-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.3k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[clang] Remove __is_layout_compatible
from revertible type traits list
#100572
[clang] Remove __is_layout_compatible
from revertible type traits list
#100572
Conversation
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang Author: Vlad Serebrennikov (Endilll) Changes
This patch removes The intention is to also cherry-pick this to 19 branch. Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100572.diff 1 Files Affected:
diff --git a/clang/lib/Parse/ParseExpr.cpp b/clang/lib/Parse/ParseExpr.cpp
index 0a017ae79de75..e82b565272831 100644
--- a/clang/lib/Parse/ParseExpr.cpp
+++ b/clang/lib/Parse/ParseExpr.cpp
@@ -763,6 +763,9 @@ class CastExpressionIdValidator final : public CorrectionCandidateCallback {
bool Parser::isRevertibleTypeTrait(const IdentifierInfo *II,
tok::TokenKind *Kind) {
if (RevertibleTypeTraits.empty()) {
+// Revertible type trait is a feature for backwards compatibility with older
+// standard libraries that declare their own structs with the same name as
+// the builtins listed below. New builtins should NOT be added to this list.
#define RTT_JOIN(X, Y) X##Y
#define REVERTIBLE_TYPE_TRAIT(Name) \
RevertibleTypeTraits[PP.getIdentifierInfo(#Name)] = RTT_JOIN(tok::kw_, Name)
@@ -790,7 +793,6 @@ bool Parser::isRevertibleTypeTrait(const IdentifierInfo *II,
REVERTIBLE_TYPE_TRAIT(__is_fundamental);
REVERTIBLE_TYPE_TRAIT(__is_integral);
REVERTIBLE_TYPE_TRAIT(__is_interface_class);
- REVERTIBLE_TYPE_TRAIT(__is_layout_compatible);
REVERTIBLE_TYPE_TRAIT(__is_literal);
REVERTIBLE_TYPE_TRAIT(__is_lvalue_expr);
REVERTIBLE_TYPE_TRAIT(__is_lvalue_reference);
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks!
Should we also rename to |
Yeah, but not in this patch. |
/cherry-pick 3295d37 |
…ist (llvm#100572) `__is_layout_compatible` was added in Clang 19 (llvm#81506), and at that time it wasn't entirely clear whether it should be a revertible type trait or not. We decided to follow the example of other type traits. Since then llvm#95969 happened, and now we know that we don't want new revertible type traits. This patch removes `__is_layout_compatible` from revertible type traits list, and leaves a comment what revertible type traits are, and that new type traits should not be added there. The intention is to also cherry-pick this to 19 branch. (cherry picked from commit 3295d37)
/pull-request #100590 |
…ist (#100572) Summary: `__is_layout_compatible` was added in Clang 19 (#81506), and at that time it wasn't entirely clear whether it should be a revertible type trait or not. We decided to follow the example of other type traits. Since then #95969 happened, and now we know that we don't want new revertible type traits. This patch removes `__is_layout_compatible` from revertible type traits list, and leaves a comment what revertible type traits are, and that new type traits should not be added there. The intention is to also cherry-pick this to 19 branch. Test Plan: Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: Differential Revision: https://phabricator.intern.facebook.com/D60250602
…ist (llvm#100572) `__is_layout_compatible` was added in Clang 19 (llvm#81506), and at that time it wasn't entirely clear whether it should be a revertible type trait or not. We decided to follow the example of other type traits. Since then llvm#95969 happened, and now we know that we don't want new revertible type traits. This patch removes `__is_layout_compatible` from revertible type traits list, and leaves a comment what revertible type traits are, and that new type traits should not be added there. The intention is to also cherry-pick this to 19 branch. (cherry picked from commit 3295d37)
__is_layout_compatible
was added in Clang 19 (#81506), and at that time it wasn't entirely clear whether it should be a revertible type trait or not. We decided to follow the example of other type traits. Since then #95969 happened, and now we know that we don't want new revertible type traits.This patch removes
__is_layout_compatible
from revertible type traits list, and leaves a comment what revertible type traits are, and that new type traits should not be added there.The intention is to also cherry-pick this to 19 branch.