[clang] [clang] Warn [[clang::lifetimebound]] misusages on types (PR #118281)

[Ilya Biryukov via cfe-commits]

================
@@ -9,11 +9,20 @@ namespace usage_invalid {
     ~A() [[clang::lifetimebound]]; // expected-error {{cannot be applied to a destructor}}
     static int *static_class_member() [[clang::lifetimebound]]; // expected-error {{static member function has no implicit object parameter}}
     int *explicit_object(this A&) [[clang::lifetimebound]]; // expected-error {{explicit object member function has no implicit object parameter}}
-    int not_function [[clang::lifetimebound]]; // expected-error {{only applies to parameters and implicit object parameters}}
-    int [[clang::lifetimebound]] also_not_function; // expected-error {{cannot be applied to types}}
+    int attr_on_var [[clang::lifetimebound]]; // expected-error {{only applies to parameters and implicit object parameters}}
+    int [[clang::lifetimebound]] attr_on_int; // expected-error {{cannot be applied to types}}
+    int * [[clang::lifetimebound]] attr_on_int_ptr; // expected-error {{cannot be applied to types}}
+    int * [[clang::lifetimebound]] * attr_on_int_ptr_ptr; // expected-error {{cannot be applied to types}}
+    int (* [[clang::lifetimebound]] attr_on_func_ptr)(); // expected-error {{cannot be applied to types}}
     void void_return_member() [[clang::lifetimebound]]; // expected-error {{'lifetimebound' attribute cannot be applied to an implicit object parameter of a function that returns void; did you mean 'lifetime_capture_by(X)'}}
   };
   int *attr_with_param(int &param [[clang::lifetimebound(42)]]); // expected-error {{takes no arguments}}
----------------
ilya-biryukov wrote:

Oh, it's nice that we already catch those!
I was wrong, and I'm really happy about it.

Declarations that use function typedefs are quite rare, but we could add them now with a TODO in this patch too. Or not, either way seems fine.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/118281