Check for unexpanded parameter packs in various kinds of
declarations. This is a work in progress, as I go through the C++
declaration grammar to identify where unexpanded parameter packs can
occur.
llvm-svn: 121912
diff --git a/clang/lib/AST/Type.cpp b/clang/lib/AST/Type.cpp
index 0991e5a..9dbbfaa 100644
--- a/clang/lib/AST/Type.cpp
+++ b/clang/lib/AST/Type.cpp
@@ -1123,8 +1123,15 @@
// Fill in the exception array.
QualType *exnSlot = argSlot + numArgs;
- for (unsigned i = 0, e = epi.NumExceptions; i != e; ++i)
+ for (unsigned i = 0, e = epi.NumExceptions; i != e; ++i) {
+ if (epi.Exceptions[i]->isDependentType())
+ setDependent();
+
+ if (epi.Exceptions[i]->containsUnexpandedParameterPack())
+ setContainsUnexpandedParameterPack();
+
exnSlot[i] = epi.Exceptions[i];
+ }
}
diff --git a/clang/lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp b/clang/lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp
index 6182e86..5704cb5 100644
--- a/clang/lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp
+++ b/clang/lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp
@@ -6424,7 +6424,9 @@
<< FieldName << FieldTy << BitWidth->getSourceRange();
return Diag(FieldLoc, diag::err_not_integral_type_anon_bitfield)
<< FieldTy << BitWidth->getSourceRange();
- }
+ } else if (DiagnoseUnexpandedParameterPack(const_cast<Expr *>(BitWidth),
+ UPPC_BitFieldWidth))
+ return true;
// If the bit-width is type- or value-dependent, don't try to check
// it now.
@@ -6499,9 +6501,17 @@
TypeSourceInfo *TInfo = GetTypeForDeclarator(D, S);
QualType T = TInfo->getType();
- if (getLangOptions().CPlusPlus)
+ if (getLangOptions().CPlusPlus) {
CheckExtraCXXDefaultArguments(D);
+ if (DiagnoseUnexpandedParameterPack(D.getIdentifierLoc(), TInfo,
+ UPPC_DataMemberType)) {
+ D.setInvalidType();
+ T = Context.IntTy;
+ TInfo = Context.getTrivialTypeSourceInfo(T, Loc);
+ }
+ }
+
DiagnoseFunctionSpecifiers(D);
if (D.getDeclSpec().isThreadSpecified())