[clang] [clang][ASTMatcher] Fix execution order of hasOperands submatchers (PR #104148)
Nicolas van Kempen via cfe-commits
cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org
Thu Aug 15 07:52:09 PDT 2024
https://github.com/nicovank updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/104148
>From 631dce009698938a5fc380ae0af054fbc6d741ea Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Nicolas van Kempen <nvankemp at gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2024 10:49:53 -0400
Subject: [PATCH] [clang][ASTMatcher] Fix execution order of hasOperands
submatchers
The `hasOperands` matcher does not always execute matchers in the order they are
written. This can cause issue in code using bindings when one operand matcher is
relying on a binding set by the other. With this change, the first matcher
present in the code is always executed first and any binding it sets are
available to the second matcher.
---
clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst | 3 +++
clang/include/clang/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchers.h | 2 +-
.../ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersTraversalTest.cpp | 12 ++++++++++++
3 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst b/clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
index b1864901e7bddb..9a547db6595e73 100644
--- a/clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
+++ b/clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
@@ -352,6 +352,9 @@ AST Matchers
- Fixed an issue with the `hasName` and `hasAnyName` matcher when matching
inline namespaces with an enclosing namespace of the same name.
+- Fixed an ordering issue with the `hasOperands` matcher occuring when setting a
+ binding in the first matcher and using it in the second matcher.
+
clang-format
------------
diff --git a/clang/include/clang/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchers.h b/clang/include/clang/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchers.h
index ca44c3ee085654..f1c72efc238784 100644
--- a/clang/include/clang/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchers.h
+++ b/clang/include/clang/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchers.h
@@ -6027,7 +6027,7 @@ AST_POLYMORPHIC_MATCHER_P2(
internal::Matcher<Expr>, Matcher1, internal::Matcher<Expr>, Matcher2) {
return internal::VariadicDynCastAllOfMatcher<Stmt, NodeType>()(
anyOf(allOf(hasLHS(Matcher1), hasRHS(Matcher2)),
- allOf(hasLHS(Matcher2), hasRHS(Matcher1))))
+ allOf(hasRHS(Matcher1), hasLHS(Matcher2))))
.matches(Node, Finder, Builder);
}
diff --git a/clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersTraversalTest.cpp b/clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersTraversalTest.cpp
index 47a71134d50273..028392f499da3b 100644
--- a/clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersTraversalTest.cpp
+++ b/clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersTraversalTest.cpp
@@ -1745,6 +1745,18 @@ TEST(MatchBinaryOperator, HasOperands) {
EXPECT_TRUE(notMatches("void x() { 0 + 1; }", HasOperands));
}
+TEST(MatchBinaryOperator, HasOperandsEnsureOrdering) {
+ StatementMatcher HasOperandsWithBindings = binaryOperator(hasOperands(
+ cStyleCastExpr(has(declRefExpr(hasDeclaration(valueDecl().bind("d"))))),
+ declRefExpr(hasDeclaration(valueDecl(equalsBoundNode("d"))))));
+ EXPECT_TRUE(matches(
+ "int a; int b = ((int) a) + a;",
+ traverse(TK_IgnoreUnlessSpelledInSource, HasOperandsWithBindings)));
+ EXPECT_TRUE(matches(
+ "int a; int b = a + ((int) a);",
+ traverse(TK_IgnoreUnlessSpelledInSource, HasOperandsWithBindings)));
+}
+
TEST(Matcher, BinaryOperatorTypes) {
// Integration test that verifies the AST provides all binary operators in
// a way we expect.
More information about the cfe-commits
mailing list