[cfe-dev] Matching function argument that may not be valid

[Daniel Dilts]

I want to insert the enum constants from the values that are in the code.
One driving reason behind this is that there isn't really any single group
that owns the enum.  One group could write it, but then nobody else would
be permitted to modify it.  A different group could write it, but then they
would have to generate some matching tables by hand.  Neither option is
really acceptable.

The ideal is to write the enum value and pull it out of the code and
generate the enum and associated tables.

On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 7:43 PM Daniel Dilts <diltsman at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Yeah, I suspected as much.  Is there any real option for finding this
>> location?  Would I have to do it where it is building the AST?
>>
>
> Nope. For parsing incorrect code you need to write your own "parser". Why
> do you want to parse incorrect code though?
>
>
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 10:25 AM, Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Ok, this only works on valid code. If you have errors, all bets are off.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 7:23 PM Daniel Dilts <diltsman at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 5:19 PM, Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 5:45 PM Daniel Dilts <diltsman at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I am attempting to write a tool that will generate a table from
>>>>>> tokens pulled from source code.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have a static template function in a template class.  I want to
>>>>>> find the first argument for all calls to the template function.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The problem is that the token may or may not be defined, since they
>>>>>> will be defined in a generated table.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If I use dump-ast it appears that the function call is omitted from
>>>>>> the AST, so I don't think that I can use AST matchers to find it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I somehow can't believe that - all calls are in the AST.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Here is my example, using "clang version 3.7.0 (trunk 235602)".  Note
>>>> that the call to Func is not present in the AST.
>>>>
>>>> enum MyEnum
>>>> {
>>>> };
>>>> void Func(MyEnum v);
>>>> int main()
>>>> {
>>>>  Func(SomeEnumValue);
>>>>  return 0;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> clang.exe -Xclang -ast-dump test.cpp
>>>> test.cpp:7:7: error: use of undeclared identifier 'SomeEnumValue'
>>>>         Func(SomeEnumValue);
>>>>              ^
>>>> TranslationUnitDecl 0x836140 <<invalid sloc>> <invalid sloc>
>>>> |-CXXRecordDecl 0x836400 <<invalid sloc>> <invalid sloc> implicit class
>>>> type_inf
>>>> o
>>>> | `-TypeVisibilityAttr 0x836470 <<invalid sloc>> Implicit Default
>>>> |-TypedefDecl 0x8364b0 <<invalid sloc>> <invalid sloc> implicit size_t
>>>> 'unsigned
>>>>  int'
>>>> |-TypedefDecl 0x836508 <<invalid sloc>> <invalid sloc> implicit
>>>> __builtin_va_lis
>>>> t 'char *'
>>>> |-EnumDecl 0x836538 <test.cpp:1:1, line:3:1> line:1:6 referenced MyEnum
>>>> 'int'
>>>> |-FunctionDecl 0x836630 <line:4:1, col:19> col:6 Func 'void (enum
>>>> MyEnum)'
>>>> | `-ParmVarDecl 0x8365b8 <col:11, col:18> col:18 v 'enum MyEnum'
>>>> `-FunctionDecl 0x836718 <line:5:1, line:9:1> line:5:5 main 'int (void)'
>>>>   `-CompoundStmt 0x836880 <line:6:1, line:9:1>
>>>>     `-ReturnStmt 0x836870 <line:8:2, col:9>
>>>>       `-IntegerLiteral 0x836850 <col:9> 'int' 01 error generated.
>>>>
>>>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20150423/bbcf9222/attachment.html>