[cfe-commits] r85935 - in /cfe/trunk: lib/Sema/SemaExprCXX.cpp test/SemaCXX/value-initialization.cpp

[Fariborz Jahanian]

Author: fjahanian
Date: Tue Nov  3 14:38:53 2009
New Revision: 85935

URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=85935&view=rev
Log:
Remove previous patch for pr5296 due to further clarification
of value-initialization and trivial constructors.


Modified:
    cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaExprCXX.cpp
    cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/value-initialization.cpp

Modified: cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaExprCXX.cpp
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaExprCXX.cpp?rev=85935&r1=85934&r2=85935&view=diff

==============================================================================
--- cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaExprCXX.cpp (original)
+++ cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaExprCXX.cpp Tue Nov  3 14:38:53 2009
@@ -253,20 +253,6 @@
       << FullRange);
 
   assert(NumExprs == 0 && "Expected 0 expressions");
-  
-  if (const RecordType *Record = Ty->getAs<RecordType>()) {
-    if (!Record->getDecl()->isUnion()) {
-    // As clarified in C++ DR302, generate constructor for 
-    // value-initialization cases, even if the implementation technique 
-    // doesn't call the constructor at that point.
-      ASTOwningVector<&ActionBase::DeleteExpr> ConstructorArgs(*this);
-      (void)PerformInitializationByConstructor(Ty, MultiExprArg(*this, 0, 0), 
-                                               TypeRange.getBegin(), 
-                                               TypeRange, DeclarationName(),
-                                               IK_Default, ConstructorArgs);
-    }
-  }
-                                           
   // C++ [expr.type.conv]p2:
   // The expression T(), where T is a simple-type-specifier for a non-array
   // complete object type or the (possibly cv-qualified) void type, creates an
@@ -467,21 +453,7 @@
         return ExprError(Diag(StartLoc, diag::err_new_uninitialized_const)
                            << TypeRange);
     } else if (NumConsArgs == 0) {
-      // Object is value-initialized. 
-      if (const RecordType *Record = AllocType->getAs<RecordType>()) {
-        if (!Record->getDecl()->isUnion()) {
-        // As clarified in C++ DR302, generate constructor for 
-        // value-initialization cases, even if the implementation technique 
-        // doesn't call the constructor at that point.
-          ASTOwningVector<&ActionBase::DeleteExpr> ConstructorArgs(*this);
-          (void)PerformInitializationByConstructor(AllocType, 
-                                                   MultiExprArg(*this, 0, 0), 
-                                                   TypeRange.getBegin(), 
-                                                   TypeRange, DeclarationName(),
-                                                   IK_Default, 
-                                                   ConstructorArgs);
-        }
-      }
+      // Object is value-initialized. Do nothing.
     } else if (NumConsArgs == 1) {
       // Object is direct-initialized.
       // FIXME: What DeclarationName do we pass in here?

Modified: cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/value-initialization.cpp
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/value-initialization.cpp?rev=85935&r1=85934&r2=85935&view=diff

==============================================================================
--- cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/value-initialization.cpp (original)
+++ cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/value-initialization.cpp Tue Nov  3 14:38:53 2009
@@ -1,23 +1,10 @@
 // RUN: clang-cc -fsyntax-only -verify %s -std=c++0x
 
 struct A {
-      ~A();
-      const int i;	// expected-note {{declared at}}
-};
-
-struct B {
-      // B is a non-POD with no user-written constructor.
-      // It has a nontrivial generated constructor.
-      const int i[12];	// expected-note {{declared at}}
-      A a;
+     const int i;	// expected-note {{declared at}}
+     virtual void f() { } 
 };
 
 int main () {
-      // Value-initializing a "B" doesn't call the default constructor for
-      // "B"; it value-initializes the members of B.  Therefore it shouldn't
-      // cause an error on generation of the default constructor for the
-      // following:
-      new B();	// expected-error {{cannot define the implicit default constructor for 'struct B', because const member 'i'}}
-      (void)B();
-      (void)A(); // expected-error {{cannot define the implicit default constructor for 'struct A', because const member 'i'}}
+      (void)A();	// expected-error {{cannot define the implicit default constructor for 'struct A', because const member 'i' cannot be default-initialized}}
 }