[cfe-commits] [PATCH]: Matchers for ignoring paren/implicit casts

[Sam Panzer]

Here you go.


On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 7:04 AM, Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com> wrote:

>
> A couple more things:
> - please completely take out the type() matcher - I've looked into it,
> and we need to come up with a good design here first; until then I
> don't think it makes sense to have a hack in
> - please rename castExpression -> castExpr to be consistent with the node
> name
>
> Apart from that lgtm
>
> Cheers,
> /Manuel
>
> On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 7:49 PM, Sam Panzer <panzer at google.com> wrote:
> >
> > A new version, with shorter (Implicit --> Imp) matcher names!
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 5:32 AM, Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 11:15 PM, Sam Panzer <panzer at google.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Here's the next version!
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 1:53 AM, Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> +/// \brief Matches expressions that match InnerMatcher after
> >> >> parentheses
> >> >> and
> >> >> +/// casts are stripped off.
> >> >> +///
> >> >> +/// Implicit and non-C Style casts are not discarded.
> >> >>
> >> >> This contradicts the example...
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > s/not/also/
> >> > Though I'm not sure if this makes it any clearer than not having a
> >> > comment.
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> +/// \brief Matches any cast nodes of Clang's AST.
> >> >> +///
> >> >> +/// Example: castExpression() matches each of the following:
> >> >> +///   (int) 3;
> >> >> +///   const_cast<Expr *>(SubExpr);
> >> >> +///   (i);
> >> >> +///   char c = 0;
> >> >> +const internal::VariadicDynCastAllOfMatcher<
> >> >> +  Expr,
> >> >> +  CastExpr> castExpression;
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Actually, this comment wasn't correct either, since parentheses aren't
> >> > CastExpr's. Fixed!
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> I'd vote for calling all new matchers we write exactly like the AST
> >> >> nodes (castExpr in this case).
> >> >> I lost the fight, and if we ever want to get to the place where it
> all
> >> >> just works, we have to start not introducing new violations of that
> >> >> rule.
> >> >> Same for Implicit -> Imp (it hurts me, but, oh well, I'll live ;)
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I would agree on the AST-style naming convention. I can see three
> naming
> >> > styles for CastExpr among existing matchers: cast (already taken!),
> >> > castExpression (what I used), and castExpr.  Which cast matchers are
> you
> >> > suggesting should be renamed, and to what? I'll be happy to change
> them,
> >> > but
> >> > I'm not sure what you're asking.
> >>
> >> ignoringImplicitCasts -> ignoringImpCasts
> >> ignoringParenImplicitCasts -> ingoringParenImpCasts
> >
> >
> > Done.
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> >> +  EXPECT_TRUE(matches("char *p = reinterpret_cast<char *>(&p);",
> >> >> +                      expression(castExpression())));
> >> >>
> >> >> Btw, if we defined the castExpr as VariadicDynCastAllOfMatcher<Stmt,
> >> >> CastExpr> just putting them in top-level would work, too. Since a
> >> >> Matcher<Stmt> is-a Matcher<Expr> this would also not limit the use of
> >> >> castExpr.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > I was following the other cast examples such as implicitCast. Would it
> >> > be
> >> > better to change this?
> >>
> >> Yes, and I think we should change the others, but not in this CL; just
> use
> >> const internal::VariadicDynCastAllOfMatcher<Stmt, CastExpr>
> >> castExpression;
> >>
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> +                          pointsTo(TypeMatcher(anything())))))));
> >> >>
> >> >> This is unfortunate. We should add a type() matcher.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I've used this workaround in my client code - and I just discovered
> that
> >> > the
> >> > test Matcher.HandlesNullQualTypes does too (with a fixme echoing your
> >> > complaint):
> >> >   const TypeMatcher AnyType = anything();
> >> >
> >> > I briefly tried adding a type() matcher, but it seems like matchers
> >> > treat
> >> > types differently from statements and declarations. All existing
> >> > matchers on
> >> > types just take a single argument, which is usually hasDeclaration()
> in
> >> > some
> >> > form (often indirectly), so it's not as easy as adding another
> >> > AST_MATCHER
> >> > definition. I'll leave this up to someone who really knows how the new
> >> > matcher should fit in :)
> >>
> >> A type matcher would be added like this:
> >> const internal::VariadicDynCastAllOfMatcher<QualType, QualtType> type;
> >
> >
> > I tried that already. It fails because QualType does not define the
> member
> > functions needed for dyn_cast to work, i.e. classOf(). I'm not brave
> enough
> > to try modifying QualType directly just for a type matcher, nor am I sure
> > that it's the right fix.
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> >> +TEST(CastExpression, MatchesSimpleCases) {
> >> >>
> >> >> I'm not really happy with those names, but I'm aware it's really hard
> >> >> to come up with good test names in those cases.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I broke the test into MatchesImplicitCasts and MatchesExplicitCasts,
> >> > both of
> >> > which are much better names.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20120802/22aaa245/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: cast-matchers-update-4.patch
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 14830 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20120802/22aaa245/attachment.obj>