[clang] [llvm] [OpenMP] OpenMP 5.1 "assume" directive parsing support (PR #92731)

[Julian Brown via llvm-commits]

================
@@ -2013,6 +2014,179 @@ class OMPMergeableClause : public OMPClause {
   }
 };
 
+/// This represents the 'absent' clause in the '#pragma omp assume'
+/// directive.
+///
+/// \code
+/// #pragma omp assume absent(<directive-name list>)
+/// \endcode
+/// In this example directive '#pragma omp assume' has an 'absent' clause.
+class OMPAbsentClause final : public OMPNoChildClause<llvm::omp::OMPC_absent> {
+  llvm::SmallSet<OpenMPDirectiveKind, 4> DirectiveKinds;
+
+  /// Location of '('.
+  SourceLocation LParenLoc;
+
+public:
+  /// Build 'absent' clause.
+  ///
+  /// \param StartLoc Starting location of the clause.
+  /// \param EndLoc Ending location of the clause.
+  OMPAbsentClause(llvm::SmallSet<OpenMPDirectiveKind, 4> &DKSet,
+                  SourceLocation StartLoc, SourceLocation LParenLoc,
+                  SourceLocation EndLoc)
+      : OMPNoChildClause(StartLoc, EndLoc), DirectiveKinds(DKSet),
+        LParenLoc(LParenLoc) {}
+
+  /// Build an empty clause.
+  OMPAbsentClause() : OMPNoChildClause() {}
+
+  SourceLocation getLParenLoc() { return LParenLoc; }
+
+  void setLParenLoc(SourceLocation S) { LParenLoc = S; }
+
+  llvm::SmallSet<OpenMPDirectiveKind, 4> &getDirectiveKinds() {
+    return DirectiveKinds;
+  }
+
+  void setDirectiveKinds(llvm::SmallSet<OpenMPDirectiveKind, 4> &DKS) {
+    DirectiveKinds = DKS;
+  }
+};
+
+/// This represents the 'contains' clause in the '#pragma omp assume'
+/// directive.
+///
+/// \code
+/// #pragma omp assume contains(<directive-name list>)
+/// \endcode
+/// In this example directive '#pragma omp assume' has a 'contains' clause.
+class OMPContainsClause final
+    : public OMPNoChildClause<llvm::omp::OMPC_contains> {
+  llvm::SmallSet<OpenMPDirectiveKind, 4> DirectiveKinds;
----------------
jtb20 wrote:

To clarify: do you mean that I should use "ompchildren" and encode the directive kind list as OMPClauses, rather than use a separate allocation/data structure?

That would probably work I guess, but it means adding a pseudo-clause type (OMPC_directive_kind or similar), or adding all the possible directive names as clause names also (which seems unwieldy for a relatively obscure feature). Is one of those along the lines of what you were thinking?

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/92731