[clang] [OpenACC] Implement 'break' and 'continue' errors for Compute Cnstrcts (PR #82543)

[Erich Keane via cfe-commits]

================
@@ -3371,6 +3379,20 @@ Sema::ActOnBreakStmt(SourceLocation BreakLoc, Scope *CurScope) {
   if (S->isOpenMPLoopScope())
     return StmtError(Diag(BreakLoc, diag::err_omp_loop_cannot_use_stmt)
                      << "break");
+
+  // OpenACC doesn't allow 'break'ing from a compute construct, so diagnose if
+  // we are trying to do so.  This can come in 2 flavors: 1-the break'able thing
+  // (besides the compute construct) 'contains' the compute construct, at which
+  // point the 'break' scope will be the compute construct.  Else it could be a
+  // loop of some sort that has a direct parent of the compute construct.
+  // However, a 'break' in a 'switch' marked as a compute construct doesn't
+  // count as 'branch out of' the compute construct.
+  if (S->isOpenACCComputeConstructScope() ||
+      (!S->isDirectlySwitchScope() && S->getParent() &&
----------------
erichkeane wrote:

Sorry if I'm being dumb here, but I don't really get the question?  We're trying to avoid diagnosing when the `breakParent` is a `switch`, so we are excluding it.  If we were to NOT use the inversion, we would be diagnosing ONLY on a the switch (the opposite of what I want?).

So the logic for when to diagnose is:

`S->isOpenACCComputeConstructScope()` <-- Diagnose if the 'current' breakParent is a Compute Construct
OR
`(!S->isDirectlySwitchScope() && S->getParent() && S->getParent()->isOpenACCComputeConstructScope()))` <-- If the Parent of the `breakParent` is a Compute Construct, unless it is a `switch`.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82543