[PATCH] D86508: [clang] implement+test remaining C90 __builtin_ functions

[Nick Desaulniers via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

nickdesaulniers added inline comments.


================
Comment at: clang/include/clang/Basic/Builtins.def:513
 BUILTIN(__builtin_printf, "icC*.", "Fp:0:")
+BUILTIN(__builtin_putchar, "ii", "F")
+BUILTIN(__builtin_puts, "icC*", "nF")
----------------
rsmith wrote:
> aaron.ballman wrote:
> > Should we also add a builtin for `putc()` (I know that's often a macro, so I'm not certain if it applies)?
> Yes, GCC has a `__builtin_putc`, so it'd make sense for us to support that too.
Curious, `putc` isn't documented at https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Other-Builtins.html, which is what I was using.  It looks like `putc` was a part of ANSI C, so I'm not sure what else might be missing from my implementation.  Let me see if I can find a more complete list of C90 functions to verify.


================
Comment at: clang/lib/Lex/PPMacroExpansion.cpp:348
   // C++ Standing Document Extensions.
-  if (LangOpts.CPlusPlus)
+  if (getLangOpts().CPlusPlus)
     Ident__has_cpp_attribute =
----------------
rsmith wrote:
> The changes to this file appear to be independent of the rest of the patch. Please go ahead and land this cleanup separately.
done: 663f4f7edc2476231fa5bfc04519d5fd51a10112


================
Comment at: clang/test/CXX/over/over.oper/over.literal/p7.cpp:10
 
-void puts(const char *);
+int puts(const char *);
 static inline void operator "" _puts(const char *c) {
----------------
rsmith wrote:
> Doesn't this also need to be `extern "C"` to be recognized as the builtin?
Interesting, if I change this back to `void`, the test passes for me.  I'm not sure why it ever failed then. Will drop this hunk from the diff.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D86508/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D86508