``#define XX``" idiom to prevent multiple
1208 inclusion. If a buffer does, subsequent includes can be ignored if the
1209 "``XX``" macro is defined.
1213 The ``TokenLexer`` class
1214 ------------------------
1216 The ``TokenLexer`` class is a token provider that returns tokens from a list of
1217 tokens that came from somewhere else. It typically used for two things: 1)
1218 returning tokens from a macro definition as it is being expanded 2) returning
1219 tokens from an arbitrary buffer of tokens. The later use is used by
1220 ``_Pragma`` and will most likely be used to handle unbounded look-ahead for the
1223 .. _MultipleIncludeOpt:
1225 The ``MultipleIncludeOpt`` class
1226 --------------------------------
1228 The ``MultipleIncludeOpt`` class implements a really simple little state
1229 machine that is used to detect the standard "``#ifndef XX`` / ``#define XX``"
1230 idiom that people typically use to prevent multiple inclusion of headers. If a
1231 buffer uses this idiom and is subsequently ``#include``'d, the preprocessor can
1232 simply check to see whether the guarding condition is defined or not. If so,
1233 the preprocessor can completely ignore the include of the header.
1240 This library contains a recursive-descent parser that polls tokens from the
1241 preprocessor and notifies a client of the parsing progress.
1243 Historically, the parser used to talk to an abstract ``Action`` interface that
1244 had virtual methods for parse events, for example ``ActOnBinOp()``. When Clang
1245 grew C++ support, the parser stopped supporting general ``Action`` clients --
1246 it now always talks to the :ref:`Sema library <Sema>`. However, the Parser
1247 still accesses AST objects only through opaque types like ``ExprResult`` and
1248 ``StmtResult``. Only :ref:`Sema <Sema>` looks at the AST node contents of these
1264 Clang AST nodes (types, declarations, statements, expressions, and so on) are
1265 generally designed to be immutable once created. This provides a number of key
1268 * Canonicalization of the "meaning" of nodes is possible as soon as the nodes
1269 are created, and is not invalidated by later addition of more information.
1270 For example, we :ref:`canonicalize types <CanonicalType>`, and use a
1271 canonicalized representation of expressions when determining whether two
1272 function template declarations involving dependent expressions declare the
1274 * AST nodes can be reused when they have the same meaning. For example, we
1275 reuse ``Type`` nodes when representing the same type (but maintain separate
1276 ``TypeLoc``\s for each instance where a type is written), and we reuse
1277 non-dependent ``Stmt`` and ``Expr`` nodes across instantiations of a
1279 * Serialization and deserialization of the AST to/from AST files is simpler:
1280 we do not need to track modifications made to AST nodes imported from AST
1281 files and serialize separate "update records".
1283 There are unfortunately exceptions to this general approach, such as:
1285 * The first declaration of a redeclarable entity maintains a pointer to the
1286 most recent declaration of that entity, which naturally needs to change as
1287 more declarations are parsed.
1288 * Name lookup tables in declaration contexts change after the namespace
1289 declaration is formed.
1290 * We attempt to maintain only a single declaration for an instantiation of a
1291 template, rather than having distinct declarations for an instantiation of
1292 the declaration versus the definition, so template instantiation often
1293 updates parts of existing declarations.
1294 * Some parts of declarations are required to be instantiated separately (this
1295 includes default arguments and exception specifications), and such
1296 instantiations update the existing declaration.
1298 These cases tend to be fragile; mutable AST state should be avoided where
1301 As a consequence of this design principle, we typically do not provide setters
1302 for AST state. (Some are provided for short-term modifications intended to be
1303 used immediately after an AST node is created and before it's "published" as
1304 part of the complete AST, or where language semantics require after-the-fact
1310 The AST intends to provide a representation of the program that is faithful to
1311 the original source. We intend for it to be possible to write refactoring tools
1312 using only information stored in, or easily reconstructible from, the Clang AST.
1313 This means that the AST representation should either not desugar source-level
1314 constructs to simpler forms, or -- where made necessary by language semantics
1315 or a clear engineering tradeoff -- should desugar minimally and wrap the result
1316 in a construct representing the original source form.
1318 For example, ``CXXForRangeStmt`` directly represents the syntactic form of a
1319 range-based for statement, but also holds a semantic representation of the
1320 range declaration and iterator declarations. It does not contain a
1321 fully-desugared ``ForStmt``, however.
1323 Some AST nodes (for example, ``ParenExpr``) represent only syntax, and others
1324 (for example, ``ImplicitCastExpr``) represent only semantics, but most nodes
1325 will represent a combination of syntax and associated semantics. Inheritance
1326 is typically used when representing different (but related) syntaxes for nodes
1327 with the same or similar semantics.
1331 The ``Type`` class and its subclasses
1332 -------------------------------------
1334 The ``Type`` class (and its subclasses) are an important part of the AST.
1335 Types are accessed through the ``ASTContext`` class, which implicitly creates
1336 and uniques them as they are needed. Types have a couple of non-obvious
1337 features: 1) they do not capture type qualifiers like ``const`` or ``volatile``
1338 (see :ref:`QualType <QualType>`), and 2) they implicitly capture typedef
1339 information. Once created, types are immutable (unlike decls).
1341 Typedefs in C make semantic analysis a bit more complex than it would be without
1342 them. The issue is that we want to capture typedef information and represent it
1343 in the AST perfectly, but the semantics of operations need to "see through"
1344 typedefs. For example, consider this code:
1358 The code above is illegal, and thus we expect there to be diagnostics emitted
1359 on the annotated lines. In this example, we expect to get:
1361 .. code-block:: text
1363 test.c:6:1: error: indirection requires pointer operand ('foo' invalid)
1366 test.c:7:1: error: indirection requires pointer operand ('foo' invalid)
1369 test.c:8:1: error: indirection requires pointer operand ('foo' invalid)
1373 While this example is somewhat silly, it illustrates the point: we want to
1374 retain typedef information where possible, so that we can emit errors about
1375 "``std::string``" instead of "``std::basic_string<char, std:...``". Doing this
1376 requires properly keeping typedef information (for example, the type of ``X``
1377 is "``foo``", not "``int``"), and requires properly propagating it through the
1378 various operators (for example, the type of ``*Y`` is "``foo``", not
1379 "``int``"). In order to retain this information, the type of these expressions
1380 is an instance of the ``TypedefType`` class, which indicates that the type of
1381 these expressions is a typedef for "``foo``".
1383 Representing types like this is great for diagnostics, because the
1384 user-specified type is always immediately available. There are two problems
1385 with this: first, various semantic checks need to make judgements about the
1386 *actual structure* of a type, ignoring typedefs. Second, we need an efficient
1387 way to query whether two types are structurally identical to each other,
1388 ignoring typedefs. The solution to both of these problems is the idea of
1396 Every instance of the ``Type`` class contains a canonical type pointer. For
1397 simple types with no typedefs involved (e.g., "``int``", "``int*``",
1398 "``int**``"), the type just points to itself. For types that have a typedef
1399 somewhere in their structure (e.g., "``foo``", "``foo*``", "``foo**``",
1400 "``bar``"), the canonical type pointer points to their structurally equivalent
1401 type without any typedefs (e.g., "``int``", "``int*``", "``int**``", and
1402 "``int*``" respectively).
1404 This design provides a constant time operation (dereferencing the canonical type
1405 pointer) that gives us access to the structure of types. For example, we can
1406 trivially tell that "``bar``" and "``foo*``" are the same type by dereferencing
1407 their canonical type pointers and doing a pointer comparison (they both point
1408 to the single "``int*``" type).
1410 Canonical types and typedef types bring up some complexities that must be
1411 carefully managed. Specifically, the ``isa``/``cast``/``dyn_cast`` operators
1412 generally shouldn't be used in code that is inspecting the AST. For example,
1413 when type checking the indirection operator (unary "``*``" on a pointer), the
1414 type checker must verify that the operand has a pointer type. It would not be
1415 correct to check that with "``isa<PointerType>(SubExpr->getType())``", because
1416 this predicate would fail if the subexpression had a typedef type.
1418 The solution to this problem are a set of helper methods on ``Type``, used to
1419 check their properties. In this case, it would be correct to use
1420 "``SubExpr->getType()->isPointerType()``" to do the check. This predicate will
1421 return true if the *canonical type is a pointer*, which is true any time the
1422 type is structurally a pointer type. The only hard part here is remembering
1423 not to use the ``isa``/``cast``/``dyn_cast`` operations.
1425 The second problem we face is how to get access to the pointer type once we
1426 know it exists. To continue the example, the result type of the indirection
1427 operator is the pointee type of the subexpression. In order to determine the
1428 type, we need to get the instance of ``PointerType`` that best captures the
1429 typedef information in the program. If the type of the expression is literally
1430 a ``PointerType``, we can return that, otherwise we have to dig through the
1431 typedefs to find the pointer type. For example, if the subexpression had type
1432 "``foo*``", we could return that type as the result. If the subexpression had
1433 type "``bar``", we want to return "``foo*``" (note that we do *not* want
1434 "``int*``"). In order to provide all of this, ``Type`` has a
1435 ``getAsPointerType()`` method that checks whether the type is structurally a
1436 ``PointerType`` and, if so, returns the best one. If not, it returns a null
1439 This structure is somewhat mystical, but after meditating on it, it will make
1444 The ``QualType`` class
1445 ----------------------
1447 The ``QualType`` class is designed as a trivial value class that is small,
1448 passed by-value and is efficient to query. The idea of ``QualType`` is that it
1449 stores the type qualifiers (``const``, ``volatile``, ``restrict``, plus some
1450 extended qualifiers required by language extensions) separately from the types
1451 themselves. ``QualType`` is conceptually a pair of "``Type*``" and the bits
1452 for these type qualifiers.
1454 By storing the type qualifiers as bits in the conceptual pair, it is extremely
1455 efficient to get the set of qualifiers on a ``QualType`` (just return the field
1456 of the pair), add a type qualifier (which is a trivial constant-time operation
1457 that sets a bit), and remove one or more type qualifiers (just return a
1458 ``QualType`` with the bitfield set to empty).
1460 Further, because the bits are stored outside of the type itself, we do not need
1461 to create duplicates of types with different sets of qualifiers (i.e. there is
1462 only a single heap allocated "``int``" type: "``const int``" and "``volatile
1463 const int``" both point to the same heap allocated "``int``" type). This
1464 reduces the heap size used to represent bits and also means we do not have to
1465 consider qualifiers when uniquing types (:ref:`Type <Type>` does not even
1466 contain qualifiers).
1468 In practice, the two most common type qualifiers (``const`` and ``restrict``)
1469 are stored in the low bits of the pointer to the ``Type`` object, together with
1470 a flag indicating whether extended qualifiers are present (which must be
1471 heap-allocated). This means that ``QualType`` is exactly the same size as a
1474 .. _DeclarationName:
1479 The ``DeclarationName`` class represents the name of a declaration in Clang.
1480 Declarations in the C family of languages can take several different forms.
1481 Most declarations are named by simple identifiers, e.g., "``f``" and "``x``" in
1482 the function declaration ``f(int x)``. In C++, declaration names can also name
1483 class constructors ("``Class``" in ``struct Class { Class(); }``), class
1484 destructors ("``~Class``"), overloaded operator names ("``operator+``"), and
1485 conversion functions ("``operator void const *``"). In Objective-C,
1486 declaration names can refer to the names of Objective-C methods, which involve
1487 the method name and the parameters, collectively called a *selector*, e.g.,
1488 "``setWidth:height:``". Since all of these kinds of entities --- variables,
1489 functions, Objective-C methods, C++ constructors, destructors, and operators
1490 --- are represented as subclasses of Clang's common ``NamedDecl`` class,
1491 ``DeclarationName`` is designed to efficiently represent any kind of name.
1493 Given a ``DeclarationName`` ``N``, ``N.getNameKind()`` will produce a value
1494 that describes what kind of name ``N`` stores. There are 10 options (all of
1495 the names are inside the ``DeclarationName`` class).
1499 The name is a simple identifier. Use ``N.getAsIdentifierInfo()`` to retrieve
1500 the corresponding ``IdentifierInfo*`` pointing to the actual identifier.
1502 ``ObjCZeroArgSelector``, ``ObjCOneArgSelector``, ``ObjCMultiArgSelector``
1504 The name is an Objective-C selector, which can be retrieved as a ``Selector``
1505 instance via ``N.getObjCSelector()``. The three possible name kinds for
1506 Objective-C reflect an optimization within the ``DeclarationName`` class:
1507 both zero- and one-argument selectors are stored as a masked
1508 ``IdentifierInfo`` pointer, and therefore require very little space, since
1509 zero- and one-argument selectors are far more common than multi-argument
1510 selectors (which use a different structure).
1512 ``CXXConstructorName``
1514 The name is a C++ constructor name. Use ``N.getCXXNameType()`` to retrieve
1515 the :ref:`type <QualType>` that this constructor is meant to construct. The
1516 type is always the canonical type, since all constructors for a given type
1519 ``CXXDestructorName``
1521 The name is a C++ destructor name. Use ``N.getCXXNameType()`` to retrieve
1522 the :ref:`type <QualType>` whose destructor is being named. This type is
1523 always a canonical type.
1525 ``CXXConversionFunctionName``
1527 The name is a C++ conversion function. Conversion functions are named
1528 according to the type they convert to, e.g., "``operator void const *``".
1529 Use ``N.getCXXNameType()`` to retrieve the type that this conversion function
1530 converts to. This type is always a canonical type.
1534 The name is a C++ overloaded operator name. Overloaded operators are named
1535 according to their spelling, e.g., "``operator+``" or "``operator new []``".
1536 Use ``N.getCXXOverloadedOperator()`` to retrieve the overloaded operator (a
1537 value of type ``OverloadedOperatorKind``).
1539 ``CXXLiteralOperatorName``
1541 The name is a C++11 user defined literal operator. User defined
1542 Literal operators are named according to the suffix they define,
1543 e.g., "``_foo``" for "``operator "" _foo``". Use
1544 ``N.getCXXLiteralIdentifier()`` to retrieve the corresponding
1545 ``IdentifierInfo*`` pointing to the identifier.
1547 ``CXXUsingDirective``
1549 The name is a C++ using directive. Using directives are not really
1550 NamedDecls, in that they all have the same name, but they are
1551 implemented as such in order to store them in DeclContext
1554 ``DeclarationName``\ s are cheap to create, copy, and compare. They require
1555 only a single pointer's worth of storage in the common cases (identifiers,
1556 zero- and one-argument Objective-C selectors) and use dense, uniqued storage
1557 for the other kinds of names. Two ``DeclarationName``\ s can be compared for
1558 equality (``==``, ``!=``) using a simple bitwise comparison, can be ordered
1559 with ``<``, ``>``, ``<=``, and ``>=`` (which provide a lexicographical ordering
1560 for normal identifiers but an unspecified ordering for other kinds of names),
1561 and can be placed into LLVM ``DenseMap``\ s and ``DenseSet``\ s.
1563 ``DeclarationName`` instances can be created in different ways depending on
1564 what kind of name the instance will store. Normal identifiers
1565 (``IdentifierInfo`` pointers) and Objective-C selectors (``Selector``) can be
1566 implicitly converted to ``DeclarationNames``. Names for C++ constructors,
1567 destructors, conversion functions, and overloaded operators can be retrieved
1568 from the ``DeclarationNameTable``, an instance of which is available as
1569 ``ASTContext::DeclarationNames``. The member functions
1570 ``getCXXConstructorName``, ``getCXXDestructorName``,
1571 ``getCXXConversionFunctionName``, and ``getCXXOperatorName``, respectively,
1572 return ``DeclarationName`` instances for the four kinds of C++ special function
1577 Declaration contexts
1578 --------------------
1580 Every declaration in a program exists within some *declaration context*, such
1581 as a translation unit, namespace, class, or function. Declaration contexts in
1582 Clang are represented by the ``DeclContext`` class, from which the various
1583 declaration-context AST nodes (``TranslationUnitDecl``, ``NamespaceDecl``,
1584 ``RecordDecl``, ``FunctionDecl``, etc.) will derive. The ``DeclContext`` class
1585 provides several facilities common to each declaration context:
1587 Source-centric vs. Semantics-centric View of Declarations
1589 ``DeclContext`` provides two views of the declarations stored within a
1590 declaration context. The source-centric view accurately represents the
1591 program source code as written, including multiple declarations of entities
1592 where present (see the section :ref:`Redeclarations and Overloads
1593 <Redeclarations>`), while the semantics-centric view represents the program
1594 semantics. The two views are kept synchronized by semantic analysis while
1595 the ASTs are being constructed.
1597 Storage of declarations within that context
1599 Every declaration context can contain some number of declarations. For
1600 example, a C++ class (represented by ``RecordDecl``) contains various member
1601 functions, fields, nested types, and so on. All of these declarations will
1602 be stored within the ``DeclContext``, and one can iterate over the
1603 declarations via [``DeclContext::decls_begin()``,
1604 ``DeclContext::decls_end()``). This mechanism provides the source-centric
1605 view of declarations in the context.
1607 Lookup of declarations within that context
1609 The ``DeclContext`` structure provides efficient name lookup for names within
1610 that declaration context. For example, if ``N`` is a namespace we can look
1611 for the name ``N::f`` using ``DeclContext::lookup``. The lookup itself is
1612 based on a lazily-constructed array (for declaration contexts with a small
1613 number of declarations) or hash table (for declaration contexts with more
1614 declarations). The lookup operation provides the semantics-centric view of
1615 the declarations in the context.
1617 Ownership of declarations
1619 The ``DeclContext`` owns all of the declarations that were declared within
1620 its declaration context, and is responsible for the management of their
1621 memory as well as their (de-)serialization.
1623 All declarations are stored within a declaration context, and one can query
1624 information about the context in which each declaration lives. One can
1625 retrieve the ``DeclContext`` that contains a particular ``Decl`` using
1626 ``Decl::getDeclContext``. However, see the section
1627 :ref:`LexicalAndSemanticContexts` for more information about how to interpret
1628 this context information.
1632 Redeclarations and Overloads
1633 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
1635 Within a translation unit, it is common for an entity to be declared several
1636 times. For example, we might declare a function "``f``" and then later
1637 re-declare it as part of an inlined definition:
1641 void f(int x, int y, int z = 1);
1643 inline void f(int x, int y, int z) { /* ... */ }
1645 The representation of "``f``" differs in the source-centric and
1646 semantics-centric views of a declaration context. In the source-centric view,
1647 all redeclarations will be present, in the order they occurred in the source
1648 code, making this view suitable for clients that wish to see the structure of
1649 the source code. In the semantics-centric view, only the most recent "``f``"
1650 will be found by the lookup, since it effectively replaces the first
1651 declaration of "``f``".
1653 (Note that because ``f`` can be redeclared at block scope, or in a friend
1654 declaration, etc. it is possible that the declaration of ``f`` found by name
1655 lookup will not be the most recent one.)
1657 In the semantics-centric view, overloading of functions is represented
1658 explicitly. For example, given two declarations of a function "``g``" that are
1666 the ``DeclContext::lookup`` operation will return a
1667 ``DeclContext::lookup_result`` that contains a range of iterators over
1668 declarations of "``g``". Clients that perform semantic analysis on a program
1669 that is not concerned with the actual source code will primarily use this
1670 semantics-centric view.
1672 .. _LexicalAndSemanticContexts:
1674 Lexical and Semantic Contexts
1675 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
1677 Each declaration has two potentially different declaration contexts: a
1678 *lexical* context, which corresponds to the source-centric view of the
1679 declaration context, and a *semantic* context, which corresponds to the
1680 semantics-centric view. The lexical context is accessible via
1681 ``Decl::getLexicalDeclContext`` while the semantic context is accessible via
1682 ``Decl::getDeclContext``, both of which return ``DeclContext`` pointers. For
1683 most declarations, the two contexts are identical. For example:
1692 Here, the semantic and lexical contexts of ``X::f`` are the ``DeclContext``
1693 associated with the class ``X`` (itself stored as a ``RecordDecl`` AST node).
1694 However, we can now define ``X::f`` out-of-line:
1698 void X::f(int x = 17) { /* ... */ }
1700 This definition of "``f``" has different lexical and semantic contexts. The
1701 lexical context corresponds to the declaration context in which the actual
1702 declaration occurred in the source code, e.g., the translation unit containing
1703 ``X``. Thus, this declaration of ``X::f`` can be found by traversing the
1704 declarations provided by [``decls_begin()``, ``decls_end()``) in the
1707 The semantic context of ``X::f`` corresponds to the class ``X``, since this
1708 member function is (semantically) a member of ``X``. Lookup of the name ``f``
1709 into the ``DeclContext`` associated with ``X`` will then return the definition
1710 of ``X::f`` (including information about the default argument).
1712 Transparent Declaration Contexts
1713 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
1715 In C and C++, there are several contexts in which names that are logically
1716 declared inside another declaration will actually "leak" out into the enclosing
1717 scope from the perspective of name lookup. The most obvious instance of this
1718 behavior is in enumeration types, e.g.,
1728 Here, ``Color`` is an enumeration, which is a declaration context that contains
1729 the enumerators ``Red``, ``Green``, and ``Blue``. Thus, traversing the list of
1730 declarations contained in the enumeration ``Color`` will yield ``Red``,
1731 ``Green``, and ``Blue``. However, outside of the scope of ``Color`` one can
1732 name the enumerator ``Red`` without qualifying the name, e.g.,
1738 There are other entities in C++ that provide similar behavior. For example,
1739 linkage specifications that use curly braces:
1747 // f and g are visible here
1749 For source-level accuracy, we treat the linkage specification and enumeration
1750 type as a declaration context in which its enclosed declarations ("``Red``",
1751 "``Green``", and "``Blue``"; "``f``" and "``g``") are declared. However, these
1752 declarations are visible outside of the scope of the declaration context.
1754 These language features (and several others, described below) have roughly the
1755 same set of requirements: declarations are declared within a particular lexical
1756 context, but the declarations are also found via name lookup in scopes
1757 enclosing the declaration itself. This feature is implemented via
1758 *transparent* declaration contexts (see
1759 ``DeclContext::isTransparentContext()``), whose declarations are visible in the
1760 nearest enclosing non-transparent declaration context. This means that the
1761 lexical context of the declaration (e.g., an enumerator) will be the
1762 transparent ``DeclContext`` itself, as will the semantic context, but the
1763 declaration will be visible in every outer context up to and including the
1764 first non-transparent declaration context (since transparent declaration
1765 contexts can be nested).
1767 The transparent ``DeclContext``\ s are:
1769 * Enumerations (but not C++11 "scoped enumerations"):
1778 // Red, Green, and Blue are in scope
1780 * C++ linkage specifications:
1788 // f and g are in scope
1790 * Anonymous unions and structs:
1794 struct LookupTable {
1797 std::vector<Item> *Vector;
1798 std::set<Item> *Set;
1803 LT.Vector = 0; // Okay: finds Vector inside the unnamed union
1805 * C++11 inline namespaces:
1810 inline namespace debug {
1814 mylib::X *xp; // okay: mylib::X refers to mylib::debug::X
1816 .. _MultiDeclContext:
1818 Multiply-Defined Declaration Contexts
1819 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
1821 C++ namespaces have the interesting property that
1822 the namespace can be defined multiple times, and the declarations provided by
1823 each namespace definition are effectively merged (from the semantic point of
1824 view). For example, the following two code snippets are semantically
1843 In Clang's representation, the source-centric view of declaration contexts will
1844 actually have two separate ``NamespaceDecl`` nodes in Snippet #1, each of which
1845 is a declaration context that contains a single declaration of "``f``".
1846 However, the semantics-centric view provided by name lookup into the namespace
1847 ``N`` for "``f``" will return a ``DeclContext::lookup_result`` that contains a
1848 range of iterators over declarations of "``f``".
1850 ``DeclContext`` manages multiply-defined declaration contexts internally. The
1851 function ``DeclContext::getPrimaryContext`` retrieves the "primary" context for
1852 a given ``DeclContext`` instance, which is the ``DeclContext`` responsible for
1853 maintaining the lookup table used for the semantics-centric view. Given a
1854 DeclContext, one can obtain the set of declaration contexts that are
1855 semantically connected to this declaration context, in source order, including
1856 this context (which will be the only result, for non-namespace contexts) via
1857 ``DeclContext::collectAllContexts``. Note that these functions are used
1858 internally within the lookup and insertion methods of the ``DeclContext``, so
1859 the vast majority of clients can ignore them.
1861 Because the same entity can be defined multiple times in different modules,
1862 it is also possible for there to be multiple definitions of (for instance)
1863 a ``CXXRecordDecl``, all of which describe a definition of the same class.
1864 In such a case, only one of those "definitions" is considered by Clang to be
1865 the definition of the class, and the others are treated as non-defining
1866 declarations that happen to also contain member declarations. Corresponding
1867 members in each definition of such multiply-defined classes are identified
1868 either by redeclaration chains (if the members are ``Redeclarable``)
1869 or by simply a pointer to the canonical declaration (if the declarations
1870 are not ``Redeclarable`` -- in that case, a ``Mergeable`` base class is used
1876 Clang produces an AST even when the code contains errors. Clang won't generate
1877 and optimize code for it, but it's used as parsing continues to detect further
1878 errors in the input. Clang-based tools also depend on such ASTs, and IDEs in
1879 particular benefit from a high-quality AST for broken code.
1881 In presence of errors, clang uses a few error-recovery strategies to present the
1882 broken code in the AST:
1884 - correcting errors: in cases where clang is confident about the fix, it
1885 provides a FixIt attaching to the error diagnostic and emits a corrected AST
1886 (reflecting the written code with FixIts applied). The advantage of that is to
1887 provide more accurate subsequent diagnostics. Typo correction is a typical
1889 - representing invalid node: the invalid node is preserved in the AST in some
1890 form, e.g. when the "declaration" part of the declaration contains semantic
1891 errors, the Decl node is marked as invalid.
1892 - dropping invalid node: this often happens for errors that we don’t have
1893 graceful recovery. Prior to Recovery AST, a mismatched-argument function call
1894 expression was dropped though a CallExpr was created for semantic analysis.
1896 With these strategies, clang surfaces better diagnostics, and provides AST
1897 consumers a rich AST reflecting the written source code as much as possible even
1903 The idea of Recovery AST is to use recovery nodes which act as a placeholder to
1904 maintain the rough structure of the parsing tree, preserve locations and
1905 children but have no language semantics attached to them.
1907 For example, consider the following mismatched function call:
1912 void test(int abc) {
1913 NoArg(abc); // oops, mismatched function arguments.
1916 Without Recovery AST, the invalid function call expression (and its child
1917 expressions) would be dropped in the AST:
1921 |-FunctionDecl <line:1:1, col:11> NoArg 'int ()'
1922 `-FunctionDecl <line:2:1, line:4:1> test 'void (int)'
1923 |-ParmVarDecl <col:11, col:15> col:15 used abc 'int'
1924 `-CompoundStmt <col:20, line:4:1>
1927 With Recovery AST, the AST looks like:
1931 |-FunctionDecl <line:1:1, col:11> NoArg 'int ()'
1932 `-FunctionDecl <line:2:1, line:4:1> test 'void (int)'
1933 |-ParmVarDecl <col:11, col:15> used abc 'int'
1934 `-CompoundStmt <col:20, line:4:1>
1935 `-RecoveryExpr <line:3:3, col:12> 'int' contains-errors
1936 |-UnresolvedLookupExpr <col:3> '<overloaded function type>' lvalue (ADL) = 'NoArg'
1937 `-DeclRefExpr <col:9> 'int' lvalue ParmVar 'abc' 'int'
1940 An alternative is to use existing Exprs, e.g. CallExpr for the above example.
1941 This would capture more call details (e.g. locations of parentheses) and allow
1942 it to be treated uniformly with valid CallExprs. However, jamming the data we
1943 have into CallExpr forces us to weaken its invariants, e.g. arg count may be
1944 wrong. This would introduce a huge burden on consumers of the AST to handle such
1945 "impossible" cases. So when we're representing (rather than correcting) errors,
1946 we use a distinct recovery node type with extremely weak invariants instead.
1948 ``RecoveryExpr`` is the only recovery node so far. In practice, broken decls
1949 need more detailed semantics preserved (the current ``Invalid`` flag works
1950 fairly well), and completely broken statements with interesting internal
1951 structure are rare (so dropping the statements is OK).
1953 Types and dependence
1954 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
1956 ``RecoveryExpr`` is an ``Expr``, so it must have a type. In many cases the true
1957 type can't really be known until the code is corrected (e.g. a call to a
1958 function that doesn't exist). And it means that we can't properly perform type
1959 checks on some containing constructs, such as ``return 42 + unknownFunction()``.
1961 To model this, we generalize the concept of dependence from C++ templates to
1962 mean dependence on a template parameter or how an error is repaired. The
1963 ``RecoveryExpr`` ``unknownFunction()`` has the totally unknown type
1964 ``DependentTy``, and this suppresses type-based analysis in the same way it
1965 would inside a template.
1967 In cases where we are confident about the concrete type (e.g. the return type
1968 for a broken non-overloaded function call), the ``RecoveryExpr`` will have this
1969 type. This allows more code to be typechecked, and produces a better AST and
1970 more diagnostics. For example:
1974 unknownFunction().size() // .size() is a CXXDependentScopeMemberExpr
1975 std::string(42).size() // .size() is a resolved MemberExpr
1977 Whether or not the ``RecoveryExpr`` has a dependent type, it is always
1978 considered value-dependent, because its value isn't well-defined until the error
1979 is resolved. Among other things, this means that clang doesn't emit more errors
1980 where a RecoveryExpr is used as a constant (e.g. array size), but also won't try
1986 Beyond the template dependence bits, we add a new “ContainsErrors” bit to
1987 express “Does this expression or anything within it contain errors” semantic,
1988 this bit is always set for RecoveryExpr, and propagated to other related nodes.
1989 This provides a fast way to query whether any (recursive) child of an expression
1990 had an error, which is often used to improve diagnostics.
1995 void recoveryExpr(int abc) {
1996 unknownFunction(); // type-dependent, value-dependent, contains-errors
1998 std::string(42).size(); // value-dependent, contains-errors,
1999 // not type-dependent, as we know the type is std::string
2006 void recoveryExpr(int abc) {
2007 unknownVar + abc; // type-dependent, value-dependent, contains-errors
2014 The ``ASTImporter`` class imports nodes of an ``ASTContext`` into another
2015 ``ASTContext``. Please refer to the document :doc:`ASTImporter: Merging Clang
2016 ASTs <LibASTImporter>` for an introduction. And please read through the
2017 high-level `description of the import algorithm
2018 <LibASTImporter.html#algorithm-of-the-import>`_, this is essential for
2019 understanding further implementation details of the importer.
2023 Abstract Syntax Graph
2024 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
2026 Despite the name, the Clang AST is not a tree. It is a directed graph with
2027 cycles. One example of a cycle is the connection between a
2028 ``ClassTemplateDecl`` and its "templated" ``CXXRecordDecl``. The *templated*
2029 ``CXXRecordDecl`` represents all the fields and methods inside the class
2030 template, while the ``ClassTemplateDecl`` holds the information which is
2031 related to being a template, i.e. template arguments, etc. We can get the
2032 *templated* class (the ``CXXRecordDecl``) of a ``ClassTemplateDecl`` with
2033 ``ClassTemplateDecl::getTemplatedDecl()``. And we can get back a pointer of the
2034 "described" class template from the *templated* class:
2035 ``CXXRecordDecl::getDescribedTemplate()``. So, this is a cycle between two
2036 nodes: between the *templated* and the *described* node. There may be various
2037 other kinds of cycles in the AST especially in case of declarations.
2041 Structural Equivalency
2042 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
2044 Importing one AST node copies that node into the destination ``ASTContext``. To
2045 copy one node means that we create a new node in the "to" context then we set
2046 its properties to be equal to the properties of the source node. Before the
2047 copy, we make sure that the source node is not *structurally equivalent* to any
2048 existing node in the destination context. If it happens to be equivalent then
2051 The informal definition of structural equivalency is the following:
2052 Two nodes are **structurally equivalent** if they are
2054 - builtin types and refer to the same type, e.g. ``int`` and ``int`` are
2055 structurally equivalent,
2056 - function types and all their parameters have structurally equivalent types,
2057 - record types and all their fields in order of their definition have the same
2058 identifier names and structurally equivalent types,
2059 - variable or function declarations and they have the same identifier name and
2060 their types are structurally equivalent.
2062 In C, two types are structurally equivalent if they are *compatible types*. For
2063 a formal definition of *compatible types*, please refer to 6.2.7/1 in the C11
2064 standard. However, there is no definition for *compatible types* in the C++
2065 standard. Still, we extend the definition of structural equivalency to
2066 templates and their instantiations similarly: besides checking the previously
2067 mentioned properties, we have to check for equivalent template
2068 parameters/arguments, etc.
2070 The structural equivalent check can be and is used independently from the
2071 ASTImporter, e.g. the ``clang::Sema`` class uses it also.
2073 The equivalence of nodes may depend on the equivalency of other pairs of nodes.
2074 Thus, the check is implemented as a parallel graph traversal. We traverse
2075 through the nodes of both graphs at the same time. The actual implementation is
2076 similar to breadth-first-search. Let's say we start the traverse with the <A,B>
2077 pair of nodes. Whenever the traversal reaches a pair <X,Y> then the following
2078 statements are true:
2080 - A and X are nodes from the same ASTContext.
2081 - B and Y are nodes from the same ASTContext.
2082 - A and B may or may not be from the same ASTContext.
2083 - if A == X and B == Y (pointer equivalency) then (there is a cycle during the
2086 - A and B are structurally equivalent if and only if
2088 - All dependent nodes on the path from <A,B> to <X,Y> are structurally
2091 When we compare two classes or enums and one of them is incomplete or has
2092 unloaded external lexical declarations then we cannot descend to compare their
2093 contained declarations. So in these cases they are considered equal if they
2094 have the same names. This is the way how we compare forward declarations with
2097 .. TODO Should we elaborate the actual implementation of the graph traversal,
2098 .. which is a very weird BFS traversal?
2100 Redeclaration Chains
2101 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
2103 The early version of the ``ASTImporter``'s merge mechanism squashed the
2104 declarations, i.e. it aimed to have only one declaration instead of maintaining
2105 a whole redeclaration chain. This early approach simply skipped importing a
2106 function prototype, but it imported a definition. To demonstrate the problem
2107 with this approach let's consider an empty "to" context and the following
2108 ``virtual`` function declarations of ``f`` in the "from" context:
2112 struct B { virtual void f(); };
2113 void B::f() {} // <-- let's import this definition
2115 If we imported the definition with the "squashing" approach then we would
2116 end-up having one declaration which is indeed a definition, but ``isVirtual()``
2117 returns ``false`` for it. The reason is that the definition is indeed not
2118 virtual, it is the property of the prototype!
2120 Consequently, we must either set the virtual flag for the definition (but then
2121 we create a malformed AST which the parser would never create), or we import
2122 the whole redeclaration chain of the function. The most recent version of the
2123 ``ASTImporter`` uses the latter mechanism. We do import all function
2124 declarations - regardless if they are definitions or prototypes - in the order
2125 as they appear in the "from" context.
2129 If we have an existing definition in the "to" context, then we cannot import
2130 another definition, we will use the existing definition. However, we can import
2131 prototype(s): we chain the newly imported prototype(s) to the existing
2132 definition. Whenever we import a new prototype from a third context, that will
2133 be added to the end of the redeclaration chain. This may result in long
2134 redeclaration chains in certain cases, e.g. if we import from several
2135 translation units which include the same header with the prototype.
2137 .. Squashing prototypes
2139 To mitigate the problem of long redeclaration chains of free functions, we
2140 could compare prototypes to see if they have the same properties and if yes
2141 then we could merge these prototypes. The implementation of squashing of
2142 prototypes for free functions is future work.
2144 .. Exception: Cannot have more than 1 prototype in-class
2146 Chaining functions this way ensures that we do copy all information from the
2147 source AST. Nonetheless, there is a problem with member functions: While we can
2148 have many prototypes for free functions, we must have only one prototype for a
2160 void X::f() {} // OK
2162 Thus, prototypes of member functions must be squashed, we cannot just simply
2163 attach a new prototype to the existing in-class prototype. Consider the
2179 void X::f() {} // D2
2181 When we import the prototype and the definition of ``f`` from the "from"
2182 context, then the resulting redecl chain will look like this ``D0 -> D2'``,
2183 where ``D2'`` is the copy of ``D2`` in the "to" context.
2185 .. Redecl chains of other declarations
2187 Generally speaking, when we import declarations (like enums and classes) we do
2188 attach the newly imported declaration to the existing redeclaration chain (if
2189 there is structural equivalency). We do not import, however, the whole
2190 redeclaration chain as we do in case of functions. Up till now, we haven't
2191 found any essential property of forward declarations which is similar to the
2192 case of the virtual flag in a member function prototype. In the future, this
2195 Traversal during the Import
2196 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
2198 The node specific import mechanisms are implemented in
2199 ``ASTNodeImporter::VisitNode()`` functions, e.g. ``VisitFunctionDecl()``.
2200 When we import a declaration then first we import everything which is needed to
2201 call the constructor of that declaration node. Everything which can be set
2202 later is set after the node is created. For example, in case of a
2203 ``FunctionDecl`` we first import the declaration context in which the function
2204 is declared, then we create the ``FunctionDecl`` and only then we import the
2205 body of the function. This means there are implicit dependencies between AST
2206 nodes. These dependencies determine the order in which we visit nodes in the
2207 "from" context. As with the regular graph traversal algorithms like DFS, we
2208 keep track which nodes we have already visited in
2209 ``ASTImporter::ImportedDecls``. Whenever we create a node then we immediately
2210 add that to the ``ImportedDecls``. We must not start the import of any other
2211 declarations before we keep track of the newly created one. This is essential,
2212 otherwise, we would not be able to handle circular dependencies. To enforce
2213 this, we wrap all constructor calls of all AST nodes in
2214 ``GetImportedOrCreateDecl()``. This wrapper ensures that all newly created
2215 declarations are immediately marked as imported; also, if a declaration is
2216 already marked as imported then we just return its counterpart in the "to"
2217 context. Consequently, calling a declaration's ``::Create()`` function directly
2218 would lead to errors, please don't do that!
2220 Even with the use of ``GetImportedOrCreateDecl()`` there is still a
2221 probability of having an infinite import recursion if things are imported from
2222 each other in wrong way. Imagine that during the import of ``A``, the import of
2223 ``B`` is requested before we could create the node for ``A`` (the constructor
2224 needs a reference to ``B``). And the same could be true for the import of ``B``
2225 (``A`` is requested to be imported before we could create the node for ``B``).
2226 In case of the :ref:`templated-described swing <templated>` we take
2227 extra attention to break the cyclical dependency: we import and set the
2228 described template only after the ``CXXRecordDecl`` is created. As a best
2229 practice, before creating the node in the "to" context, avoid importing of
2230 other nodes which are not needed for the constructor of node ``A``.
2235 Every import function returns with either an ``llvm::Error`` or an
2236 ``llvm::Expected<T>`` object. This enforces to check the return value of the
2237 import functions. If there was an error during one import then we return with
2238 that error. (Exception: when we import the members of a class, we collect the
2239 individual errors with each member and we concatenate them in one Error
2240 object.) We cache these errors in cases of declarations. During the next import
2241 call if there is an existing error we just return with that. So, clients of the
2242 library receive an Error object, which they must check.
2244 During import of a specific declaration, it may happen that some AST nodes had
2245 already been created before we recognize an error. In this case, we signal back
2246 the error to the caller, but the "to" context remains polluted with those nodes
2247 which had been created. Ideally, those nodes should not had been created, but
2248 that time we did not know about the error, the error happened later. Since the
2249 AST is immutable (most of the cases we can't remove existing nodes) we choose
2250 to mark these nodes as erroneous.
2252 We cache the errors associated with declarations in the "from" context in
2253 ``ASTImporter::ImportDeclErrors`` and the ones which are associated with the
2254 "to" context in ``ASTImporterSharedState::ImportErrors``. Note that, there may
2255 be several ASTImporter objects which import into the same "to" context but from
2256 different "from" contexts; in this case, they have to share the associated
2257 errors of the "to" context.
2259 When an error happens, that propagates through the call stack, through all the
2260 dependant nodes. However, in case of dependency cycles, this is not enough,
2261 because we strive to mark the erroneous nodes so clients can act upon. In those
2262 cases, we have to keep track of the errors for those nodes which are
2263 intermediate nodes of a cycle.
2265 An **import path** is the list of the AST nodes which we visit during an Import
2266 call. If node ``A`` depends on node ``B`` then the path contains an ``A->B``
2267 edge. From the call stack of the import functions, we can read the very same
2270 Now imagine the following AST, where the ``->`` represents dependency in terms
2271 of the import (all nodes are declarations).
2273 .. code-block:: text
2278 We would like to import A.
2279 The import behaves like a DFS, so we will visit the nodes in this order: ABCDE.
2280 During the visitation we will have the following import paths:
2282 .. code-block:: text
2294 If during the visit of E there is an error then we set an error for E, then as
2295 the call stack shrinks for B, then for A:
2297 .. code-block:: text
2305 ABE // Error! Set an error to E
2306 AB // Set an error to B
2307 A // Set an error to A
2309 However, during the import we could import C and D without any error and they
2310 are independent of A,B and E. We must not set up an error for C and D. So, at
2311 the end of the import we have an entry in ``ImportDeclErrors`` for A,B,E but
2314 Now, what happens if there is a cycle in the import path? Let's consider this
2317 .. code-block:: text
2322 During the visitation, we will have the below import paths and if during the
2323 visit of E there is an error then we will set up an error for E,B,A. But what's
2326 .. code-block:: text
2334 ABE // Error! Set an error to E
2335 AB // Set an error to B
2336 A // Set an error to A
2338 This time we know that both B and C are dependent on A. This means we must set
2339 up an error for C too. As the call stack reverses back we get to A and we must
2340 set up an error to all nodes which depend on A (this includes C). But C is no
2341 longer on the import path, it just had been previously. Such a situation can
2342 happen only if during the visitation we had a cycle. If we didn't have any
2343 cycle, then the normal way of passing an Error object through the call stack
2344 could handle the situation. This is why we must track cycles during the import
2345 process for each visited declaration.
2350 When we import a declaration from the source context then we check whether we
2351 already have a structurally equivalent node with the same name in the "to"
2352 context. If the "from" node is a definition and the found one is also a
2353 definition, then we do not create a new node, instead, we mark the found node
2354 as the imported node. If the found definition and the one we want to import
2355 have the same name but they are structurally in-equivalent, then we have an ODR
2356 violation in case of C++. If the "from" node is not a definition then we add
2357 that to the redeclaration chain of the found node. This behaviour is essential
2358 when we merge ASTs from different translation units which include the same
2359 header file(s). For example, we want to have only one definition for the class
2360 template ``std::vector``, even if we included ``<vector>`` in several
2363 To find a structurally equivalent node we can use the regular C/C++ lookup
2364 functions: ``DeclContext::noload_lookup()`` and
2365 ``DeclContext::localUncachedLookup()``. These functions do respect the C/C++
2366 name hiding rules, thus you cannot find certain declarations in a given
2367 declaration context. For instance, unnamed declarations (anonymous structs),
2368 non-first ``friend`` declarations and template specializations are hidden. This
2369 is a problem, because if we use the regular C/C++ lookup then we create
2370 redundant AST nodes during the merge! Also, having two instances of the same
2371 node could result in false :ref:`structural in-equivalencies <structural-eq>`
2372 of other nodes which depend on the duplicated node. Because of these reasons,
2373 we created a lookup class which has the sole purpose to register all
2374 declarations, so later they can be looked up by subsequent import requests.
2375 This is the ``ASTImporterLookupTable`` class. This lookup table should be
2376 shared amongst the different ``ASTImporter`` instances if they happen to import
2377 to the very same "to" context. This is why we can use the importer specific
2378 lookup only via the ``ASTImporterSharedState`` class.
2383 The ``ExternalASTSource`` is an abstract interface associated with the
2384 ``ASTContext`` class. It provides the ability to read the declarations stored
2385 within a declaration context either for iteration or for name lookup. A
2386 declaration context with an external AST source may load its declarations
2387 on-demand. This means that the list of declarations (represented as a linked
2388 list, the head is ``DeclContext::FirstDecl``) could be empty. However, member
2389 functions like ``DeclContext::lookup()`` may initiate a load.
2391 Usually, external sources are associated with precompiled headers. For example,
2392 when we load a class from a PCH then the members are loaded only if we do want
2393 to look up something in the class' context.
2395 In case of LLDB, an implementation of the ``ExternalASTSource`` interface is
2396 attached to the AST context which is related to the parsed expression. This
2397 implementation of the ``ExternalASTSource`` interface is realized with the help
2398 of the ``ASTImporter`` class. This way, LLDB can reuse Clang's parsing
2399 machinery while synthesizing the underlying AST from the debug data (e.g. from
2400 DWARF). From the view of the ``ASTImporter`` this means both the "to" and the
2401 "from" context may have declaration contexts with external lexical storage. If
2402 a ``DeclContext`` in the "to" AST context has external lexical storage then we
2403 must take extra attention to work only with the already loaded declarations!
2404 Otherwise, we would end up with an uncontrolled import process. For instance,
2405 if we used the regular ``DeclContext::lookup()`` to find the existing
2406 declarations in the "to" context then the ``lookup()`` call itself would
2407 initiate a new import while we are in the middle of importing a declaration!
2408 (By the time we initiate the lookup we haven't registered yet that we already
2409 started to import the node of the "from" context.) This is why we use
2410 ``DeclContext::noload_lookup()`` instead.
2412 Class Template Instantiations
2413 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
2415 Different translation units may have class template instantiations with the
2416 same template arguments, but with a different set of instantiated
2417 ``MethodDecls`` and ``FieldDecls``. Consider the following files:
2422 template <typename T>
2424 int a{0}; // FieldDecl with InitListExpr
2425 X(char) : a(3) {} // (1)
2431 // ClassTemplateSpec with ctor (1): FieldDecl without InitlistExpr
2437 // ClassTemplateSpec with ctor (2): FieldDecl WITH InitlistExpr
2441 In ``foo.cpp`` we use the constructor with number ``(1)``, which explicitly
2442 initializes the member ``a`` to ``3``, thus the ``InitListExpr`` ``{0}`` is not
2443 used here and the AST node is not instantiated. However, in the case of
2444 ``bar.cpp`` we use the constructor with number ``(2)``, which does not
2445 explicitly initialize the ``a`` member, so the default ``InitListExpr`` is
2446 needed and thus instantiated. When we merge the AST of ``foo.cpp`` and
2447 ``bar.cpp`` we must create an AST node for the class template instantiation of
2448 ``X<char>`` which has all the required nodes. Therefore, when we find an
2449 existing ``ClassTemplateSpecializationDecl`` then we merge the fields of the
2450 ``ClassTemplateSpecializationDecl`` in the "from" context in a way that the
2451 ``InitListExpr`` is copied if not existent yet. The same merge mechanism should
2452 be done in the cases of instantiated default arguments and exception
2453 specifications of functions.
2457 Visibility of Declarations
2458 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
2460 During import of a global variable with external visibility, the lookup will
2461 find variables (with the same name) but with static visibility (linkage).
2462 Clearly, we cannot put them into the same redeclaration chain. The same is true
2463 the in case of functions. Also, we have to take care of other kinds of
2464 declarations like enums, classes, etc. if they are in anonymous namespaces.
2465 Therefore, we filter the lookup results and consider only those which have the
2466 same visibility as the declaration we currently import.
2468 We consider two declarations in two anonymous namespaces to have the same
2469 visibility only if they are imported from the same AST context.
2471 Strategies to Handle Conflicting Names
2472 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
2474 During the import we lookup existing declarations with the same name. We filter
2475 the lookup results based on their :ref:`visibility <visibility>`. If any of the
2476 found declarations are not structurally equivalent then we bumped to a name
2477 conflict error (ODR violation in C++). In this case, we return with an
2478 ``Error`` and we set up the ``Error`` object for the declaration. However, some
2479 clients of the ``ASTImporter`` may require a different, perhaps less
2480 conservative and more liberal error handling strategy.
2482 E.g. static analysis clients may benefit if the node is created even if there
2483 is a name conflict. During the CTU analysis of certain projects, we recognized
2484 that there are global declarations which collide with declarations from other
2485 translation units, but they are not referenced outside from their translation
2486 unit. These declarations should be in an unnamed namespace ideally. If we treat
2487 these collisions liberally then CTU analysis can find more results. Note, the
2488 feature be able to choose between name conflict handling strategies is still an
2496 The ``CFG`` class is designed to represent a source-level control-flow graph
2497 for a single statement (``Stmt*``). Typically instances of ``CFG`` are
2498 constructed for function bodies (usually an instance of ``CompoundStmt``), but
2499 can also be instantiated to represent the control-flow of any class that
2500 subclasses ``Stmt``, which includes simple expressions. Control-flow graphs
2501 are especially useful for performing `flow- or path-sensitive
2502 <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_flow_analysis#Sensitivities>`_ program
2503 analyses on a given function.
2508 Concretely, an instance of ``CFG`` is a collection of basic blocks. Each basic
2509 block is an instance of ``CFGBlock``, which simply contains an ordered sequence
2510 of ``Stmt*`` (each referring to statements in the AST). The ordering of
2511 statements within a block indicates unconditional flow of control from one
2512 statement to the next. :ref:`Conditional control-flow
2513 <ConditionalControlFlow>` is represented using edges between basic blocks. The
2514 statements within a given ``CFGBlock`` can be traversed using the
2515 ``CFGBlock::*iterator`` interface.
2517 A ``CFG`` object owns the instances of ``CFGBlock`` within the control-flow
2518 graph it represents. Each ``CFGBlock`` within a CFG is also uniquely numbered
2519 (accessible via ``CFGBlock::getBlockID()``). Currently the number is based on
2520 the ordering the blocks were created, but no assumptions should be made on how
2521 ``CFGBlocks`` are numbered other than their numbers are unique and that they
2522 are numbered from 0..N-1 (where N is the number of basic blocks in the CFG).
2524 Entry and Exit Blocks
2525 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
2527 Each instance of ``CFG`` contains two special blocks: an *entry* block
2528 (accessible via ``CFG::getEntry()``), which has no incoming edges, and an
2529 *exit* block (accessible via ``CFG::getExit()``), which has no outgoing edges.
2530 Neither block contains any statements, and they serve the role of providing a
2531 clear entrance and exit for a body of code such as a function body. The
2532 presence of these empty blocks greatly simplifies the implementation of many
2533 analyses built on top of CFGs.
2535 .. _ConditionalControlFlow:
2537 Conditional Control-Flow
2538 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
2540 Conditional control-flow (such as those induced by if-statements and loops) is
2541 represented as edges between ``CFGBlocks``. Because different C language
2542 constructs can induce control-flow, each ``CFGBlock`` also records an extra
2543 ``Stmt*`` that represents the *terminator* of the block. A terminator is
2544 simply the statement that caused the control-flow, and is used to identify the
2545 nature of the conditional control-flow between blocks. For example, in the
2546 case of an if-statement, the terminator refers to the ``IfStmt`` object in the
2547 AST that represented the given branch.
2549 To illustrate, consider the following code example:
2565 After invoking the parser+semantic analyzer on this code fragment, the AST of
2566 the body of ``foo`` is referenced by a single ``Stmt*``. We can then construct
2567 an instance of ``CFG`` representing the control-flow graph of this function
2568 body by single call to a static class method:
2573 std::unique_ptr<CFG> FooCFG = CFG::buildCFG(FooBody);
2575 Along with providing an interface to iterate over its ``CFGBlocks``, the
2576 ``CFG`` class also provides methods that are useful for debugging and
2577 visualizing CFGs. For example, the method ``CFG::dump()`` dumps a
2578 pretty-printed version of the CFG to standard error. This is especially useful
2579 when one is using a debugger such as gdb. For example, here is the output of
2582 .. code-block:: text
2592 Predecessors (1): B5
2593 Successors (2): B3 B2
2597 Predecessors (1): B4
2603 Predecessors (1): B4
2608 Predecessors (2): B2 B3
2612 Predecessors (1): B1
2615 For each block, the pretty-printed output displays for each block the number of
2616 *predecessor* blocks (blocks that have outgoing control-flow to the given
2617 block) and *successor* blocks (blocks that have control-flow that have incoming
2618 control-flow from the given block). We can also clearly see the special entry
2619 and exit blocks at the beginning and end of the pretty-printed output. For the
2620 entry block (block B5), the number of predecessor blocks is 0, while for the
2621 exit block (block B0) the number of successor blocks is 0.
2623 The most interesting block here is B4, whose outgoing control-flow represents
2624 the branching caused by the sole if-statement in ``foo``. Of particular
2625 interest is the second statement in the block, ``(x > 2)``, and the terminator,
2626 printed as ``if [B4.2]``. The second statement represents the evaluation of
2627 the condition of the if-statement, which occurs before the actual branching of
2628 control-flow. Within the ``CFGBlock`` for B4, the ``Stmt*`` for the second
2629 statement refers to the actual expression in the AST for ``(x > 2)``. Thus
2630 pointers to subclasses of ``Expr`` can appear in the list of statements in a
2631 block, and not just subclasses of ``Stmt`` that refer to proper C statements.
2633 The terminator of block B4 is a pointer to the ``IfStmt`` object in the AST.
2634 The pretty-printer outputs ``if [B4.2]`` because the condition expression of
2635 the if-statement has an actual place in the basic block, and thus the
2636 terminator is essentially *referring* to the expression that is the second
2637 statement of block B4 (i.e., B4.2). In this manner, conditions for
2638 control-flow (which also includes conditions for loops and switch statements)
2639 are hoisted into the actual basic block.
2641 .. Implicit Control-Flow
2642 .. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
2644 .. A key design principle of the ``CFG`` class was to not require any
2645 .. transformations to the AST in order to represent control-flow. Thus the
2646 .. ``CFG`` does not perform any "lowering" of the statements in an AST: loops
2647 .. are not transformed into guarded gotos, short-circuit operations are not
2648 .. converted to a set of if-statements, and so on.
2650 Constant Folding in the Clang AST
2651 ---------------------------------
2653 There are several places where constants and constant folding matter a lot to
2654 the Clang front-end. First, in general, we prefer the AST to retain the source
2655 code as close to how the user wrote it as possible. This means that if they
2656 wrote "``5+4``", we want to keep the addition and two constants in the AST, we
2657 don't want to fold to "``9``". This means that constant folding in various
2658 ways turns into a tree walk that needs to handle the various cases.
2660 However, there are places in both C and C++ that require constants to be
2661 folded. For example, the C standard defines what an "integer constant
2662 expression" (i-c-e) is with very precise and specific requirements. The
2663 language then requires i-c-e's in a lot of places (for example, the size of a
2664 bitfield, the value for a case statement, etc). For these, we have to be able
2665 to constant fold the constants, to do semantic checks (e.g., verify bitfield
2666 size is non-negative and that case statements aren't duplicated). We aim for
2667 Clang to be very pedantic about this, diagnosing cases when the code does not
2668 use an i-c-e where one is required, but accepting the code unless running with
2669 ``-pedantic-errors``.
2671 Things get a little bit more tricky when it comes to compatibility with
2672 real-world source code. Specifically, GCC has historically accepted a huge
2673 superset of expressions as i-c-e's, and a lot of real world code depends on
2674 this unfortunate accident of history (including, e.g., the glibc system
2675 headers). GCC accepts anything its "fold" optimizer is capable of reducing to
2676 an integer constant, which means that the definition of what it accepts changes
2677 as its optimizer does. One example is that GCC accepts things like "``case
2678 X-X:``" even when ``X`` is a variable, because it can fold this to 0.
2680 Another issue are how constants interact with the extensions we support, such
2681 as ``__builtin_constant_p``, ``__builtin_inf``, ``__extension__`` and many
2682 others. C99 obviously does not specify the semantics of any of these
2683 extensions, and the definition of i-c-e does not include them. However, these
2684 extensions are often used in real code, and we have to have a way to reason
2687 Finally, this is not just a problem for semantic analysis. The code generator
2688 and other clients have to be able to fold constants (e.g., to initialize global
2689 variables) and have to handle a superset of what C99 allows. Further, these
2690 clients can benefit from extended information. For example, we know that
2691 "``foo() || 1``" always evaluates to ``true``, but we can't replace the
2692 expression with ``true`` because it has side effects.
2694 Implementation Approach
2695 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
2697 After trying several different approaches, we've finally converged on a design
2698 (Note, at the time of this writing, not all of this has been implemented,
2699 consider this a design goal!). Our basic approach is to define a single
2700 recursive evaluation method (``Expr::Evaluate``), which is implemented
2701 in ``AST/ExprConstant.cpp``. Given an expression with "scalar" type (integer,
2702 fp, complex, or pointer) this method returns the following information:
2704 * Whether the expression is an integer constant expression, a general constant
2705 that was folded but has no side effects, a general constant that was folded
2706 but that does have side effects, or an uncomputable/unfoldable value.
2707 * If the expression was computable in any way, this method returns the
2708 ``APValue`` for the result of the expression.
2709 * If the expression is not evaluatable at all, this method returns information
2710 on one of the problems with the expression. This includes a
2711 ``SourceLocation`` for where the problem is, and a diagnostic ID that explains
2712 the problem. The diagnostic should have ``ERROR`` type.
2713 * If the expression is not an integer constant expression, this method returns
2714 information on one of the problems with the expression. This includes a
2715 ``SourceLocation`` for where the problem is, and a diagnostic ID that
2716 explains the problem. The diagnostic should have ``EXTENSION`` type.
2718 This information gives various clients the flexibility that they want, and we
2719 will eventually have some helper methods for various extensions. For example,
2720 ``Sema`` should have a ``Sema::VerifyIntegerConstantExpression`` method, which
2721 calls ``Evaluate`` on the expression. If the expression is not foldable, the
2722 error is emitted, and it would return ``true``. If the expression is not an
2723 i-c-e, the ``EXTENSION`` diagnostic is emitted. Finally it would return
2724 ``false`` to indicate that the AST is OK.
2726 Other clients can use the information in other ways, for example, codegen can
2727 just use expressions that are foldable in any way.
2732 This section describes how some of the various extensions Clang supports
2733 interacts with constant evaluation:
2735 * ``__extension__``: The expression form of this extension causes any
2736 evaluatable subexpression to be accepted as an integer constant expression.
2737 * ``__builtin_constant_p``: This returns true (as an integer constant
2738 expression) if the operand evaluates to either a numeric value (that is, not
2739 a pointer cast to integral type) of integral, enumeration, floating or
2740 complex type, or if it evaluates to the address of the first character of a
2741 string literal (possibly cast to some other type). As a special case, if
2742 ``__builtin_constant_p`` is the (potentially parenthesized) condition of a
2743 conditional operator expression ("``?:``"), only the true side of the
2744 conditional operator is considered, and it is evaluated with full constant
2746 * ``__builtin_choose_expr``: The condition is required to be an integer
2747 constant expression, but we accept any constant as an "extension of an
2748 extension". This only evaluates one operand depending on which way the
2749 condition evaluates.
2750 * ``__builtin_classify_type``: This always returns an integer constant
2752 * ``__builtin_inf, nan, ...``: These are treated just like a floating-point
2754 * ``__builtin_abs, copysign, ...``: These are constant folded as general
2755 constant expressions.
2756 * ``__builtin_strlen`` and ``strlen``: These are constant folded as integer
2757 constant expressions if the argument is a string literal.
2764 This library is called by the :ref:`Parser library <Parser>` during parsing to
2765 do semantic analysis of the input. For valid programs, Sema builds an AST for
2773 CodeGen takes an :ref:`AST <AST>` as input and produces `LLVM IR code
2774 <//llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html>`_ from it.
2779 How to add an attribute
2780 -----------------------
2781 Attributes are a form of metadata that can be attached to a program construct,
2782 allowing the programmer to pass semantic information along to the compiler for
2783 various uses. For example, attributes may be used to alter the code generation
2784 for a program construct, or to provide extra semantic information for static
2785 analysis. This document explains how to add a custom attribute to Clang.
2786 Documentation on existing attributes can be found `here
2787 <//clang.llvm.org/docs/AttributeReference.html>`_.
2791 Attributes in Clang are handled in three stages: parsing into a parsed attribute
2792 representation, conversion from a parsed attribute into a semantic attribute,
2793 and then the semantic handling of the attribute.
2795 Parsing of the attribute is determined by the various syntactic forms attributes
2796 can take, such as GNU, C++11, and Microsoft style attributes, as well as other
2797 information provided by the table definition of the attribute. Ultimately, the
2798 parsed representation of an attribute object is an ``ParsedAttr`` object.
2799 These parsed attributes chain together as a list of parsed attributes attached
2800 to a declarator or declaration specifier. The parsing of attributes is handled
2801 automatically by Clang, except for attributes spelled as keywords. When
2802 implementing a keyword attribute, the parsing of the keyword and creation of the
2803 ``ParsedAttr`` object must be done manually.
2805 Eventually, ``Sema::ProcessDeclAttributeList()`` is called with a ``Decl`` and
2806 a ``ParsedAttr``, at which point the parsed attribute can be transformed
2807 into a semantic attribute. The process by which a parsed attribute is converted
2808 into a semantic attribute depends on the attribute definition and semantic
2809 requirements of the attribute. The end result, however, is that the semantic
2810 attribute object is attached to the ``Decl`` object, and can be obtained by a
2811 call to ``Decl::getAttr<T>()``. Similarly, for statement attributes,
2812 ``Sema::ProcessStmtAttributes()`` is called with a ``Stmt`` a list of
2813 ``ParsedAttr`` objects to be converted into a semantic attribute.
2815 The structure of the semantic attribute is also governed by the attribute
2816 definition given in Attr.td. This definition is used to automatically generate
2817 functionality used for the implementation of the attribute, such as a class
2818 derived from ``clang::Attr``, information for the parser to use, automated
2819 semantic checking for some attributes, etc.
2822 ``include/clang/Basic/Attr.td``
2823 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
2824 The first step to adding a new attribute to Clang is to add its definition to
2825 `include/clang/Basic/Attr.td
2826 <https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/clang/include/clang/Basic/Attr.td>`_.
2827 This tablegen definition must derive from the ``Attr`` (tablegen, not
2828 semantic) type, or one of its derivatives. Most attributes will derive from the
2829 ``InheritableAttr`` type, which specifies that the attribute can be inherited by
2830 later redeclarations of the ``Decl`` it is associated with.
2831 ``InheritableParamAttr`` is similar to ``InheritableAttr``, except that the
2832 attribute is written on a parameter instead of a declaration. If the attribute
2833 applies to statements, it should inherit from ``StmtAttr``. If the attribute is
2834 intended to apply to a type instead of a declaration, such an attribute should
2835 derive from ``TypeAttr``, and will generally not be given an AST representation.
2836 (Note that this document does not cover the creation of type attributes.) An
2837 attribute that inherits from ``IgnoredAttr`` is parsed, but will generate an
2838 ignored attribute diagnostic when used, which may be useful when an attribute is
2839 supported by another vendor but not supported by clang.
2841 The definition will specify several key pieces of information, such as the
2842 semantic name of the attribute, the spellings the attribute supports, the
2843 arguments the attribute expects, and more. Most members of the ``Attr`` tablegen
2844 type do not require definitions in the derived definition as the default
2845 suffice. However, every attribute must specify at least a spelling list, a
2846 subject list, and a documentation list.
2850 All attributes are required to specify a spelling list that denotes the ways in
2851 which the attribute can be spelled. For instance, a single semantic attribute
2852 may have a keyword spelling, as well as a C++11 spelling and a GNU spelling. An
2853 empty spelling list is also permissible and may be useful for attributes which
2854 are created implicitly. The following spellings are accepted:
2856 ============ ================================================================
2857 Spelling Description
2858 ============ ================================================================
2859 ``GNU`` Spelled with a GNU-style ``__attribute__((attr))`` syntax and
2861 ``CXX11`` Spelled with a C++-style ``[[attr]]`` syntax with an optional
2862 vendor-specific namespace.
2863 ``C2x`` Spelled with a C-style ``[[attr]]`` syntax with an optional
2864 vendor-specific namespace.
2865 ``Declspec`` Spelled with a Microsoft-style ``__declspec(attr)`` syntax.
2866 ``Keyword`` The attribute is spelled as a keyword, and required custom
2868 ``GCC`` Specifies two or three spellings: the first is a GNU-style
2869 spelling, the second is a C++-style spelling with the ``gnu``
2870 namespace, and the third is an optional C-style spelling with
2871 the ``gnu`` namespace. Attributes should only specify this
2872 spelling for attributes supported by GCC.
2873 ``Clang`` Specifies two or three spellings: the first is a GNU-style
2874 spelling, the second is a C++-style spelling with the ``clang``
2875 namespace, and the third is an optional C-style spelling with
2876 the ``clang`` namespace. By default, a C-style spelling is
2878 ``Pragma`` The attribute is spelled as a ``#pragma``, and requires custom
2879 processing within the preprocessor. If the attribute is meant to
2880 be used by Clang, it should set the namespace to ``"clang"``.
2881 Note that this spelling is not used for declaration attributes.
2882 ============ ================================================================
2886 Attributes appertain to one or more subjects. If the attribute attempts to
2887 attach to a subject that is not in the subject list, a diagnostic is issued
2888 automatically. Whether the diagnostic is a warning or an error depends on how
2889 the attribute's ``SubjectList`` is defined, but the default behavior is to warn.
2890 The diagnostics displayed to the user are automatically determined based on the
2891 subjects in the list, but a custom diagnostic parameter can also be specified in
2892 the ``SubjectList``. The diagnostics generated for subject list violations are
2893 calculated automatically or specified by the subject list itself. If a
2894 previously unused Decl node is added to the ``SubjectList``, the logic used to
2895 automatically determine the diagnostic parameter in `utils/TableGen/ClangAttrEmitter.cpp
2896 <https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/clang/utils/TableGen/ClangAttrEmitter.cpp>`_
2897 may need to be updated.
2899 By default, all subjects in the SubjectList must either be a Decl node defined
2900 in ``DeclNodes.td``, or a statement node defined in ``StmtNodes.td``. However,
2901 more complex subjects can be created by creating a ``SubsetSubject`` object.
2902 Each such object has a base subject which it appertains to (which must be a
2903 Decl or Stmt node, and not a SubsetSubject node), and some custom code which is
2904 called when determining whether an attribute appertains to the subject. For
2905 instance, a ``NonBitField`` SubsetSubject appertains to a ``FieldDecl``, and
2906 tests whether the given FieldDecl is a bit field. When a SubsetSubject is
2907 specified in a SubjectList, a custom diagnostic parameter must also be provided.
2909 Diagnostic checking for attribute subject lists for declaration and statement
2910 attributes is automated except when ``HasCustomParsing`` is set to ``1``.
2914 All attributes must have some form of documentation associated with them.
2915 Documentation is table generated on the public web server by a server-side
2916 process that runs daily. Generally, the documentation for an attribute is a
2917 stand-alone definition in `include/clang/Basic/AttrDocs.td
2918 <https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/clang/include/clang/Basic/AttrDocs.td>`_
2919 that is named after the attribute being documented.
2921 If the attribute is not for public consumption, or is an implicitly-created
2922 attribute that has no visible spelling, the documentation list can specify the
2923 ``Undocumented`` object. Otherwise, the attribute should have its documentation
2924 added to AttrDocs.td.
2926 Documentation derives from the ``Documentation`` tablegen type. All derived
2927 types must specify a documentation category and the actual documentation itself.
2928 Additionally, it can specify a custom heading for the attribute, though a
2929 default heading will be chosen when possible.
2931 There are four predefined documentation categories: ``DocCatFunction`` for
2932 attributes that appertain to function-like subjects, ``DocCatVariable`` for
2933 attributes that appertain to variable-like subjects, ``DocCatType`` for type
2934 attributes, and ``DocCatStmt`` for statement attributes. A custom documentation
2935 category should be used for groups of attributes with similar functionality.
2936 Custom categories are good for providing overview information for the attributes
2937 grouped under it. For instance, the consumed annotation attributes define a
2938 custom category, ``DocCatConsumed``, that explains what consumed annotations are
2941 Documentation content (whether it is for an attribute or a category) is written
2942 using reStructuredText (RST) syntax.
2944 After writing the documentation for the attribute, it should be locally tested
2945 to ensure that there are no issues generating the documentation on the server.
2946 Local testing requires a fresh build of clang-tblgen. To generate the attribute
2947 documentation, execute the following command::
2949 clang-tblgen -gen-attr-docs -I /path/to/clang/include /path/to/clang/include/clang/Basic/Attr.td -o /path/to/clang/docs/AttributeReference.rst
2951 When testing locally, *do not* commit changes to ``AttributeReference.rst``.
2952 This file is generated by the server automatically, and any changes made to this
2953 file will be overwritten.
2957 Attributes may optionally specify a list of arguments that can be passed to the
2958 attribute. Attribute arguments specify both the parsed form and the semantic
2959 form of the attribute. For example, if ``Args`` is
2960 ``[StringArgument<"Arg1">, IntArgument<"Arg2">]`` then
2961 ``__attribute__((myattribute("Hello", 3)))`` will be a valid use; it requires
2962 two arguments while parsing, and the Attr subclass' constructor for the
2963 semantic attribute will require a string and integer argument.
2965 All arguments have a name and a flag that specifies whether the argument is
2966 optional. The associated C++ type of the argument is determined by the argument
2967 definition type. If the existing argument types are insufficient, new types can
2968 be created, but it requires modifying `utils/TableGen/ClangAttrEmitter.cpp
2969 <https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/clang/utils/TableGen/ClangAttrEmitter.cpp>`_
2970 to properly support the type.
2974 The ``Attr`` definition has other members which control the behavior of the
2975 attribute. Many of them are special-purpose and beyond the scope of this
2976 document, however a few deserve mention.
2978 If the parsed form of the attribute is more complex, or differs from the
2979 semantic form, the ``HasCustomParsing`` bit can be set to ``1`` for the class,
2980 and the parsing code in `Parser::ParseGNUAttributeArgs()
2981 <https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/clang/lib/Parse/ParseDecl.cpp>`_
2982 can be updated for the special case. Note that this only applies to arguments
2983 with a GNU spelling -- attributes with a __declspec spelling currently ignore
2984 this flag and are handled by ``Parser::ParseMicrosoftDeclSpec``.
2986 Note that setting this member to 1 will opt out of common attribute semantic
2987 handling, requiring extra implementation efforts to ensure the attribute
2988 appertains to the appropriate subject, etc.
2990 If the attribute should not be propagated from a template declaration to an
2991 instantiation of the template, set the ``Clone`` member to 0. By default, all
2992 attributes will be cloned to template instantiations.
2994 Attributes that do not require an AST node should set the ``ASTNode`` field to
2995 ``0`` to avoid polluting the AST. Note that anything inheriting from
2996 ``TypeAttr`` or ``IgnoredAttr`` automatically do not generate an AST node. All
2997 other attributes generate an AST node by default. The AST node is the semantic
2998 representation of the attribute.
3000 The ``LangOpts`` field specifies a list of language options required by the
3001 attribute. For instance, all of the CUDA-specific attributes specify ``[CUDA]``
3002 for the ``LangOpts`` field, and when the CUDA language option is not enabled, an
3003 "attribute ignored" warning diagnostic is emitted. Since language options are
3004 not table generated nodes, new language options must be created manually and
3005 should specify the spelling used by ``LangOptions`` class.
3007 Custom accessors can be generated for an attribute based on the spelling list
3008 for that attribute. For instance, if an attribute has two different spellings:
3009 'Foo' and 'Bar', accessors can be created:
3010 ``[Accessor<"isFoo", [GNU<"Foo">]>, Accessor<"isBar", [GNU<"Bar">]>]``
3011 These accessors will be generated on the semantic form of the attribute,
3012 accepting no arguments and returning a ``bool``.
3014 Attributes that do not require custom semantic handling should set the
3015 ``SemaHandler`` field to ``0``. Note that anything inheriting from
3016 ``IgnoredAttr`` automatically do not get a semantic handler. All other
3017 attributes are assumed to use a semantic handler by default. Attributes
3018 without a semantic handler are not given a parsed attribute ``Kind`` enumerator.
3020 "Simple" attributes, that require no custom semantic processing aside from what
3021 is automatically provided, should set the ``SimpleHandler`` field to ``1``.
3023 Target-specific attributes may share a spelling with other attributes in
3024 different targets. For instance, the ARM and MSP430 targets both have an
3025 attribute spelled ``GNU<"interrupt">``, but with different parsing and semantic
3026 requirements. To support this feature, an attribute inheriting from
3027 ``TargetSpecificAttribute`` may specify a ``ParseKind`` field. This field
3028 should be the same value between all arguments sharing a spelling, and
3029 corresponds to the parsed attribute's ``Kind`` enumerator. This allows
3030 attributes to share a parsed attribute kind, but have distinct semantic
3031 attribute classes. For instance, ``ParsedAttr`` is the shared
3032 parsed attribute kind, but ARMInterruptAttr and MSP430InterruptAttr are the
3033 semantic attributes generated.
3035 By default, attribute arguments are parsed in an evaluated context. If the
3036 arguments for an attribute should be parsed in an unevaluated context (akin to
3037 the way the argument to a ``sizeof`` expression is parsed), set
3038 ``ParseArgumentsAsUnevaluated`` to ``1``.
3040 If additional functionality is desired for the semantic form of the attribute,
3041 the ``AdditionalMembers`` field specifies code to be copied verbatim into the
3042 semantic attribute class object, with ``public`` access.
3044 If two or more attributes cannot be used in combination on the same declaration
3045 or statement, a ``MutualExclusions`` definition can be supplied to automatically
3046 generate diagnostic code. This will disallow the attribute combinations
3047 regardless of spellings used. Additionally, it will diagnose combinations within
3048 the same attribute list, different attribute list, and redeclarations, as
3053 All semantic processing of declaration attributes happens in `lib/Sema/SemaDeclAttr.cpp
3054 <https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/clang/lib/Sema/SemaDeclAttr.cpp>`_,
3055 and generally starts in the ``ProcessDeclAttribute()`` function. If the
3056 attribute has the ``SimpleHandler`` field set to ``1`` then the function to
3057 process the attribute will be automatically generated, and nothing needs to be
3058 done here. Otherwise, write a new ``handleYourAttr()`` function, and add that to
3059 the switch statement. Please do not implement handling logic directly in the
3060 ``case`` for the attribute.
3062 Unless otherwise specified by the attribute definition, common semantic checking
3063 of the parsed attribute is handled automatically. This includes diagnosing
3064 parsed attributes that do not appertain to the given ``Decl`` or ``Stmt``,
3065 ensuring the correct minimum number of arguments are passed, etc.
3067 If the attribute adds additional warnings, define a ``DiagGroup`` in
3068 `include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticGroups.td
3069 <https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/clang/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticGroups.td>`_
3070 named after the attribute's ``Spelling`` with "_"s replaced by "-"s. If there
3071 is only a single diagnostic, it is permissible to use ``InGroup<DiagGroup<"your-attribute">>``
3072 directly in `DiagnosticSemaKinds.td
3073 <https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/clang/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td>`_
3075 All semantic diagnostics generated for your attribute, including automatically-
3076 generated ones (such as subjects and argument counts), should have a
3077 corresponding test case.
3081 Most attributes are implemented to have some effect on the compiler. For
3082 instance, to modify the way code is generated, or to add extra semantic checks
3083 for an analysis pass, etc. Having added the attribute definition and conversion
3084 to the semantic representation for the attribute, what remains is to implement
3085 the custom logic requiring use of the attribute.
3087 The ``clang::Decl`` object can be queried for the presence or absence of an
3088 attribute using ``hasAttr<T>()``. To obtain a pointer to the semantic
3089 representation of the attribute, ``getAttr<T>`` may be used.
3091 The ``clang::AttributedStmt`` object can be queried for the presence or absence
3092 of an attribute by calling ``getAttrs()`` and looping over the list of
3095 How to add an expression or statement
3096 -------------------------------------
3098 Expressions and statements are one of the most fundamental constructs within a
3099 compiler, because they interact with many different parts of the AST, semantic
3100 analysis, and IR generation. Therefore, adding a new expression or statement
3101 kind into Clang requires some care. The following list details the various
3102 places in Clang where an expression or statement needs to be introduced, along
3103 with patterns to follow to ensure that the new expression or statement works
3104 well across all of the C languages. We focus on expressions, but statements
3107 #. Introduce parsing actions into the parser. Recursive-descent parsing is
3108 mostly self-explanatory, but there are a few things that are worth keeping
3111 * Keep as much source location information as possible! You'll want it later
3112 to produce great diagnostics and support Clang's various features that map
3113 between source code and the AST.
3114 * Write tests for all of the "bad" parsing cases, to make sure your recovery
3115 is good. If you have matched delimiters (e.g., parentheses, square
3116 brackets, etc.), use ``Parser::BalancedDelimiterTracker`` to give nice
3117 diagnostics when things go wrong.
3119 #. Introduce semantic analysis actions into ``Sema``. Semantic analysis should
3120 always involve two functions: an ``ActOnXXX`` function that will be called
3121 directly from the parser, and a ``BuildXXX`` function that performs the
3122 actual semantic analysis and will (eventually!) build the AST node. It's
3123 fairly common for the ``ActOnCXX`` function to do very little (often just
3124 some minor translation from the parser's representation to ``Sema``'s
3125 representation of the same thing), but the separation is still important:
3126 C++ template instantiation, for example, should always call the ``BuildXXX``
3127 variant. Several notes on semantic analysis before we get into construction
3130 * Your expression probably involves some types and some subexpressions.
3131 Make sure to fully check that those types, and the types of those
3132 subexpressions, meet your expectations. Add implicit conversions where
3133 necessary to make sure that all of the types line up exactly the way you
3134 want them. Write extensive tests to check that you're getting good
3135 diagnostics for mistakes and that you can use various forms of
3136 subexpressions with your expression.
3137 * When type-checking a type or subexpression, make sure to first check
3138 whether the type is "dependent" (``Type::isDependentType()``) or whether a
3139 subexpression is type-dependent (``Expr::isTypeDependent()``). If any of
3140 these return ``true``, then you're inside a template and you can't do much
3141 type-checking now. That's normal, and your AST node (when you get there)
3142 will have to deal with this case. At this point, you can write tests that
3143 use your expression within templates, but don't try to instantiate the
3145 * For each subexpression, be sure to call ``Sema::CheckPlaceholderExpr()``
3146 to deal with "weird" expressions that don't behave well as subexpressions.
3147 Then, determine whether you need to perform lvalue-to-rvalue conversions
3148 (``Sema::DefaultLvalueConversions``) or the usual unary conversions
3149 (``Sema::UsualUnaryConversions``), for places where the subexpression is
3150 producing a value you intend to use.
3151 * Your ``BuildXXX`` function will probably just return ``ExprError()`` at
3152 this point, since you don't have an AST. That's perfectly fine, and
3153 shouldn't impact your testing.
3155 #. Introduce an AST node for your new expression. This starts with declaring
3156 the node in ``include/Basic/StmtNodes.td`` and creating a new class for your
3157 expression in the appropriate ``include/AST/Expr*.h`` header. It's best to
3158 look at the class for a similar expression to get ideas, and there are some
3159 specific things to watch for:
3161 * If you need to allocate memory, use the ``ASTContext`` allocator to
3162 allocate memory. Never use raw ``malloc`` or ``new``, and never hold any
3163 resources in an AST node, because the destructor of an AST node is never
3165 * Make sure that ``getSourceRange()`` covers the exact source range of your
3166 expression. This is needed for diagnostics and for IDE support.
3167 * Make sure that ``children()`` visits all of the subexpressions. This is
3168 important for a number of features (e.g., IDE support, C++ variadic
3169 templates). If you have sub-types, you'll also need to visit those
3170 sub-types in ``RecursiveASTVisitor``.
3171 * Add printing support (``StmtPrinter.cpp``) for your expression.
3172 * Add profiling support (``StmtProfile.cpp``) for your AST node, noting the
3173 distinguishing (non-source location) characteristics of an instance of
3174 your expression. Omitting this step will lead to hard-to-diagnose
3175 failures regarding matching of template declarations.
3176 * Add serialization support (``ASTReaderStmt.cpp``, ``ASTWriterStmt.cpp``)
3179 #. Teach semantic analysis to build your AST node. At this point, you can wire
3180 up your ``Sema::BuildXXX`` function to actually create your AST. A few
3181 things to check at this point:
3183 * If your expression can construct a new C++ class or return a new
3184 Objective-C object, be sure to update and then call
3185 ``Sema::MaybeBindToTemporary`` for your just-created AST node to be sure
3186 that the object gets properly destructed. An easy way to test this is to
3187 return a C++ class with a private destructor: semantic analysis should
3188 flag an error here with the attempt to call the destructor.
3189 * Inspect the generated AST by printing it using ``clang -cc1 -ast-print``,
3190 to make sure you're capturing all of the important information about how
3191 the AST was written.
3192 * Inspect the generated AST under ``clang -cc1 -ast-dump`` to verify that
3193 all of the types in the generated AST line up the way you want them.
3194 Remember that clients of the AST should never have to "think" to
3195 understand what's going on. For example, all implicit conversions should
3196 show up explicitly in the AST.
3197 * Write tests that use your expression as a subexpression of other,
3198 well-known expressions. Can you call a function using your expression as
3199 an argument? Can you use the ternary operator?
3201 #. Teach code generation to create IR to your AST node. This step is the first
3202 (and only) that requires knowledge of LLVM IR. There are several things to
3205 * Code generation is separated into scalar/aggregate/complex and
3206 lvalue/rvalue paths, depending on what kind of result your expression
3207 produces. On occasion, this requires some careful factoring of code to
3209 * ``CodeGenFunction`` contains functions ``ConvertType`` and
3210 ``ConvertTypeForMem`` that convert Clang's types (``clang::Type*`` or
3211 ``clang::QualType``) to LLVM types. Use the former for values, and the
3212 latter for memory locations: test with the C++ "``bool``" type to check
3213 this. If you find that you are having to use LLVM bitcasts to make the
3214 subexpressions of your expression have the type that your expression
3215 expects, STOP! Go fix semantic analysis and the AST so that you don't
3216 need these bitcasts.
3217 * The ``CodeGenFunction`` class has a number of helper functions to make
3218 certain operations easy, such as generating code to produce an lvalue or
3219 an rvalue, or to initialize a memory location with a given value. Prefer
3220 to use these functions rather than directly writing loads and stores,
3221 because these functions take care of some of the tricky details for you
3222 (e.g., for exceptions).
3223 * If your expression requires some special behavior in the event of an
3224 exception, look at the ``push*Cleanup`` functions in ``CodeGenFunction``
3225 to introduce a cleanup. You shouldn't have to deal with
3226 exception-handling directly.
3227 * Testing is extremely important in IR generation. Use ``clang -cc1
3228 -emit-llvm`` and `FileCheck
3229 <https://llvm.org/docs/CommandGuide/FileCheck.html>`_ to verify that you're
3230 generating the right IR.
3232 #. Teach template instantiation how to cope with your AST node, which requires
3233 some fairly simple code:
3235 * Make sure that your expression's constructor properly computes the flags
3236 for type dependence (i.e., the type your expression produces can change
3237 from one instantiation to the next), value dependence (i.e., the constant
3238 value your expression produces can change from one instantiation to the
3239 next), instantiation dependence (i.e., a template parameter occurs
3240 anywhere in your expression), and whether your expression contains a
3241 parameter pack (for variadic templates). Often, computing these flags
3242 just means combining the results from the various types and
3244 * Add ``TransformXXX`` and ``RebuildXXX`` functions to the ``TreeTransform``
3245 class template in ``Sema``. ``TransformXXX`` should (recursively)
3246 transform all of the subexpressions and types within your expression,
3247 using ``getDerived().TransformYYY``. If all of the subexpressions and
3248 types transform without error, it will then call the ``RebuildXXX``
3249 function, which will in turn call ``getSema().BuildXXX`` to perform
3250 semantic analysis and build your expression.
3251 * To test template instantiation, take those tests you wrote to make sure
3252 that you were type checking with type-dependent expressions and dependent
3253 types (from step #2) and instantiate those templates with various types,
3254 some of which type-check and some that don't, and test the error messages
3257 #. There are some "extras" that make other features work better. It's worth
3258 handling these extras to give your expression complete integration into
3261 * Add code completion support for your expression in
3262 ``SemaCodeComplete.cpp``.
3263 * If your expression has types in it, or has any "interesting" features
3264 other than subexpressions, extend libclang's ``CursorVisitor`` to provide
3265 proper visitation for your expression, enabling various IDE features such
3266 as syntax highlighting, cross-referencing, and so on. The
3267 ``c-index-test`` helper program can be used to test these features.