[cfe-commits] r49817 - in /cfe/trunk: Driver/ASTConsumers.cpp include/clang/AST/DeclObjC.h lib/AST/DeclObjC.cpp lib/Sema/SemaDeclObjC.cpp

[Fariborz Jahanian]

On Apr 16, 2008, at 7:54 PM, Chris Lattner wrote:

> On Apr 16, 2008, at 2:08 PM, Fariborz Jahanian wrote:
>> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=49817&view=rev
>> Log:
>> This patch adds support for declaraing properties in categories,
>> just as they are declared in objc classes.
>
> Nice!
>
>> Modified: cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaDeclObjC.cpp
>> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaDeclObjC.cpp?rev=49817&r1=49816&r2=49817&view=diff
>>
>> =
>> =
>> =
>> =
>> =
>> =
>> =
>> =
>> =
>> =====================================================================
>> --- cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaDeclObjC.cpp (original)
>> +++ cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaDeclObjC.cpp Wed Apr 16 16:08:45 2008
>> @@ -699,6 +699,9 @@
>>  if (pNum != 0)
>>    if (ObjCInterfaceDecl *IDecl =  
>> dyn_cast<ObjCInterfaceDecl>(ClassDecl))
>>      IDecl->addProperties((ObjCPropertyDecl**)allProperties, pNum);
>> +    else
>> +      if (ObjCCategoryDecl *CDecl =  
>> dyn_cast<ObjCCategoryDecl>(ClassDecl))
>> +        CDecl->addProperties((ObjCPropertyDecl**)allProperties,  
>> pNum);
>>
>>  for (unsigned i = 0; i < allNum; i++ ) {
>>    ObjCMethodDecl *Method =
>
> What if ClassDecl is neither an ObjCInterfaceDecl or a  
> ObjCCategoryDecl?  Should there be an assert or error here?

I still need to do more in this area. Protocols are OK,  
implementations are not. Much more sementaics checking need be done.
>
>
>> = 
>> = 
>> = 
>> = 
>> = 
>> = 
>> = 
>> = 
>> = 
>> =====================================================================
>> --- cfe/trunk/include/clang/AST/DeclObjC.h (original)
>> +++ cfe/trunk/include/clang/AST/DeclObjC.h Wed Apr 16 16:08:45 2008
>> @@ -672,6 +672,10 @@
>> public:
>>
>> @@ -705,6 +709,11 @@
>>  unsigned getNumInstanceMethods() const { return  
>> NumInstanceMethods; }
>>  unsigned getNumClassMethods() const { return NumClassMethods; }
>>
>> +  void addProperties(ObjCPropertyDecl **Properties, unsigned  
>> NumProperties);
>> +  unsigned getNumPropertyDecl() const { return NumPropertyDecl; }
>> +
>> +  ObjCPropertyDecl * const * getPropertyDecl() const { return  
>> PropertyDecl; }
>> +
>>  typedef ObjCMethodDecl * const * instmeth_iterator;
>>  instmeth_iterator instmeth_begin() const { return InstanceMethods; }
>>  instmeth_iterator instmeth_end() const {
>>
>
> This looks good, but please add an iterarator interface to this,  
> just like instmeth_begin/end and the iterators in InterfaceDecl.

Yes.

>
>
>> = 
>> = 
>> = 
>> = 
>> = 
>> = 
>> = 
>> = 
>> = 
>> =====================================================================
>> --- cfe/trunk/Driver/ASTConsumers.cpp (original)
>> +++ cfe/trunk/Driver/ASTConsumers.cpp Wed Apr 16 16:08:45 2008
>> @@ -345,6 +345,69 @@
>>  Out << "@interface "
>>      << PID->getClassInterface()->getName()
>>      << '(' << PID->getName() << ");\n";
>> +  // Output property declarations.
>> +  int NumProperties = PID->getNumPropertyDecl();
>> +  if (NumProperties > 0) {
>> +    for (int i = 0; i < NumProperties; i++) {
>> +      ObjCPropertyDecl *PDecl = PID->getPropertyDecl()[i];
>
> Please use the iterator interface instead of getNumPropertyDecl/ 
> getPropertyDecl.  There is no need to check to see if NumProperties  
> > 0.

Just wanted to do a print to look at the validity of the ASTs. Much  
clean up need be done here.

>
>
>>
>> +      Out << "@property";
>
> Should all this code be split out to a helper function that takes an  
> ObjCPropertyDecl?  This code should be generally shared with  
> interfaces.
Yes. I just cut and pasted from interface to do a quick sanity check.  
This need be consolidated with the one in interface (and protocol).

- Faribnorz

>
>
> -Chris