[cfe-commits] r133929 - in /cfe/trunk: test/Index/annotate-tokens.cpp tools/libclang/CIndex.cpp

[Argyrios Kyrtzidis]

On Jun 27, 2011, at 12:48 PM, Douglas Gregor wrote:

> 
> On Jun 27, 2011, at 12:42 PM, Argyrios Kyrtzidis wrote:
> 
>> Author: akirtzidis
>> Date: Mon Jun 27 14:42:20 2011
>> New Revision: 133929
>> 
>> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=133929&view=rev
>> Log:
>> [libclang] Avoid having the cursor of an expression "overwrite" the annotation of the
>> variable declaration that it belongs to.
>> 
>> This can happen for C++ constructor expressions whose range generally
>> include the variable declaration, e.g.:
>> 
>> MyCXXClass foo; // Make sure we don't annotate 'foo' as a CallExpr cursor.
>> 
>> rdar://9124499.
>> 
>> Modified:
>>   cfe/trunk/test/Index/annotate-tokens.cpp
>>   cfe/trunk/tools/libclang/CIndex.cpp
>> 
>> Modified: cfe/trunk/test/Index/annotate-tokens.cpp
>> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/Index/annotate-tokens.cpp?rev=133929&r1=133928&r2=133929&view=diff
>> ==============================================================================
>> --- cfe/trunk/test/Index/annotate-tokens.cpp (original)
>> +++ cfe/trunk/test/Index/annotate-tokens.cpp Mon Jun 27 14:42:20 2011
>> @@ -17,9 +17,10 @@
>> struct S2 { S1 *operator->(); };
>> void test3(S2 s2) {
>>  s2->f();
>> +  X foo;
>> }
>> 
>> -// RUN: c-index-test -test-annotate-tokens=%s:1:1:20:1 %s | FileCheck %s
>> +// RUN: c-index-test -test-annotate-tokens=%s:1:1:21:1 %s | FileCheck %s
>> // CHECK: Keyword: "struct" [1:1 - 1:7] StructDecl=bonk:1:8 (Definition)
>> // CHECK: Identifier: "bonk" [1:8 - 1:12] StructDecl=bonk:1:8 (Definition)
>> // CHECK: Punctuation: "{" [1:13 - 1:14] StructDecl=bonk:1:8 (Definition)
>> @@ -115,4 +116,7 @@
>> // CHECK: Punctuation: "(" [19:8 - 19:9] CallExpr=f:16:18
>> // CHECK: Punctuation: ")" [19:9 - 19:10] CallExpr=f:16:18
>> // CHECK: Punctuation: ";" [19:10 - 19:11] UnexposedStmt=
>> -// CHECK: Punctuation: "}" [20:1 - 20:2] UnexposedStmt=
>> +// CHECK: Identifier: "X" [20:3 - 20:4] TypeRef=struct X:7:8
>> +// CHECK: Identifier: "foo" [20:5 - 20:8] VarDecl=foo:20:5 (Definition)
>> +// CHECK: Punctuation: ";" [20:8 - 20:9] UnexposedStmt=
>> +// CHECK: Punctuation: "}" [21:1 - 21:2] UnexposedStmt=
>> 
>> Modified: cfe/trunk/tools/libclang/CIndex.cpp
>> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/tools/libclang/CIndex.cpp?rev=133929&r1=133928&r2=133929&view=diff
>> ==============================================================================
>> --- cfe/trunk/tools/libclang/CIndex.cpp (original)
>> +++ cfe/trunk/tools/libclang/CIndex.cpp Mon Jun 27 14:42:20 2011
>> @@ -4627,6 +4627,24 @@
>>    break;
>>  }
>> 
>> +  // Avoid having the cursor of an expression "overwrite" the annotation of the
>> +  // variable declaration that it belongs to.
>> +  // This can happen for C++ constructor expressions whose range generally
>> +  // include the variable declaration, e.g.:
>> +  //  MyCXXClass foo; // Make sure we don't annotate 'foo' as a CallExpr cursor.
>> +  if (clang_isExpression(cursorK)) {
>> +    Expr *E = getCursorExpr(cursor);
>> +    if (Decl *D = getCursorDecl(cursor)) {
> 
> I'm confused by this logic, since a cursor can't be both a declaration and an expression. Is the latter supposed to be

I see 

CXCursor cxcursor::MakeCXCursor(Stmt *S, Decl *Parent,
                                CXTranslationUnit TU)

making statement/expression cursors including the parent Decl. Is this not the case ?

> 
>  if (Decl *D = getCursorDecl(parent)) {
> 
> ?
> 
> 	- Doug

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20110627/2ed27e6c/attachment.html>