[flang-commits] [flang] [Flang][OpenMP] Add Semantic Checks for Atomic Capture Construct (PR #108516)

[via flang-commits]

================
@@ -1977,6 +1977,64 @@ void OmpStructureChecker::CheckAtomicUpdateStmt(
   ErrIfAllocatableVariable(var);
 }
 
+// TODO: Allow cond-update-stmt once compare clause is supported.
+void OmpStructureChecker::CheckAtomicCaptureConstruct(
+    const parser::OmpAtomicCapture &atomicCaptureConstruct) {
+  const Fortran::parser::AssignmentStmt &stmt1 =
+      std::get<Fortran::parser::OmpAtomicCapture::Stmt1>(
+          atomicCaptureConstruct.t)
+          .v.statement;
+  const auto &stmt1Var{std::get<Fortran::parser::Variable>(stmt1.t)};
+  const auto &stmt1Expr{std::get<Fortran::parser::Expr>(stmt1.t)};
+
+  const Fortran::parser::AssignmentStmt &stmt2 =
+      std::get<Fortran::parser::OmpAtomicCapture::Stmt2>(
+          atomicCaptureConstruct.t)
+          .v.statement;
+  const auto &stmt2Var{std::get<Fortran::parser::Variable>(stmt2.t)};
+  const auto &stmt2Expr{std::get<Fortran::parser::Expr>(stmt2.t)};
+
+  if (Fortran::semantics::checkForSingleVariableOnRHS(stmt1)) {
+    CheckAtomicCaptureStmt(stmt1);
+    if (Fortran::semantics::checkForSymbolMatch(stmt2)) {
+      // Atomic capture construct is of the form [capture-stmt, update-stmt]
+      CheckAtomicUpdateStmt(stmt2);
+    } else {
+      // Atomic capture construct is of the form [capture-stmt, write-stmt]
+      CheckAtomicWriteStmt(stmt2);
+    }
+    auto *v{stmt2Var.typedExpr.get()};
+    auto *e{stmt1Expr.typedExpr.get()};
+    if (v && e && !(v->v == e->v)) {
+      context_.Say(stmt1Expr.source,
+          "Captured variable %s "
+          "expected to be assigned in the second statement of "
----------------
harishch4 wrote:

> Can we have this in the same line so that the error message can be easily searched for?

Wouldn't it violate the column width limit? Another error message is going to 170 columns. if that's okay, I'll change it.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108516