[clang] Remove __is_layout_compatible from revertible type traits list#100572
Merged
[clang] Remove __is_layout_compatible from revertible type traits list#100572
__is_layout_compatible from revertible type traits list#100572Conversation
Member
|
@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);
|
Contributor
|
Should we also rename to |
Contributor
Author
Yeah, but not in this patch. |
Contributor
Author
|
/cherry-pick 3295d37 |
llvmbot
pushed a commit
to llvmbot/llvm-project
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 25, 2024
…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)
Member
|
/pull-request #100590 |
yuxuanchen1997
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 25, 2024
…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
tru
pushed a commit
to llvmbot/llvm-project
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 26, 2024
…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)
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
__is_layout_compatiblewas 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_compatiblefrom 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.