[cfe-commits] r76436 - in /cfe/trunk: include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticParseKinds.td include/clang/Parse/Parser.h lib/Parse/ParseDecl.cpp lib/Parse/ParseDeclCXX.cpp test/SemaCXX/destructor.cpp

[Douglas Gregor]

On Jul 20, 2009, at 10:43 AM, Fariborz Jahanian wrote:

> Author: fjahanian
> Date: Mon Jul 20 12:43:15 2009
> New Revision: 76436
>
> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=76436&view=rev
> Log:
> Issue a more descriptive diagnostics when mis-declaring
> a destructor.

I don't think that the diagnostic "destructor name must be same as the  
class name" is much of an improvement. Perhaps something like,  
"expected the class name after '~' to name a destructor"?

It fits better for (admittedly stupid) cases like, e.g., "~operator+ 
(int, int)".

(another comment further down)

> Modified:
>    cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticParseKinds.td
>    cfe/trunk/include/clang/Parse/Parser.h
>    cfe/trunk/lib/Parse/ParseDecl.cpp
>    cfe/trunk/lib/Parse/ParseDeclCXX.cpp
>    cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/destructor.cpp
>
> Modified: cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticParseKinds.td
> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticParseKinds.td?rev=76436&r1=76435&r2=76436&view=diff
>
> = 
> = 
> = 
> = 
> = 
> = 
> = 
> = 
> ======================================================================
> --- cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticParseKinds.td (original)
> +++ cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticParseKinds.td Mon Jul 20  
> 12:43:15 2009
> @@ -138,6 +138,8 @@
> def err_unexpected_typedef_ident : Error<
>   "unexpected type name %0: expected identifier">;
> def err_expected_class_name : Error<"expected class name">;
> +def err_destructor_class_name : Error<
> +  "destructor name must be same as the class name">;
> def err_unspecified_vla_size_with_static : Error<
>   "'static' may not be used with an unspecified variable length  
> array size">;
>
>
> Modified: cfe/trunk/include/clang/Parse/Parser.h
> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/include/clang/Parse/Parser.h?rev=76436&r1=76435&r2=76436&view=diff
>
> = 
> = 
> = 
> = 
> = 
> = 
> = 
> = 
> ======================================================================
> --- cfe/trunk/include/clang/Parse/Parser.h (original)
> +++ cfe/trunk/include/clang/Parse/Parser.h Mon Jul 20 12:43:15 2009
> @@ -1129,7 +1129,8 @@
>   // 
> = 
> = 
> =-------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> ===//
>   // C++ 9: classes [class] and C structs/unions.
>   TypeResult ParseClassName(SourceLocation &EndLocation,
> -                            const CXXScopeSpec *SS = 0);
> +                            const CXXScopeSpec *SS = 0,
> +                            bool DestrExpected = false);
>   void ParseClassSpecifier(tok::TokenKind TagTokKind, SourceLocation  
> TagLoc,
>                            DeclSpec &DS,
>                 const ParsedTemplateInfo &TemplateInfo =  
> ParsedTemplateInfo(),
>
> Modified: cfe/trunk/lib/Parse/ParseDecl.cpp
> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/lib/Parse/ParseDecl.cpp?rev=76436&r1=76435&r2=76436&view=diff
>
> = 
> = 
> = 
> = 
> = 
> = 
> = 
> = 
> ======================================================================
> --- cfe/trunk/lib/Parse/ParseDecl.cpp (original)
> +++ cfe/trunk/lib/Parse/ParseDecl.cpp Mon Jul 20 12:43:15 2009
> @@ -2194,13 +2194,13 @@
>           SourceLocation NameLoc = Tok.getLocation();
>           SourceLocation EndLoc;
>           CXXScopeSpec *SS = afterCXXScope? &D.getCXXScopeSpec() : 0;
> -          TypeResult Type = ParseClassName(EndLoc, SS);
> +          TypeResult Type = ParseClassName(EndLoc, SS, true);
>           if (Type.isInvalid())
>             D.SetIdentifier(0, TildeLoc);
>           else
>             D.setDestructor(Type.get(), TildeLoc, NameLoc);
>         } else {
> -          Diag(Tok, diag::err_expected_class_name);
> +          Diag(Tok, diag::err_destructor_class_name);
>           D.SetIdentifier(0, TildeLoc);
>         }
>         goto PastIdentifier;

In addition to these parser-level checks, we're missing the semantic  
checks to diagnose this error:

   struct X { };
   struct Y {
     ~X() { }
   };

	- Doug