[cfe-dev] Proposal: parsing Qt signals/slots with attributes

Douglas Gregor dgregor at apple.com
Fri Oct 7 13:32:43 PDT 2011

On Oct 6, 2011, at 2:12 AM, Erik Verbruggen wrote:

> On 30 Sep, 2011,at 07:34 AM, Douglas Gregor <dgregor at apple.com> wrote:
>> Let's use the existing "annotate" attribute, which is a bit like the "user" attribute mentioned in (2) above, but already implemented in Clang. That way, Qt can have definitions such as:
>> #define Q_OBJECT __attribute__((annotate("qt_object")))
>> Then, you patch need only:
>> (a) add support for parsing attributes on access specifiers, and
>> (b) update libclang to expose the "annotate" attribute 
>> That should be sufficient, requires much less effort (and risk) than most of the other solutions, and won't require us to bring anything related to Qt into Clang itself.
> Attached is a new patch, which adds parsing of attributes after a C++ access specifier. These attributes get propagated in the same manner as the access specifier.

I see that this handles, e.g.,

	public slots:

(with the attribute definition of "slots", of course)

but it doesn't seem to handle, e.g.,


I assume you want to address that as well?

> Then in c-index-test I changed the spelling of the annotate attribute to return the quoted string.

That makes sense, thanks.

> Question: should I add a check to disallow attributes other than the annotate attribute after an access specifier?

Yes. I'd like us to enable such attributes on a case-by-case basis, rather than deal with the fallout of them all implicitly propagating.

Minor nit:

@@ -2139,10 +2146,19 @@ void Parser::ParseCXXMemberSpecification(SourceLocation RecordLoc,
         CurAS = AS;
         SourceLocation ASLoc = Tok.getLocation();
-        if (Tok.is(tok::colon))
-          Actions.ActOnAccessSpecifier(AS, ASLoc, Tok.getLocation());
-        else
+        AccessAttrs.clear();
+        MaybeParseGNUAttributes(AccessAttrs);
+        if (Tok.is(tok::colon)) {
+          Decl *xsDecl = Actions.ActOnAccessSpecifier(AS, ASLoc,
+                                                      Tok.getLocation());
+          if (AttributeList *Attrs = AccessAttrs.getList())
+            Actions.ProcessDeclAttributeList(Actions.CurScope, xsDecl, Attrs,
+                                             false, true);
+        } else {
           Diag(Tok, diag::err_expected_colon);
+        }


suggests that "nsDecl" be named starting with a capital letter.

We also seem to be missing tests.

	- Doug

More information about the cfe-dev mailing list