• Home
  • Line#
  • Scopes#
  • Navigate#
  • Raw
  • Download
1============================
2"Clang" CFE Internals Manual
3============================
4
5.. contents::
6   :local:
7
8Introduction
9============
10
11This document describes some of the more important APIs and internal design
12decisions made in the Clang C front-end.  The purpose of this document is to
13both capture some of this high level information and also describe some of the
14design decisions behind it.  This is meant for people interested in hacking on
15Clang, not for end-users.  The description below is categorized by libraries,
16and does not describe any of the clients of the libraries.
17
18LLVM Support Library
19====================
20
21The LLVM ``libSupport`` library provides many underlying libraries and
22`data-structures <http://llvm.org/docs/ProgrammersManual.html>`_, including
23command line option processing, various containers and a system abstraction
24layer, which is used for file system access.
25
26The Clang "Basic" Library
27=========================
28
29This library certainly needs a better name.  The "basic" library contains a
30number of low-level utilities for tracking and manipulating source buffers,
31locations within the source buffers, diagnostics, tokens, target abstraction,
32and information about the subset of the language being compiled for.
33
34Part of this infrastructure is specific to C (such as the ``TargetInfo``
35class), other parts could be reused for other non-C-based languages
36(``SourceLocation``, ``SourceManager``, ``Diagnostics``, ``FileManager``).
37When and if there is future demand we can figure out if it makes sense to
38introduce a new library, move the general classes somewhere else, or introduce
39some other solution.
40
41We describe the roles of these classes in order of their dependencies.
42
43The Diagnostics Subsystem
44-------------------------
45
46The Clang Diagnostics subsystem is an important part of how the compiler
47communicates with the human.  Diagnostics are the warnings and errors produced
48when the code is incorrect or dubious.  In Clang, each diagnostic produced has
49(at the minimum) a unique ID, an English translation associated with it, a
50:ref:`SourceLocation <SourceLocation>` to "put the caret", and a severity
51(e.g., ``WARNING`` or ``ERROR``).  They can also optionally include a number of
52arguments to the dianostic (which fill in "%0"'s in the string) as well as a
53number of source ranges that related to the diagnostic.
54
55In this section, we'll be giving examples produced by the Clang command line
56driver, but diagnostics can be :ref:`rendered in many different ways
57<DiagnosticClient>` depending on how the ``DiagnosticClient`` interface is
58implemented.  A representative example of a diagnostic is:
59
60.. code-block:: c++
61
62  t.c:38:15: error: invalid operands to binary expression ('int *' and '_Complex float')
63  P = (P-42) + Gamma*4;
64      ~~~~~~ ^ ~~~~~~~
65
66In this example, you can see the English translation, the severity (error), you
67can see the source location (the caret ("``^``") and file/line/column info),
68the source ranges "``~~~~``", arguments to the diagnostic ("``int*``" and
69"``_Complex float``").  You'll have to believe me that there is a unique ID
70backing the diagnostic :).
71
72Getting all of this to happen has several steps and involves many moving
73pieces, this section describes them and talks about best practices when adding
74a new diagnostic.
75
76The ``Diagnostic*Kinds.td`` files
77^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
78
79Diagnostics are created by adding an entry to one of the
80``clang/Basic/Diagnostic*Kinds.td`` files, depending on what library will be
81using it.  From this file, :program:`tblgen` generates the unique ID of the
82diagnostic, the severity of the diagnostic and the English translation + format
83string.
84
85There is little sanity with the naming of the unique ID's right now.  Some
86start with ``err_``, ``warn_``, ``ext_`` to encode the severity into the name.
87Since the enum is referenced in the C++ code that produces the diagnostic, it
88is somewhat useful for it to be reasonably short.
89
90The severity of the diagnostic comes from the set {``NOTE``, ``REMARK``,
91``WARNING``,
92``EXTENSION``, ``EXTWARN``, ``ERROR``}.  The ``ERROR`` severity is used for
93diagnostics indicating the program is never acceptable under any circumstances.
94When an error is emitted, the AST for the input code may not be fully built.
95The ``EXTENSION`` and ``EXTWARN`` severities are used for extensions to the
96language that Clang accepts.  This means that Clang fully understands and can
97represent them in the AST, but we produce diagnostics to tell the user their
98code is non-portable.  The difference is that the former are ignored by
99default, and the later warn by default.  The ``WARNING`` severity is used for
100constructs that are valid in the currently selected source language but that
101are dubious in some way.  The ``REMARK`` severity provides generic information
102about the compilation that is not necessarily related to any dubious code.  The
103``NOTE`` level is used to staple more information onto previous diagnostics.
104
105These *severities* are mapped into a smaller set (the ``Diagnostic::Level``
106enum, {``Ignored``, ``Note``, ``Remark``, ``Warning``, ``Error``, ``Fatal``}) of
107output
108*levels* by the diagnostics subsystem based on various configuration options.
109Clang internally supports a fully fine grained mapping mechanism that allows
110you to map almost any diagnostic to the output level that you want.  The only
111diagnostics that cannot be mapped are ``NOTE``\ s, which always follow the
112severity of the previously emitted diagnostic and ``ERROR``\ s, which can only
113be mapped to ``Fatal`` (it is not possible to turn an error into a warning, for
114example).
115
116Diagnostic mappings are used in many ways.  For example, if the user specifies
117``-pedantic``, ``EXTENSION`` maps to ``Warning``, if they specify
118``-pedantic-errors``, it turns into ``Error``.  This is used to implement
119options like ``-Wunused_macros``, ``-Wundef`` etc.
120
121Mapping to ``Fatal`` should only be used for diagnostics that are considered so
122severe that error recovery won't be able to recover sensibly from them (thus
123spewing a ton of bogus errors).  One example of this class of error are failure
124to ``#include`` a file.
125
126The Format String
127^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
128
129The format string for the diagnostic is very simple, but it has some power.  It
130takes the form of a string in English with markers that indicate where and how
131arguments to the diagnostic are inserted and formatted.  For example, here are
132some simple format strings:
133
134.. code-block:: c++
135
136  "binary integer literals are an extension"
137  "format string contains '\\0' within the string body"
138  "more '%%' conversions than data arguments"
139  "invalid operands to binary expression (%0 and %1)"
140  "overloaded '%0' must be a %select{unary|binary|unary or binary}2 operator"
141       " (has %1 parameter%s1)"
142
143These examples show some important points of format strings.  You can use any
144plain ASCII character in the diagnostic string except "``%``" without a
145problem, but these are C strings, so you have to use and be aware of all the C
146escape sequences (as in the second example).  If you want to produce a "``%``"
147in the output, use the "``%%``" escape sequence, like the third diagnostic.
148Finally, Clang uses the "``%...[digit]``" sequences to specify where and how
149arguments to the diagnostic are formatted.
150
151Arguments to the diagnostic are numbered according to how they are specified by
152the C++ code that :ref:`produces them <internals-producing-diag>`, and are
153referenced by ``%0`` .. ``%9``.  If you have more than 10 arguments to your
154diagnostic, you are doing something wrong :).  Unlike ``printf``, there is no
155requirement that arguments to the diagnostic end up in the output in the same
156order as they are specified, you could have a format string with "``%1 %0``"
157that swaps them, for example.  The text in between the percent and digit are
158formatting instructions.  If there are no instructions, the argument is just
159turned into a string and substituted in.
160
161Here are some "best practices" for writing the English format string:
162
163* Keep the string short.  It should ideally fit in the 80 column limit of the
164  ``DiagnosticKinds.td`` file.  This avoids the diagnostic wrapping when
165  printed, and forces you to think about the important point you are conveying
166  with the diagnostic.
167* Take advantage of location information.  The user will be able to see the
168  line and location of the caret, so you don't need to tell them that the
169  problem is with the 4th argument to the function: just point to it.
170* Do not capitalize the diagnostic string, and do not end it with a period.
171* If you need to quote something in the diagnostic string, use single quotes.
172
173Diagnostics should never take random English strings as arguments: you
174shouldn't use "``you have a problem with %0``" and pass in things like "``your
175argument``" or "``your return value``" as arguments.  Doing this prevents
176:ref:`translating <internals-diag-translation>` the Clang diagnostics to other
177languages (because they'll get random English words in their otherwise
178localized diagnostic).  The exceptions to this are C/C++ language keywords
179(e.g., ``auto``, ``const``, ``mutable``, etc) and C/C++ operators (``/=``).
180Note that things like "pointer" and "reference" are not keywords.  On the other
181hand, you *can* include anything that comes from the user's source code,
182including variable names, types, labels, etc.  The "``select``" format can be
183used to achieve this sort of thing in a localizable way, see below.
184
185Formatting a Diagnostic Argument
186^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
187
188Arguments to diagnostics are fully typed internally, and come from a couple
189different classes: integers, types, names, and random strings.  Depending on
190the class of the argument, it can be optionally formatted in different ways.
191This gives the ``DiagnosticClient`` information about what the argument means
192without requiring it to use a specific presentation (consider this MVC for
193Clang :).
194
195Here are the different diagnostic argument formats currently supported by
196Clang:
197
198**"s" format**
199
200Example:
201  ``"requires %1 parameter%s1"``
202Class:
203  Integers
204Description:
205  This is a simple formatter for integers that is useful when producing English
206  diagnostics.  When the integer is 1, it prints as nothing.  When the integer
207  is not 1, it prints as "``s``".  This allows some simple grammatical forms to
208  be to be handled correctly, and eliminates the need to use gross things like
209  ``"requires %1 parameter(s)"``.
210
211**"select" format**
212
213Example:
214  ``"must be a %select{unary|binary|unary or binary}2 operator"``
215Class:
216  Integers
217Description:
218  This format specifier is used to merge multiple related diagnostics together
219  into one common one, without requiring the difference to be specified as an
220  English string argument.  Instead of specifying the string, the diagnostic
221  gets an integer argument and the format string selects the numbered option.
222  In this case, the "``%2``" value must be an integer in the range [0..2].  If
223  it is 0, it prints "unary", if it is 1 it prints "binary" if it is 2, it
224  prints "unary or binary".  This allows other language translations to
225  substitute reasonable words (or entire phrases) based on the semantics of the
226  diagnostic instead of having to do things textually.  The selected string
227  does undergo formatting.
228
229**"plural" format**
230
231Example:
232  ``"you have %1 %plural{1:mouse|:mice}1 connected to your computer"``
233Class:
234  Integers
235Description:
236  This is a formatter for complex plural forms.  It is designed to handle even
237  the requirements of languages with very complex plural forms, as many Baltic
238  languages have.  The argument consists of a series of expression/form pairs,
239  separated by ":", where the first form whose expression evaluates to true is
240  the result of the modifier.
241
242  An expression can be empty, in which case it is always true.  See the example
243  at the top.  Otherwise, it is a series of one or more numeric conditions,
244  separated by ",".  If any condition matches, the expression matches.  Each
245  numeric condition can take one of three forms.
246
247  * number: A simple decimal number matches if the argument is the same as the
248    number.  Example: ``"%plural{1:mouse|:mice}4"``
249  * range: A range in square brackets matches if the argument is within the
250    range.  Then range is inclusive on both ends.  Example:
251    ``"%plural{0:none|1:one|[2,5]:some|:many}2"``
252  * modulo: A modulo operator is followed by a number, and equals sign and
253    either a number or a range.  The tests are the same as for plain numbers
254    and ranges, but the argument is taken modulo the number first.  Example:
255    ``"%plural{%100=0:even hundred|%100=[1,50]:lower half|:everything else}1"``
256
257  The parser is very unforgiving.  A syntax error, even whitespace, will abort,
258  as will a failure to match the argument against any expression.
259
260**"ordinal" format**
261
262Example:
263  ``"ambiguity in %ordinal0 argument"``
264Class:
265  Integers
266Description:
267  This is a formatter which represents the argument number as an ordinal: the
268  value ``1`` becomes ``1st``, ``3`` becomes ``3rd``, and so on.  Values less
269  than ``1`` are not supported.  This formatter is currently hard-coded to use
270  English ordinals.
271
272**"objcclass" format**
273
274Example:
275  ``"method %objcclass0 not found"``
276Class:
277  ``DeclarationName``
278Description:
279  This is a simple formatter that indicates the ``DeclarationName`` corresponds
280  to an Objective-C class method selector.  As such, it prints the selector
281  with a leading "``+``".
282
283**"objcinstance" format**
284
285Example:
286  ``"method %objcinstance0 not found"``
287Class:
288  ``DeclarationName``
289Description:
290  This is a simple formatter that indicates the ``DeclarationName`` corresponds
291  to an Objective-C instance method selector.  As such, it prints the selector
292  with a leading "``-``".
293
294**"q" format**
295
296Example:
297  ``"candidate found by name lookup is %q0"``
298Class:
299  ``NamedDecl *``
300Description:
301  This formatter indicates that the fully-qualified name of the declaration
302  should be printed, e.g., "``std::vector``" rather than "``vector``".
303
304**"diff" format**
305
306Example:
307  ``"no known conversion %diff{from $ to $|from argument type to parameter type}1,2"``
308Class:
309  ``QualType``
310Description:
311  This formatter takes two ``QualType``\ s and attempts to print a template
312  difference between the two.  If tree printing is off, the text inside the
313  braces before the pipe is printed, with the formatted text replacing the $.
314  If tree printing is on, the text after the pipe is printed and a type tree is
315  printed after the diagnostic message.
316
317It is really easy to add format specifiers to the Clang diagnostics system, but
318they should be discussed before they are added.  If you are creating a lot of
319repetitive diagnostics and/or have an idea for a useful formatter, please bring
320it up on the cfe-dev mailing list.
321
322.. _internals-producing-diag:
323
324Producing the Diagnostic
325^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
326
327Now that you've created the diagnostic in the ``Diagnostic*Kinds.td`` file, you
328need to write the code that detects the condition in question and emits the new
329diagnostic.  Various components of Clang (e.g., the preprocessor, ``Sema``,
330etc.) provide a helper function named "``Diag``".  It creates a diagnostic and
331accepts the arguments, ranges, and other information that goes along with it.
332
333For example, the binary expression error comes from code like this:
334
335.. code-block:: c++
336
337  if (various things that are bad)
338    Diag(Loc, diag::err_typecheck_invalid_operands)
339      << lex->getType() << rex->getType()
340      << lex->getSourceRange() << rex->getSourceRange();
341
342This shows that use of the ``Diag`` method: it takes a location (a
343:ref:`SourceLocation <SourceLocation>` object) and a diagnostic enum value
344(which matches the name from ``Diagnostic*Kinds.td``).  If the diagnostic takes
345arguments, they are specified with the ``<<`` operator: the first argument
346becomes ``%0``, the second becomes ``%1``, etc.  The diagnostic interface
347allows you to specify arguments of many different types, including ``int`` and
348``unsigned`` for integer arguments, ``const char*`` and ``std::string`` for
349string arguments, ``DeclarationName`` and ``const IdentifierInfo *`` for names,
350``QualType`` for types, etc.  ``SourceRange``\ s are also specified with the
351``<<`` operator, but do not have a specific ordering requirement.
352
353As you can see, adding and producing a diagnostic is pretty straightforward.
354The hard part is deciding exactly what you need to say to help the user,
355picking a suitable wording, and providing the information needed to format it
356correctly.  The good news is that the call site that issues a diagnostic should
357be completely independent of how the diagnostic is formatted and in what
358language it is rendered.
359
360Fix-It Hints
361^^^^^^^^^^^^
362
363In some cases, the front end emits diagnostics when it is clear that some small
364change to the source code would fix the problem.  For example, a missing
365semicolon at the end of a statement or a use of deprecated syntax that is
366easily rewritten into a more modern form.  Clang tries very hard to emit the
367diagnostic and recover gracefully in these and other cases.
368
369However, for these cases where the fix is obvious, the diagnostic can be
370annotated with a hint (referred to as a "fix-it hint") that describes how to
371change the code referenced by the diagnostic to fix the problem.  For example,
372it might add the missing semicolon at the end of the statement or rewrite the
373use of a deprecated construct into something more palatable.  Here is one such
374example from the C++ front end, where we warn about the right-shift operator
375changing meaning from C++98 to C++11:
376
377.. code-block:: c++
378
379  test.cpp:3:7: warning: use of right-shift operator ('>>') in template argument
380                         will require parentheses in C++11
381  A<100 >> 2> *a;
382        ^
383    (       )
384
385Here, the fix-it hint is suggesting that parentheses be added, and showing
386exactly where those parentheses would be inserted into the source code.  The
387fix-it hints themselves describe what changes to make to the source code in an
388abstract manner, which the text diagnostic printer renders as a line of
389"insertions" below the caret line.  :ref:`Other diagnostic clients
390<DiagnosticClient>` might choose to render the code differently (e.g., as
391markup inline) or even give the user the ability to automatically fix the
392problem.
393
394Fix-it hints on errors and warnings need to obey these rules:
395
396* Since they are automatically applied if ``-Xclang -fixit`` is passed to the
397  driver, they should only be used when it's very likely they match the user's
398  intent.
399* Clang must recover from errors as if the fix-it had been applied.
400
401If a fix-it can't obey these rules, put the fix-it on a note.  Fix-its on notes
402are not applied automatically.
403
404All fix-it hints are described by the ``FixItHint`` class, instances of which
405should be attached to the diagnostic using the ``<<`` operator in the same way
406that highlighted source ranges and arguments are passed to the diagnostic.
407Fix-it hints can be created with one of three constructors:
408
409* ``FixItHint::CreateInsertion(Loc, Code)``
410
411    Specifies that the given ``Code`` (a string) should be inserted before the
412    source location ``Loc``.
413
414* ``FixItHint::CreateRemoval(Range)``
415
416    Specifies that the code in the given source ``Range`` should be removed.
417
418* ``FixItHint::CreateReplacement(Range, Code)``
419
420    Specifies that the code in the given source ``Range`` should be removed,
421    and replaced with the given ``Code`` string.
422
423.. _DiagnosticClient:
424
425The ``DiagnosticClient`` Interface
426^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
427
428Once code generates a diagnostic with all of the arguments and the rest of the
429relevant information, Clang needs to know what to do with it.  As previously
430mentioned, the diagnostic machinery goes through some filtering to map a
431severity onto a diagnostic level, then (assuming the diagnostic is not mapped
432to "``Ignore``") it invokes an object that implements the ``DiagnosticClient``
433interface with the information.
434
435It is possible to implement this interface in many different ways.  For
436example, the normal Clang ``DiagnosticClient`` (named
437``TextDiagnosticPrinter``) turns the arguments into strings (according to the
438various formatting rules), prints out the file/line/column information and the
439string, then prints out the line of code, the source ranges, and the caret.
440However, this behavior isn't required.
441
442Another implementation of the ``DiagnosticClient`` interface is the
443``TextDiagnosticBuffer`` class, which is used when Clang is in ``-verify``
444mode.  Instead of formatting and printing out the diagnostics, this
445implementation just captures and remembers the diagnostics as they fly by.
446Then ``-verify`` compares the list of produced diagnostics to the list of
447expected ones.  If they disagree, it prints out its own output.  Full
448documentation for the ``-verify`` mode can be found in the Clang API
449documentation for `VerifyDiagnosticConsumer
450</doxygen/classclang_1_1VerifyDiagnosticConsumer.html#details>`_.
451
452There are many other possible implementations of this interface, and this is
453why we prefer diagnostics to pass down rich structured information in
454arguments.  For example, an HTML output might want declaration names be
455linkified to where they come from in the source.  Another example is that a GUI
456might let you click on typedefs to expand them.  This application would want to
457pass significantly more information about types through to the GUI than a
458simple flat string.  The interface allows this to happen.
459
460.. _internals-diag-translation:
461
462Adding Translations to Clang
463^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
464
465Not possible yet! Diagnostic strings should be written in UTF-8, the client can
466translate to the relevant code page if needed.  Each translation completely
467replaces the format string for the diagnostic.
468
469.. _SourceLocation:
470.. _SourceManager:
471
472The ``SourceLocation`` and ``SourceManager`` classes
473----------------------------------------------------
474
475Strangely enough, the ``SourceLocation`` class represents a location within the
476source code of the program.  Important design points include:
477
478#. ``sizeof(SourceLocation)`` must be extremely small, as these are embedded
479   into many AST nodes and are passed around often.  Currently it is 32 bits.
480#. ``SourceLocation`` must be a simple value object that can be efficiently
481   copied.
482#. We should be able to represent a source location for any byte of any input
483   file.  This includes in the middle of tokens, in whitespace, in trigraphs,
484   etc.
485#. A ``SourceLocation`` must encode the current ``#include`` stack that was
486   active when the location was processed.  For example, if the location
487   corresponds to a token, it should contain the set of ``#include``\ s active
488   when the token was lexed.  This allows us to print the ``#include`` stack
489   for a diagnostic.
490#. ``SourceLocation`` must be able to describe macro expansions, capturing both
491   the ultimate instantiation point and the source of the original character
492   data.
493
494In practice, the ``SourceLocation`` works together with the ``SourceManager``
495class to encode two pieces of information about a location: its spelling
496location and its instantiation location.  For most tokens, these will be the
497same.  However, for a macro expansion (or tokens that came from a ``_Pragma``
498directive) these will describe the location of the characters corresponding to
499the token and the location where the token was used (i.e., the macro
500instantiation point or the location of the ``_Pragma`` itself).
501
502The Clang front-end inherently depends on the location of a token being tracked
503correctly.  If it is ever incorrect, the front-end may get confused and die.
504The reason for this is that the notion of the "spelling" of a ``Token`` in
505Clang depends on being able to find the original input characters for the
506token.  This concept maps directly to the "spelling location" for the token.
507
508``SourceRange`` and ``CharSourceRange``
509---------------------------------------
510
511.. mostly taken from http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/cfe-dev/2010-August/010595.html
512
513Clang represents most source ranges by [first, last], where "first" and "last"
514each point to the beginning of their respective tokens.  For example consider
515the ``SourceRange`` of the following statement:
516
517.. code-block:: c++
518
519  x = foo + bar;
520  ^first    ^last
521
522To map from this representation to a character-based representation, the "last"
523location needs to be adjusted to point to (or past) the end of that token with
524either ``Lexer::MeasureTokenLength()`` or ``Lexer::getLocForEndOfToken()``.  For
525the rare cases where character-level source ranges information is needed we use
526the ``CharSourceRange`` class.
527
528The Driver Library
529==================
530
531The clang Driver and library are documented :doc:`here <DriverInternals>`.
532
533Precompiled Headers
534===================
535
536Clang supports two implementations of precompiled headers.  The default
537implementation, precompiled headers (:doc:`PCH <PCHInternals>`) uses a
538serialized representation of Clang's internal data structures, encoded with the
539`LLVM bitstream format <http://llvm.org/docs/BitCodeFormat.html>`_.
540Pretokenized headers (:doc:`PTH <PTHInternals>`), on the other hand, contain a
541serialized representation of the tokens encountered when preprocessing a header
542(and anything that header includes).
543
544The Frontend Library
545====================
546
547The Frontend library contains functionality useful for building tools on top of
548the Clang libraries, for example several methods for outputting diagnostics.
549
550The Lexer and Preprocessor Library
551==================================
552
553The Lexer library contains several tightly-connected classes that are involved
554with the nasty process of lexing and preprocessing C source code.  The main
555interface to this library for outside clients is the large ``Preprocessor``
556class.  It contains the various pieces of state that are required to coherently
557read tokens out of a translation unit.
558
559The core interface to the ``Preprocessor`` object (once it is set up) is the
560``Preprocessor::Lex`` method, which returns the next :ref:`Token <Token>` from
561the preprocessor stream.  There are two types of token providers that the
562preprocessor is capable of reading from: a buffer lexer (provided by the
563:ref:`Lexer <Lexer>` class) and a buffered token stream (provided by the
564:ref:`TokenLexer <TokenLexer>` class).
565
566.. _Token:
567
568The Token class
569---------------
570
571The ``Token`` class is used to represent a single lexed token.  Tokens are
572intended to be used by the lexer/preprocess and parser libraries, but are not
573intended to live beyond them (for example, they should not live in the ASTs).
574
575Tokens most often live on the stack (or some other location that is efficient
576to access) as the parser is running, but occasionally do get buffered up.  For
577example, macro definitions are stored as a series of tokens, and the C++
578front-end periodically needs to buffer tokens up for tentative parsing and
579various pieces of look-ahead.  As such, the size of a ``Token`` matters.  On a
58032-bit system, ``sizeof(Token)`` is currently 16 bytes.
581
582Tokens occur in two forms: :ref:`annotation tokens <AnnotationToken>` and
583normal tokens.  Normal tokens are those returned by the lexer, annotation
584tokens represent semantic information and are produced by the parser, replacing
585normal tokens in the token stream.  Normal tokens contain the following
586information:
587
588* **A SourceLocation** --- This indicates the location of the start of the
589  token.
590
591* **A length** --- This stores the length of the token as stored in the
592  ``SourceBuffer``.  For tokens that include them, this length includes
593  trigraphs and escaped newlines which are ignored by later phases of the
594  compiler.  By pointing into the original source buffer, it is always possible
595  to get the original spelling of a token completely accurately.
596
597* **IdentifierInfo** --- If a token takes the form of an identifier, and if
598  identifier lookup was enabled when the token was lexed (e.g., the lexer was
599  not reading in "raw" mode) this contains a pointer to the unique hash value
600  for the identifier.  Because the lookup happens before keyword
601  identification, this field is set even for language keywords like "``for``".
602
603* **TokenKind** --- This indicates the kind of token as classified by the
604  lexer.  This includes things like ``tok::starequal`` (for the "``*=``"
605  operator), ``tok::ampamp`` for the "``&&``" token, and keyword values (e.g.,
606  ``tok::kw_for``) for identifiers that correspond to keywords.  Note that
607  some tokens can be spelled multiple ways.  For example, C++ supports
608  "operator keywords", where things like "``and``" are treated exactly like the
609  "``&&``" operator.  In these cases, the kind value is set to ``tok::ampamp``,
610  which is good for the parser, which doesn't have to consider both forms.  For
611  something that cares about which form is used (e.g., the preprocessor
612  "stringize" operator) the spelling indicates the original form.
613
614* **Flags** --- There are currently four flags tracked by the
615  lexer/preprocessor system on a per-token basis:
616
617  #. **StartOfLine** --- This was the first token that occurred on its input
618     source line.
619  #. **LeadingSpace** --- There was a space character either immediately before
620     the token or transitively before the token as it was expanded through a
621     macro.  The definition of this flag is very closely defined by the
622     stringizing requirements of the preprocessor.
623  #. **DisableExpand** --- This flag is used internally to the preprocessor to
624     represent identifier tokens which have macro expansion disabled.  This
625     prevents them from being considered as candidates for macro expansion ever
626     in the future.
627  #. **NeedsCleaning** --- This flag is set if the original spelling for the
628     token includes a trigraph or escaped newline.  Since this is uncommon,
629     many pieces of code can fast-path on tokens that did not need cleaning.
630
631One interesting (and somewhat unusual) aspect of normal tokens is that they
632don't contain any semantic information about the lexed value.  For example, if
633the token was a pp-number token, we do not represent the value of the number
634that was lexed (this is left for later pieces of code to decide).
635Additionally, the lexer library has no notion of typedef names vs variable
636names: both are returned as identifiers, and the parser is left to decide
637whether a specific identifier is a typedef or a variable (tracking this
638requires scope information among other things).  The parser can do this
639translation by replacing tokens returned by the preprocessor with "Annotation
640Tokens".
641
642.. _AnnotationToken:
643
644Annotation Tokens
645-----------------
646
647Annotation tokens are tokens that are synthesized by the parser and injected
648into the preprocessor's token stream (replacing existing tokens) to record
649semantic information found by the parser.  For example, if "``foo``" is found
650to be a typedef, the "``foo``" ``tok::identifier`` token is replaced with an
651``tok::annot_typename``.  This is useful for a couple of reasons: 1) this makes
652it easy to handle qualified type names (e.g., "``foo::bar::baz<42>::t``") in
653C++ as a single "token" in the parser.  2) if the parser backtracks, the
654reparse does not need to redo semantic analysis to determine whether a token
655sequence is a variable, type, template, etc.
656
657Annotation tokens are created by the parser and reinjected into the parser's
658token stream (when backtracking is enabled).  Because they can only exist in
659tokens that the preprocessor-proper is done with, it doesn't need to keep
660around flags like "start of line" that the preprocessor uses to do its job.
661Additionally, an annotation token may "cover" a sequence of preprocessor tokens
662(e.g., "``a::b::c``" is five preprocessor tokens).  As such, the valid fields
663of an annotation token are different than the fields for a normal token (but
664they are multiplexed into the normal ``Token`` fields):
665
666* **SourceLocation "Location"** --- The ``SourceLocation`` for the annotation
667  token indicates the first token replaced by the annotation token.  In the
668  example above, it would be the location of the "``a``" identifier.
669* **SourceLocation "AnnotationEndLoc"** --- This holds the location of the last
670  token replaced with the annotation token.  In the example above, it would be
671  the location of the "``c``" identifier.
672* **void* "AnnotationValue"** --- This contains an opaque object that the
673  parser gets from ``Sema``.  The parser merely preserves the information for
674  ``Sema`` to later interpret based on the annotation token kind.
675* **TokenKind "Kind"** --- This indicates the kind of Annotation token this is.
676  See below for the different valid kinds.
677
678Annotation tokens currently come in three kinds:
679
680#. **tok::annot_typename**: This annotation token represents a resolved
681   typename token that is potentially qualified.  The ``AnnotationValue`` field
682   contains the ``QualType`` returned by ``Sema::getTypeName()``, possibly with
683   source location information attached.
684#. **tok::annot_cxxscope**: This annotation token represents a C++ scope
685   specifier, such as "``A::B::``".  This corresponds to the grammar
686   productions "*::*" and "*:: [opt] nested-name-specifier*".  The
687   ``AnnotationValue`` pointer is a ``NestedNameSpecifier *`` returned by the
688   ``Sema::ActOnCXXGlobalScopeSpecifier`` and
689   ``Sema::ActOnCXXNestedNameSpecifier`` callbacks.
690#. **tok::annot_template_id**: This annotation token represents a C++
691   template-id such as "``foo<int, 4>``", where "``foo``" is the name of a
692   template.  The ``AnnotationValue`` pointer is a pointer to a ``malloc``'d
693   ``TemplateIdAnnotation`` object.  Depending on the context, a parsed
694   template-id that names a type might become a typename annotation token (if
695   all we care about is the named type, e.g., because it occurs in a type
696   specifier) or might remain a template-id token (if we want to retain more
697   source location information or produce a new type, e.g., in a declaration of
698   a class template specialization).  template-id annotation tokens that refer
699   to a type can be "upgraded" to typename annotation tokens by the parser.
700
701As mentioned above, annotation tokens are not returned by the preprocessor,
702they are formed on demand by the parser.  This means that the parser has to be
703aware of cases where an annotation could occur and form it where appropriate.
704This is somewhat similar to how the parser handles Translation Phase 6 of C99:
705String Concatenation (see C99 5.1.1.2).  In the case of string concatenation,
706the preprocessor just returns distinct ``tok::string_literal`` and
707``tok::wide_string_literal`` tokens and the parser eats a sequence of them
708wherever the grammar indicates that a string literal can occur.
709
710In order to do this, whenever the parser expects a ``tok::identifier`` or
711``tok::coloncolon``, it should call the ``TryAnnotateTypeOrScopeToken`` or
712``TryAnnotateCXXScopeToken`` methods to form the annotation token.  These
713methods will maximally form the specified annotation tokens and replace the
714current token with them, if applicable.  If the current tokens is not valid for
715an annotation token, it will remain an identifier or "``::``" token.
716
717.. _Lexer:
718
719The ``Lexer`` class
720-------------------
721
722The ``Lexer`` class provides the mechanics of lexing tokens out of a source
723buffer and deciding what they mean.  The ``Lexer`` is complicated by the fact
724that it operates on raw buffers that have not had spelling eliminated (this is
725a necessity to get decent performance), but this is countered with careful
726coding as well as standard performance techniques (for example, the comment
727handling code is vectorized on X86 and PowerPC hosts).
728
729The lexer has a couple of interesting modal features:
730
731* The lexer can operate in "raw" mode.  This mode has several features that
732  make it possible to quickly lex the file (e.g., it stops identifier lookup,
733  doesn't specially handle preprocessor tokens, handles EOF differently, etc).
734  This mode is used for lexing within an "``#if 0``" block, for example.
735* The lexer can capture and return comments as tokens.  This is required to
736  support the ``-C`` preprocessor mode, which passes comments through, and is
737  used by the diagnostic checker to identifier expect-error annotations.
738* The lexer can be in ``ParsingFilename`` mode, which happens when
739  preprocessing after reading a ``#include`` directive.  This mode changes the
740  parsing of "``<``" to return an "angled string" instead of a bunch of tokens
741  for each thing within the filename.
742* When parsing a preprocessor directive (after "``#``") the
743  ``ParsingPreprocessorDirective`` mode is entered.  This changes the parser to
744  return EOD at a newline.
745* The ``Lexer`` uses a ``LangOptions`` object to know whether trigraphs are
746  enabled, whether C++ or ObjC keywords are recognized, etc.
747
748In addition to these modes, the lexer keeps track of a couple of other features
749that are local to a lexed buffer, which change as the buffer is lexed:
750
751* The ``Lexer`` uses ``BufferPtr`` to keep track of the current character being
752  lexed.
753* The ``Lexer`` uses ``IsAtStartOfLine`` to keep track of whether the next
754  lexed token will start with its "start of line" bit set.
755* The ``Lexer`` keeps track of the current "``#if``" directives that are active
756  (which can be nested).
757* The ``Lexer`` keeps track of an :ref:`MultipleIncludeOpt
758  <MultipleIncludeOpt>` object, which is used to detect whether the buffer uses
759  the standard "``#ifndef XX`` / ``#define XX``" idiom to prevent multiple
760  inclusion.  If a buffer does, subsequent includes can be ignored if the
761  "``XX``" macro is defined.
762
763.. _TokenLexer:
764
765The ``TokenLexer`` class
766------------------------
767
768The ``TokenLexer`` class is a token provider that returns tokens from a list of
769tokens that came from somewhere else.  It typically used for two things: 1)
770returning tokens from a macro definition as it is being expanded 2) returning
771tokens from an arbitrary buffer of tokens.  The later use is used by
772``_Pragma`` and will most likely be used to handle unbounded look-ahead for the
773C++ parser.
774
775.. _MultipleIncludeOpt:
776
777The ``MultipleIncludeOpt`` class
778--------------------------------
779
780The ``MultipleIncludeOpt`` class implements a really simple little state
781machine that is used to detect the standard "``#ifndef XX`` / ``#define XX``"
782idiom that people typically use to prevent multiple inclusion of headers.  If a
783buffer uses this idiom and is subsequently ``#include``'d, the preprocessor can
784simply check to see whether the guarding condition is defined or not.  If so,
785the preprocessor can completely ignore the include of the header.
786
787.. _Parser:
788
789The Parser Library
790==================
791
792This library contains a recursive-descent parser that polls tokens from the
793preprocessor and notifies a client of the parsing progress.
794
795Historically, the parser used to talk to an abstract ``Action`` interface that
796had virtual methods for parse events, for example ``ActOnBinOp()``.  When Clang
797grew C++ support, the parser stopped supporting general ``Action`` clients --
798it now always talks to the :ref:`Sema libray <Sema>`.  However, the Parser
799still accesses AST objects only through opaque types like ``ExprResult`` and
800``StmtResult``.  Only :ref:`Sema <Sema>` looks at the AST node contents of these
801wrappers.
802
803.. _AST:
804
805The AST Library
806===============
807
808.. _Type:
809
810The ``Type`` class and its subclasses
811-------------------------------------
812
813The ``Type`` class (and its subclasses) are an important part of the AST.
814Types are accessed through the ``ASTContext`` class, which implicitly creates
815and uniques them as they are needed.  Types have a couple of non-obvious
816features: 1) they do not capture type qualifiers like ``const`` or ``volatile``
817(see :ref:`QualType <QualType>`), and 2) they implicitly capture typedef
818information.  Once created, types are immutable (unlike decls).
819
820Typedefs in C make semantic analysis a bit more complex than it would be without
821them.  The issue is that we want to capture typedef information and represent it
822in the AST perfectly, but the semantics of operations need to "see through"
823typedefs.  For example, consider this code:
824
825.. code-block:: c++
826
827  void func() {
828    typedef int foo;
829    foo X, *Y;
830    typedef foo *bar;
831    bar Z;
832    *X; // error
833    **Y; // error
834    **Z; // error
835  }
836
837The code above is illegal, and thus we expect there to be diagnostics emitted
838on the annotated lines.  In this example, we expect to get:
839
840.. code-block:: c++
841
842  test.c:6:1: error: indirection requires pointer operand ('foo' invalid)
843    *X; // error
844    ^~
845  test.c:7:1: error: indirection requires pointer operand ('foo' invalid)
846    **Y; // error
847    ^~~
848  test.c:8:1: error: indirection requires pointer operand ('foo' invalid)
849    **Z; // error
850    ^~~
851
852While this example is somewhat silly, it illustrates the point: we want to
853retain typedef information where possible, so that we can emit errors about
854"``std::string``" instead of "``std::basic_string<char, std:...``".  Doing this
855requires properly keeping typedef information (for example, the type of ``X``
856is "``foo``", not "``int``"), and requires properly propagating it through the
857various operators (for example, the type of ``*Y`` is "``foo``", not
858"``int``").  In order to retain this information, the type of these expressions
859is an instance of the ``TypedefType`` class, which indicates that the type of
860these expressions is a typedef for "``foo``".
861
862Representing types like this is great for diagnostics, because the
863user-specified type is always immediately available.  There are two problems
864with this: first, various semantic checks need to make judgements about the
865*actual structure* of a type, ignoring typedefs.  Second, we need an efficient
866way to query whether two types are structurally identical to each other,
867ignoring typedefs.  The solution to both of these problems is the idea of
868canonical types.
869
870Canonical Types
871^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
872
873Every instance of the ``Type`` class contains a canonical type pointer.  For
874simple types with no typedefs involved (e.g., "``int``", "``int*``",
875"``int**``"), the type just points to itself.  For types that have a typedef
876somewhere in their structure (e.g., "``foo``", "``foo*``", "``foo**``",
877"``bar``"), the canonical type pointer points to their structurally equivalent
878type without any typedefs (e.g., "``int``", "``int*``", "``int**``", and
879"``int*``" respectively).
880
881This design provides a constant time operation (dereferencing the canonical type
882pointer) that gives us access to the structure of types.  For example, we can
883trivially tell that "``bar``" and "``foo*``" are the same type by dereferencing
884their canonical type pointers and doing a pointer comparison (they both point
885to the single "``int*``" type).
886
887Canonical types and typedef types bring up some complexities that must be
888carefully managed.  Specifically, the ``isa``/``cast``/``dyn_cast`` operators
889generally shouldn't be used in code that is inspecting the AST.  For example,
890when type checking the indirection operator (unary "``*``" on a pointer), the
891type checker must verify that the operand has a pointer type.  It would not be
892correct to check that with "``isa<PointerType>(SubExpr->getType())``", because
893this predicate would fail if the subexpression had a typedef type.
894
895The solution to this problem are a set of helper methods on ``Type``, used to
896check their properties.  In this case, it would be correct to use
897"``SubExpr->getType()->isPointerType()``" to do the check.  This predicate will
898return true if the *canonical type is a pointer*, which is true any time the
899type is structurally a pointer type.  The only hard part here is remembering
900not to use the ``isa``/``cast``/``dyn_cast`` operations.
901
902The second problem we face is how to get access to the pointer type once we
903know it exists.  To continue the example, the result type of the indirection
904operator is the pointee type of the subexpression.  In order to determine the
905type, we need to get the instance of ``PointerType`` that best captures the
906typedef information in the program.  If the type of the expression is literally
907a ``PointerType``, we can return that, otherwise we have to dig through the
908typedefs to find the pointer type.  For example, if the subexpression had type
909"``foo*``", we could return that type as the result.  If the subexpression had
910type "``bar``", we want to return "``foo*``" (note that we do *not* want
911"``int*``").  In order to provide all of this, ``Type`` has a
912``getAsPointerType()`` method that checks whether the type is structurally a
913``PointerType`` and, if so, returns the best one.  If not, it returns a null
914pointer.
915
916This structure is somewhat mystical, but after meditating on it, it will make
917sense to you :).
918
919.. _QualType:
920
921The ``QualType`` class
922----------------------
923
924The ``QualType`` class is designed as a trivial value class that is small,
925passed by-value and is efficient to query.  The idea of ``QualType`` is that it
926stores the type qualifiers (``const``, ``volatile``, ``restrict``, plus some
927extended qualifiers required by language extensions) separately from the types
928themselves.  ``QualType`` is conceptually a pair of "``Type*``" and the bits
929for these type qualifiers.
930
931By storing the type qualifiers as bits in the conceptual pair, it is extremely
932efficient to get the set of qualifiers on a ``QualType`` (just return the field
933of the pair), add a type qualifier (which is a trivial constant-time operation
934that sets a bit), and remove one or more type qualifiers (just return a
935``QualType`` with the bitfield set to empty).
936
937Further, because the bits are stored outside of the type itself, we do not need
938to create duplicates of types with different sets of qualifiers (i.e. there is
939only a single heap allocated "``int``" type: "``const int``" and "``volatile
940const int``" both point to the same heap allocated "``int``" type).  This
941reduces the heap size used to represent bits and also means we do not have to
942consider qualifiers when uniquing types (:ref:`Type <Type>` does not even
943contain qualifiers).
944
945In practice, the two most common type qualifiers (``const`` and ``restrict``)
946are stored in the low bits of the pointer to the ``Type`` object, together with
947a flag indicating whether extended qualifiers are present (which must be
948heap-allocated).  This means that ``QualType`` is exactly the same size as a
949pointer.
950
951.. _DeclarationName:
952
953Declaration names
954-----------------
955
956The ``DeclarationName`` class represents the name of a declaration in Clang.
957Declarations in the C family of languages can take several different forms.
958Most declarations are named by simple identifiers, e.g., "``f``" and "``x``" in
959the function declaration ``f(int x)``.  In C++, declaration names can also name
960class constructors ("``Class``" in ``struct Class { Class(); }``), class
961destructors ("``~Class``"), overloaded operator names ("``operator+``"), and
962conversion functions ("``operator void const *``").  In Objective-C,
963declaration names can refer to the names of Objective-C methods, which involve
964the method name and the parameters, collectively called a *selector*, e.g.,
965"``setWidth:height:``".  Since all of these kinds of entities --- variables,
966functions, Objective-C methods, C++ constructors, destructors, and operators
967--- are represented as subclasses of Clang's common ``NamedDecl`` class,
968``DeclarationName`` is designed to efficiently represent any kind of name.
969
970Given a ``DeclarationName`` ``N``, ``N.getNameKind()`` will produce a value
971that describes what kind of name ``N`` stores.  There are 10 options (all of
972the names are inside the ``DeclarationName`` class).
973
974``Identifier``
975
976  The name is a simple identifier.  Use ``N.getAsIdentifierInfo()`` to retrieve
977  the corresponding ``IdentifierInfo*`` pointing to the actual identifier.
978
979``ObjCZeroArgSelector``, ``ObjCOneArgSelector``, ``ObjCMultiArgSelector``
980
981  The name is an Objective-C selector, which can be retrieved as a ``Selector``
982  instance via ``N.getObjCSelector()``.  The three possible name kinds for
983  Objective-C reflect an optimization within the ``DeclarationName`` class:
984  both zero- and one-argument selectors are stored as a masked
985  ``IdentifierInfo`` pointer, and therefore require very little space, since
986  zero- and one-argument selectors are far more common than multi-argument
987  selectors (which use a different structure).
988
989``CXXConstructorName``
990
991  The name is a C++ constructor name.  Use ``N.getCXXNameType()`` to retrieve
992  the :ref:`type <QualType>` that this constructor is meant to construct.  The
993  type is always the canonical type, since all constructors for a given type
994  have the same name.
995
996``CXXDestructorName``
997
998  The name is a C++ destructor name.  Use ``N.getCXXNameType()`` to retrieve
999  the :ref:`type <QualType>` whose destructor is being named.  This type is
1000  always a canonical type.
1001
1002``CXXConversionFunctionName``
1003
1004  The name is a C++ conversion function.  Conversion functions are named
1005  according to the type they convert to, e.g., "``operator void const *``".
1006  Use ``N.getCXXNameType()`` to retrieve the type that this conversion function
1007  converts to.  This type is always a canonical type.
1008
1009``CXXOperatorName``
1010
1011  The name is a C++ overloaded operator name.  Overloaded operators are named
1012  according to their spelling, e.g., "``operator+``" or "``operator new []``".
1013  Use ``N.getCXXOverloadedOperator()`` to retrieve the overloaded operator (a
1014  value of type ``OverloadedOperatorKind``).
1015
1016``CXXLiteralOperatorName``
1017
1018  The name is a C++11 user defined literal operator.  User defined
1019  Literal operators are named according to the suffix they define,
1020  e.g., "``_foo``" for "``operator "" _foo``".  Use
1021  ``N.getCXXLiteralIdentifier()`` to retrieve the corresponding
1022  ``IdentifierInfo*`` pointing to the identifier.
1023
1024``CXXUsingDirective``
1025
1026  The name is a C++ using directive.  Using directives are not really
1027  NamedDecls, in that they all have the same name, but they are
1028  implemented as such in order to store them in DeclContext
1029  effectively.
1030
1031``DeclarationName``\ s are cheap to create, copy, and compare.  They require
1032only a single pointer's worth of storage in the common cases (identifiers,
1033zero- and one-argument Objective-C selectors) and use dense, uniqued storage
1034for the other kinds of names.  Two ``DeclarationName``\ s can be compared for
1035equality (``==``, ``!=``) using a simple bitwise comparison, can be ordered
1036with ``<``, ``>``, ``<=``, and ``>=`` (which provide a lexicographical ordering
1037for normal identifiers but an unspecified ordering for other kinds of names),
1038and can be placed into LLVM ``DenseMap``\ s and ``DenseSet``\ s.
1039
1040``DeclarationName`` instances can be created in different ways depending on
1041what kind of name the instance will store.  Normal identifiers
1042(``IdentifierInfo`` pointers) and Objective-C selectors (``Selector``) can be
1043implicitly converted to ``DeclarationNames``.  Names for C++ constructors,
1044destructors, conversion functions, and overloaded operators can be retrieved
1045from the ``DeclarationNameTable``, an instance of which is available as
1046``ASTContext::DeclarationNames``.  The member functions
1047``getCXXConstructorName``, ``getCXXDestructorName``,
1048``getCXXConversionFunctionName``, and ``getCXXOperatorName``, respectively,
1049return ``DeclarationName`` instances for the four kinds of C++ special function
1050names.
1051
1052.. _DeclContext:
1053
1054Declaration contexts
1055--------------------
1056
1057Every declaration in a program exists within some *declaration context*, such
1058as a translation unit, namespace, class, or function.  Declaration contexts in
1059Clang are represented by the ``DeclContext`` class, from which the various
1060declaration-context AST nodes (``TranslationUnitDecl``, ``NamespaceDecl``,
1061``RecordDecl``, ``FunctionDecl``, etc.) will derive.  The ``DeclContext`` class
1062provides several facilities common to each declaration context:
1063
1064Source-centric vs. Semantics-centric View of Declarations
1065
1066  ``DeclContext`` provides two views of the declarations stored within a
1067  declaration context.  The source-centric view accurately represents the
1068  program source code as written, including multiple declarations of entities
1069  where present (see the section :ref:`Redeclarations and Overloads
1070  <Redeclarations>`), while the semantics-centric view represents the program
1071  semantics.  The two views are kept synchronized by semantic analysis while
1072  the ASTs are being constructed.
1073
1074Storage of declarations within that context
1075
1076  Every declaration context can contain some number of declarations.  For
1077  example, a C++ class (represented by ``RecordDecl``) contains various member
1078  functions, fields, nested types, and so on.  All of these declarations will
1079  be stored within the ``DeclContext``, and one can iterate over the
1080  declarations via [``DeclContext::decls_begin()``,
1081  ``DeclContext::decls_end()``).  This mechanism provides the source-centric
1082  view of declarations in the context.
1083
1084Lookup of declarations within that context
1085
1086  The ``DeclContext`` structure provides efficient name lookup for names within
1087  that declaration context.  For example, if ``N`` is a namespace we can look
1088  for the name ``N::f`` using ``DeclContext::lookup``.  The lookup itself is
1089  based on a lazily-constructed array (for declaration contexts with a small
1090  number of declarations) or hash table (for declaration contexts with more
1091  declarations).  The lookup operation provides the semantics-centric view of
1092  the declarations in the context.
1093
1094Ownership of declarations
1095
1096  The ``DeclContext`` owns all of the declarations that were declared within
1097  its declaration context, and is responsible for the management of their
1098  memory as well as their (de-)serialization.
1099
1100All declarations are stored within a declaration context, and one can query
1101information about the context in which each declaration lives.  One can
1102retrieve the ``DeclContext`` that contains a particular ``Decl`` using
1103``Decl::getDeclContext``.  However, see the section
1104:ref:`LexicalAndSemanticContexts` for more information about how to interpret
1105this context information.
1106
1107.. _Redeclarations:
1108
1109Redeclarations and Overloads
1110^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
1111
1112Within a translation unit, it is common for an entity to be declared several
1113times.  For example, we might declare a function "``f``" and then later
1114re-declare it as part of an inlined definition:
1115
1116.. code-block:: c++
1117
1118  void f(int x, int y, int z = 1);
1119
1120  inline void f(int x, int y, int z) { /* ...  */ }
1121
1122The representation of "``f``" differs in the source-centric and
1123semantics-centric views of a declaration context.  In the source-centric view,
1124all redeclarations will be present, in the order they occurred in the source
1125code, making this view suitable for clients that wish to see the structure of
1126the source code.  In the semantics-centric view, only the most recent "``f``"
1127will be found by the lookup, since it effectively replaces the first
1128declaration of "``f``".
1129
1130In the semantics-centric view, overloading of functions is represented
1131explicitly.  For example, given two declarations of a function "``g``" that are
1132overloaded, e.g.,
1133
1134.. code-block:: c++
1135
1136  void g();
1137  void g(int);
1138
1139the ``DeclContext::lookup`` operation will return a
1140``DeclContext::lookup_result`` that contains a range of iterators over
1141declarations of "``g``".  Clients that perform semantic analysis on a program
1142that is not concerned with the actual source code will primarily use this
1143semantics-centric view.
1144
1145.. _LexicalAndSemanticContexts:
1146
1147Lexical and Semantic Contexts
1148^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
1149
1150Each declaration has two potentially different declaration contexts: a
1151*lexical* context, which corresponds to the source-centric view of the
1152declaration context, and a *semantic* context, which corresponds to the
1153semantics-centric view.  The lexical context is accessible via
1154``Decl::getLexicalDeclContext`` while the semantic context is accessible via
1155``Decl::getDeclContext``, both of which return ``DeclContext`` pointers.  For
1156most declarations, the two contexts are identical.  For example:
1157
1158.. code-block:: c++
1159
1160  class X {
1161  public:
1162    void f(int x);
1163  };
1164
1165Here, the semantic and lexical contexts of ``X::f`` are the ``DeclContext``
1166associated with the class ``X`` (itself stored as a ``RecordDecl`` AST node).
1167However, we can now define ``X::f`` out-of-line:
1168
1169.. code-block:: c++
1170
1171  void X::f(int x = 17) { /* ...  */ }
1172
1173This definition of "``f``" has different lexical and semantic contexts.  The
1174lexical context corresponds to the declaration context in which the actual
1175declaration occurred in the source code, e.g., the translation unit containing
1176``X``.  Thus, this declaration of ``X::f`` can be found by traversing the
1177declarations provided by [``decls_begin()``, ``decls_end()``) in the
1178translation unit.
1179
1180The semantic context of ``X::f`` corresponds to the class ``X``, since this
1181member function is (semantically) a member of ``X``.  Lookup of the name ``f``
1182into the ``DeclContext`` associated with ``X`` will then return the definition
1183of ``X::f`` (including information about the default argument).
1184
1185Transparent Declaration Contexts
1186^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
1187
1188In C and C++, there are several contexts in which names that are logically
1189declared inside another declaration will actually "leak" out into the enclosing
1190scope from the perspective of name lookup.  The most obvious instance of this
1191behavior is in enumeration types, e.g.,
1192
1193.. code-block:: c++
1194
1195  enum Color {
1196    Red,
1197    Green,
1198    Blue
1199  };
1200
1201Here, ``Color`` is an enumeration, which is a declaration context that contains
1202the enumerators ``Red``, ``Green``, and ``Blue``.  Thus, traversing the list of
1203declarations contained in the enumeration ``Color`` will yield ``Red``,
1204``Green``, and ``Blue``.  However, outside of the scope of ``Color`` one can
1205name the enumerator ``Red`` without qualifying the name, e.g.,
1206
1207.. code-block:: c++
1208
1209  Color c = Red;
1210
1211There are other entities in C++ that provide similar behavior.  For example,
1212linkage specifications that use curly braces:
1213
1214.. code-block:: c++
1215
1216  extern "C" {
1217    void f(int);
1218    void g(int);
1219  }
1220  // f and g are visible here
1221
1222For source-level accuracy, we treat the linkage specification and enumeration
1223type as a declaration context in which its enclosed declarations ("``Red``",
1224"``Green``", and "``Blue``"; "``f``" and "``g``") are declared.  However, these
1225declarations are visible outside of the scope of the declaration context.
1226
1227These language features (and several others, described below) have roughly the
1228same set of requirements: declarations are declared within a particular lexical
1229context, but the declarations are also found via name lookup in scopes
1230enclosing the declaration itself.  This feature is implemented via
1231*transparent* declaration contexts (see
1232``DeclContext::isTransparentContext()``), whose declarations are visible in the
1233nearest enclosing non-transparent declaration context.  This means that the
1234lexical context of the declaration (e.g., an enumerator) will be the
1235transparent ``DeclContext`` itself, as will the semantic context, but the
1236declaration will be visible in every outer context up to and including the
1237first non-transparent declaration context (since transparent declaration
1238contexts can be nested).
1239
1240The transparent ``DeclContext``\ s are:
1241
1242* Enumerations (but not C++11 "scoped enumerations"):
1243
1244  .. code-block:: c++
1245
1246    enum Color {
1247      Red,
1248      Green,
1249      Blue
1250    };
1251    // Red, Green, and Blue are in scope
1252
1253* C++ linkage specifications:
1254
1255  .. code-block:: c++
1256
1257    extern "C" {
1258      void f(int);
1259      void g(int);
1260    }
1261    // f and g are in scope
1262
1263* Anonymous unions and structs:
1264
1265  .. code-block:: c++
1266
1267    struct LookupTable {
1268      bool IsVector;
1269      union {
1270        std::vector<Item> *Vector;
1271        std::set<Item> *Set;
1272      };
1273    };
1274
1275    LookupTable LT;
1276    LT.Vector = 0; // Okay: finds Vector inside the unnamed union
1277
1278* C++11 inline namespaces:
1279
1280  .. code-block:: c++
1281
1282    namespace mylib {
1283      inline namespace debug {
1284        class X;
1285      }
1286    }
1287    mylib::X *xp; // okay: mylib::X refers to mylib::debug::X
1288
1289.. _MultiDeclContext:
1290
1291Multiply-Defined Declaration Contexts
1292^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
1293
1294C++ namespaces have the interesting --- and, so far, unique --- property that
1295the namespace can be defined multiple times, and the declarations provided by
1296each namespace definition are effectively merged (from the semantic point of
1297view).  For example, the following two code snippets are semantically
1298indistinguishable:
1299
1300.. code-block:: c++
1301
1302  // Snippet #1:
1303  namespace N {
1304    void f();
1305  }
1306  namespace N {
1307    void f(int);
1308  }
1309
1310  // Snippet #2:
1311  namespace N {
1312    void f();
1313    void f(int);
1314  }
1315
1316In Clang's representation, the source-centric view of declaration contexts will
1317actually have two separate ``NamespaceDecl`` nodes in Snippet #1, each of which
1318is a declaration context that contains a single declaration of "``f``".
1319However, the semantics-centric view provided by name lookup into the namespace
1320``N`` for "``f``" will return a ``DeclContext::lookup_result`` that contains a
1321range of iterators over declarations of "``f``".
1322
1323``DeclContext`` manages multiply-defined declaration contexts internally.  The
1324function ``DeclContext::getPrimaryContext`` retrieves the "primary" context for
1325a given ``DeclContext`` instance, which is the ``DeclContext`` responsible for
1326maintaining the lookup table used for the semantics-centric view.  Given a
1327DeclContext, one can obtain the set of declaration contexts that are semanticaly
1328connected to this declaration context, in source order, including this context
1329(which will be the only result, for non-namespace contexts) via
1330``DeclContext::collectAllContexts``. Note that these functions are used
1331internally within the lookup and insertion methods of the ``DeclContext``, so
1332the vast majority of clients can ignore them.
1333
1334.. _CFG:
1335
1336The ``CFG`` class
1337-----------------
1338
1339The ``CFG`` class is designed to represent a source-level control-flow graph
1340for a single statement (``Stmt*``).  Typically instances of ``CFG`` are
1341constructed for function bodies (usually an instance of ``CompoundStmt``), but
1342can also be instantiated to represent the control-flow of any class that
1343subclasses ``Stmt``, which includes simple expressions.  Control-flow graphs
1344are especially useful for performing `flow- or path-sensitive
1345<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_flow_analysis#Sensitivities>`_ program
1346analyses on a given function.
1347
1348Basic Blocks
1349^^^^^^^^^^^^
1350
1351Concretely, an instance of ``CFG`` is a collection of basic blocks.  Each basic
1352block is an instance of ``CFGBlock``, which simply contains an ordered sequence
1353of ``Stmt*`` (each referring to statements in the AST).  The ordering of
1354statements within a block indicates unconditional flow of control from one
1355statement to the next.  :ref:`Conditional control-flow
1356<ConditionalControlFlow>` is represented using edges between basic blocks.  The
1357statements within a given ``CFGBlock`` can be traversed using the
1358``CFGBlock::*iterator`` interface.
1359
1360A ``CFG`` object owns the instances of ``CFGBlock`` within the control-flow
1361graph it represents.  Each ``CFGBlock`` within a CFG is also uniquely numbered
1362(accessible via ``CFGBlock::getBlockID()``).  Currently the number is based on
1363the ordering the blocks were created, but no assumptions should be made on how
1364``CFGBlocks`` are numbered other than their numbers are unique and that they
1365are numbered from 0..N-1 (where N is the number of basic blocks in the CFG).
1366
1367Entry and Exit Blocks
1368^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
1369
1370Each instance of ``CFG`` contains two special blocks: an *entry* block
1371(accessible via ``CFG::getEntry()``), which has no incoming edges, and an
1372*exit* block (accessible via ``CFG::getExit()``), which has no outgoing edges.
1373Neither block contains any statements, and they serve the role of providing a
1374clear entrance and exit for a body of code such as a function body.  The
1375presence of these empty blocks greatly simplifies the implementation of many
1376analyses built on top of CFGs.
1377
1378.. _ConditionalControlFlow:
1379
1380Conditional Control-Flow
1381^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
1382
1383Conditional control-flow (such as those induced by if-statements and loops) is
1384represented as edges between ``CFGBlocks``.  Because different C language
1385constructs can induce control-flow, each ``CFGBlock`` also records an extra
1386``Stmt*`` that represents the *terminator* of the block.  A terminator is
1387simply the statement that caused the control-flow, and is used to identify the
1388nature of the conditional control-flow between blocks.  For example, in the
1389case of an if-statement, the terminator refers to the ``IfStmt`` object in the
1390AST that represented the given branch.
1391
1392To illustrate, consider the following code example:
1393
1394.. code-block:: c++
1395
1396  int foo(int x) {
1397    x = x + 1;
1398    if (x > 2)
1399      x++;
1400    else {
1401      x += 2;
1402      x *= 2;
1403    }
1404
1405    return x;
1406  }
1407
1408After invoking the parser+semantic analyzer on this code fragment, the AST of
1409the body of ``foo`` is referenced by a single ``Stmt*``.  We can then construct
1410an instance of ``CFG`` representing the control-flow graph of this function
1411body by single call to a static class method:
1412
1413.. code-block:: c++
1414
1415  Stmt *FooBody = ...
1416  std::unique_ptr<CFG> FooCFG = CFG::buildCFG(FooBody);
1417
1418Along with providing an interface to iterate over its ``CFGBlocks``, the
1419``CFG`` class also provides methods that are useful for debugging and
1420visualizing CFGs.  For example, the method ``CFG::dump()`` dumps a
1421pretty-printed version of the CFG to standard error.  This is especially useful
1422when one is using a debugger such as gdb.  For example, here is the output of
1423``FooCFG->dump()``:
1424
1425.. code-block:: c++
1426
1427 [ B5 (ENTRY) ]
1428    Predecessors (0):
1429    Successors (1): B4
1430
1431 [ B4 ]
1432    1: x = x + 1
1433    2: (x > 2)
1434    T: if [B4.2]
1435    Predecessors (1): B5
1436    Successors (2): B3 B2
1437
1438 [ B3 ]
1439    1: x++
1440    Predecessors (1): B4
1441    Successors (1): B1
1442
1443 [ B2 ]
1444    1: x += 2
1445    2: x *= 2
1446    Predecessors (1): B4
1447    Successors (1): B1
1448
1449 [ B1 ]
1450    1: return x;
1451    Predecessors (2): B2 B3
1452    Successors (1): B0
1453
1454 [ B0 (EXIT) ]
1455    Predecessors (1): B1
1456    Successors (0):
1457
1458For each block, the pretty-printed output displays for each block the number of
1459*predecessor* blocks (blocks that have outgoing control-flow to the given
1460block) and *successor* blocks (blocks that have control-flow that have incoming
1461control-flow from the given block).  We can also clearly see the special entry
1462and exit blocks at the beginning and end of the pretty-printed output.  For the
1463entry block (block B5), the number of predecessor blocks is 0, while for the
1464exit block (block B0) the number of successor blocks is 0.
1465
1466The most interesting block here is B4, whose outgoing control-flow represents
1467the branching caused by the sole if-statement in ``foo``.  Of particular
1468interest is the second statement in the block, ``(x > 2)``, and the terminator,
1469printed as ``if [B4.2]``.  The second statement represents the evaluation of
1470the condition of the if-statement, which occurs before the actual branching of
1471control-flow.  Within the ``CFGBlock`` for B4, the ``Stmt*`` for the second
1472statement refers to the actual expression in the AST for ``(x > 2)``.  Thus
1473pointers to subclasses of ``Expr`` can appear in the list of statements in a
1474block, and not just subclasses of ``Stmt`` that refer to proper C statements.
1475
1476The terminator of block B4 is a pointer to the ``IfStmt`` object in the AST.
1477The pretty-printer outputs ``if [B4.2]`` because the condition expression of
1478the if-statement has an actual place in the basic block, and thus the
1479terminator is essentially *referring* to the expression that is the second
1480statement of block B4 (i.e., B4.2).  In this manner, conditions for
1481control-flow (which also includes conditions for loops and switch statements)
1482are hoisted into the actual basic block.
1483
1484.. Implicit Control-Flow
1485.. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
1486
1487.. A key design principle of the ``CFG`` class was to not require any
1488.. transformations to the AST in order to represent control-flow.  Thus the
1489.. ``CFG`` does not perform any "lowering" of the statements in an AST: loops
1490.. are not transformed into guarded gotos, short-circuit operations are not
1491.. converted to a set of if-statements, and so on.
1492
1493Constant Folding in the Clang AST
1494---------------------------------
1495
1496There are several places where constants and constant folding matter a lot to
1497the Clang front-end.  First, in general, we prefer the AST to retain the source
1498code as close to how the user wrote it as possible.  This means that if they
1499wrote "``5+4``", we want to keep the addition and two constants in the AST, we
1500don't want to fold to "``9``".  This means that constant folding in various
1501ways turns into a tree walk that needs to handle the various cases.
1502
1503However, there are places in both C and C++ that require constants to be
1504folded.  For example, the C standard defines what an "integer constant
1505expression" (i-c-e) is with very precise and specific requirements.  The
1506language then requires i-c-e's in a lot of places (for example, the size of a
1507bitfield, the value for a case statement, etc).  For these, we have to be able
1508to constant fold the constants, to do semantic checks (e.g., verify bitfield
1509size is non-negative and that case statements aren't duplicated).  We aim for
1510Clang to be very pedantic about this, diagnosing cases when the code does not
1511use an i-c-e where one is required, but accepting the code unless running with
1512``-pedantic-errors``.
1513
1514Things get a little bit more tricky when it comes to compatibility with
1515real-world source code.  Specifically, GCC has historically accepted a huge
1516superset of expressions as i-c-e's, and a lot of real world code depends on
1517this unfortuate accident of history (including, e.g., the glibc system
1518headers).  GCC accepts anything its "fold" optimizer is capable of reducing to
1519an integer constant, which means that the definition of what it accepts changes
1520as its optimizer does.  One example is that GCC accepts things like "``case
1521X-X:``" even when ``X`` is a variable, because it can fold this to 0.
1522
1523Another issue are how constants interact with the extensions we support, such
1524as ``__builtin_constant_p``, ``__builtin_inf``, ``__extension__`` and many
1525others.  C99 obviously does not specify the semantics of any of these
1526extensions, and the definition of i-c-e does not include them.  However, these
1527extensions are often used in real code, and we have to have a way to reason
1528about them.
1529
1530Finally, this is not just a problem for semantic analysis.  The code generator
1531and other clients have to be able to fold constants (e.g., to initialize global
1532variables) and has to handle a superset of what C99 allows.  Further, these
1533clients can benefit from extended information.  For example, we know that
1534"``foo() || 1``" always evaluates to ``true``, but we can't replace the
1535expression with ``true`` because it has side effects.
1536
1537Implementation Approach
1538^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
1539
1540After trying several different approaches, we've finally converged on a design
1541(Note, at the time of this writing, not all of this has been implemented,
1542consider this a design goal!).  Our basic approach is to define a single
1543recursive method evaluation method (``Expr::Evaluate``), which is implemented
1544in ``AST/ExprConstant.cpp``.  Given an expression with "scalar" type (integer,
1545fp, complex, or pointer) this method returns the following information:
1546
1547* Whether the expression is an integer constant expression, a general constant
1548  that was folded but has no side effects, a general constant that was folded
1549  but that does have side effects, or an uncomputable/unfoldable value.
1550* If the expression was computable in any way, this method returns the
1551  ``APValue`` for the result of the expression.
1552* If the expression is not evaluatable at all, this method returns information
1553  on one of the problems with the expression.  This includes a
1554  ``SourceLocation`` for where the problem is, and a diagnostic ID that explains
1555  the problem.  The diagnostic should have ``ERROR`` type.
1556* If the expression is not an integer constant expression, this method returns
1557  information on one of the problems with the expression.  This includes a
1558  ``SourceLocation`` for where the problem is, and a diagnostic ID that
1559  explains the problem.  The diagnostic should have ``EXTENSION`` type.
1560
1561This information gives various clients the flexibility that they want, and we
1562will eventually have some helper methods for various extensions.  For example,
1563``Sema`` should have a ``Sema::VerifyIntegerConstantExpression`` method, which
1564calls ``Evaluate`` on the expression.  If the expression is not foldable, the
1565error is emitted, and it would return ``true``.  If the expression is not an
1566i-c-e, the ``EXTENSION`` diagnostic is emitted.  Finally it would return
1567``false`` to indicate that the AST is OK.
1568
1569Other clients can use the information in other ways, for example, codegen can
1570just use expressions that are foldable in any way.
1571
1572Extensions
1573^^^^^^^^^^
1574
1575This section describes how some of the various extensions Clang supports
1576interacts with constant evaluation:
1577
1578* ``__extension__``: The expression form of this extension causes any
1579  evaluatable subexpression to be accepted as an integer constant expression.
1580* ``__builtin_constant_p``: This returns true (as an integer constant
1581  expression) if the operand evaluates to either a numeric value (that is, not
1582  a pointer cast to integral type) of integral, enumeration, floating or
1583  complex type, or if it evaluates to the address of the first character of a
1584  string literal (possibly cast to some other type).  As a special case, if
1585  ``__builtin_constant_p`` is the (potentially parenthesized) condition of a
1586  conditional operator expression ("``?:``"), only the true side of the
1587  conditional operator is considered, and it is evaluated with full constant
1588  folding.
1589* ``__builtin_choose_expr``: The condition is required to be an integer
1590  constant expression, but we accept any constant as an "extension of an
1591  extension".  This only evaluates one operand depending on which way the
1592  condition evaluates.
1593* ``__builtin_classify_type``: This always returns an integer constant
1594  expression.
1595* ``__builtin_inf, nan, ...``: These are treated just like a floating-point
1596  literal.
1597* ``__builtin_abs, copysign, ...``: These are constant folded as general
1598  constant expressions.
1599* ``__builtin_strlen`` and ``strlen``: These are constant folded as integer
1600  constant expressions if the argument is a string literal.
1601
1602.. _Sema:
1603
1604The Sema Library
1605================
1606
1607This library is called by the :ref:`Parser library <Parser>` during parsing to
1608do semantic analysis of the input.  For valid programs, Sema builds an AST for
1609parsed constructs.
1610
1611.. _CodeGen:
1612
1613The CodeGen Library
1614===================
1615
1616CodeGen takes an :ref:`AST <AST>` as input and produces `LLVM IR code
1617<//llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html>`_ from it.
1618
1619How to change Clang
1620===================
1621
1622How to add an attribute
1623-----------------------
1624
1625Attribute Basics
1626^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
1627
1628Attributes in clang come in two forms: parsed form, and semantic form. Both
1629forms are represented via a tablegen definition of the attribute, specified in
1630Attr.td.
1631
1632
1633``include/clang/Basic/Attr.td``
1634^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
1635
1636First, add your attribute to the `include/clang/Basic/Attr.td
1637<http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/Attr.td?view=markup>`_
1638file.
1639
1640Each attribute gets a ``def`` inheriting from ``Attr`` or one of its
1641subclasses.  ``InheritableAttr`` means that the attribute also applies to
1642subsequent declarations of the same name.  ``InheritableParamAttr`` is similar
1643to ``InheritableAttr``, except that the attribute is written on a parameter
1644instead of a declaration, type or statement.  Attributes inheriting from
1645``TypeAttr`` are pure type attributes which generally are not given a
1646representation in the AST.  Attributes inheriting from ``TargetSpecificAttr``
1647are attributes specific to one or more target architectures.  An attribute that
1648inherits from ``IgnoredAttr`` is parsed, but will generate an ignored attribute
1649diagnostic when used.  The attribute type may be useful when an attribute is
1650supported by another vendor, but not supported by clang.
1651
1652``Spellings`` lists the strings that can appear in ``__attribute__((here))`` or
1653``[[here]]``.  All such strings will be synonymous.  Possible ``Spellings``
1654are: ``GNU`` (for use with GNU-style __attribute__ spellings), ``Declspec``
1655(for use with Microsoft Visual Studio-style __declspec spellings), ``CXX11`
1656(for use with C++11-style [[foo]] and [[foo::bar]] spellings), and ``Keyword``
1657(for use with attributes that are implemented as keywords, like C++11's
1658``override`` or ``final``). If you want to allow the ``[[]]`` C++11 syntax, you
1659have to define a list of ``Namespaces``, which will let users write
1660``[[namespace::spelling]]``.  Using the empty string for a namespace will allow
1661users to write just the spelling with no "``::``".  Attributes which g++-4.8
1662or later accepts should also have a ``CXX11<"gnu", "spelling">`` spelling.
1663
1664``Subjects`` restricts what kinds of AST node to which this attribute can
1665appertain (roughly, attach).  The subjects are specified via a ``SubjectList``,
1666which specify the list of subjects. Additionally, subject-related diagnostics
1667can be specified to be warnings or errors, with the default being a warning.
1668The diagnostics displayed to the user are automatically determined based on
1669the subjects in the list, but a custom diagnostic parameter can also be
1670specified in the ``SubjectList``.  The diagnostics generated for subject list
1671violations are either ``diag::warn_attribute_wrong_decl_type`` or
1672``diag::err_attribute_wrong_decl_type``, and the parameter enumeration is
1673found in `include/clang/Sema/AttributeList.h
1674<http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/include/clang/Sema/AttributeList.h?view=markup>`_
1675If you add new Decl nodes to the ``SubjectList``, you may need to update the
1676logic used to automatically determine the diagnostic parameter in `utils/TableGen/ClangAttrEmitter.cpp
1677<http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/utils/TableGen/ClangAttrEmitter.cpp?view=markup>`_.
1678
1679Diagnostic checking for attribute subject lists is automated except when
1680``HasCustomParsing`` is set to ``1``.
1681
1682By default, all subjects in the SubjectList must either be a Decl node defined
1683in ``DeclNodes.td``, or a statement node defined in ``StmtNodes.td``.  However,
1684more complex subjects can be created by creating a ``SubsetSubject`` object.
1685Each such object has a base subject which it appertains to (which must be a
1686Decl or Stmt node, and not a SubsetSubject node), and some custom code which is
1687called when determining whether an attribute appertains to the subject.  For
1688instance, a ``NonBitField`` SubsetSubject appertains to a ``FieldDecl``, and
1689tests whether the given FieldDecl is a bit field.  When a SubsetSubject is
1690specified in a SubjectList, a custom diagnostic parameter must also be provided.
1691
1692``Args`` names the arguments the attribute takes, in order.  If ``Args`` is
1693``[StringArgument<"Arg1">, IntArgument<"Arg2">]`` then
1694``__attribute__((myattribute("Hello", 3)))`` will be a valid use.  Attribute
1695arguments specify both the parsed form and the semantic form of the attribute.
1696The previous example shows an attribute which requires two attributes while
1697parsing, and the Attr subclass' constructor for the attribute will require a
1698string and integer argument.
1699
1700Diagnostic checking for argument counts is automated except when
1701``HasCustomParsing`` is set to ``1``, or when the attribute uses an optional or
1702variadic argument.  Diagnostic checking for argument semantics is not automated.
1703
1704If the parsed form of the attribute is more complex, or differs from the
1705semantic form, the ``HasCustomParsing`` bit can be set to ``1`` for the class,
1706and the parsing code in `Parser::ParseGNUAttributeArgs
1707<http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/lib/Parse/ParseDecl.cpp?view=markup>`_
1708can be updated for the special case.  Note that this only applies to arguments
1709with a GNU spelling -- attributes with a __declspec spelling currently ignore
1710this flag and are handled by ``Parser::ParseMicrosoftDeclSpec``.
1711
1712Custom accessors can be generated for an attribute based on the spelling list
1713for that attribute.  For instance, if an attribute has two different spellings:
1714'Foo' and 'Bar', accessors can be created:
1715``[Accessor<"isFoo", [GNU<"Foo">]>, Accessor<"isBar", [GNU<"Bar">]>]``
1716These accessors will be generated on the semantic form of the attribute,
1717accepting no arguments and returning a Boolean.
1718
1719Attributes which do not require an AST node should set the ``ASTNode`` field to
1720``0`` to avoid polluting the AST.  Note that anything inheriting from
1721``TypeAttr`` or ``IgnoredAttr`` automatically do not generate an AST node.  All
1722other attributes generate an AST node by default.  The AST node is the semantic
1723representation of the attribute.
1724
1725Attributes which do not require custom semantic handling should set the
1726``SemaHandler`` field to ``0``.  Note that anything inheriting from
1727``IgnoredAttr`` automatically do not get a semantic handler.  All other
1728attributes are assumed to use a semantic handler by default.  Attributes
1729without a semantic handler are not given a parsed attribute Kind enumeration.
1730
1731The ``LangOpts`` field can be used to specify a list of language options
1732required by the attribute.  For instance, all of the CUDA-specific attributes
1733specify ``[CUDA]`` for the ``LangOpts`` field, and when the CUDA language
1734option is not enabled, an "attribute ignored" warning diagnostic is emitted.
1735Since language options are not table generated nodes, new language options must
1736be created manually and should specify the spelling used by ``LangOptions`` class.
1737
1738Target-specific attribute sometimes share a spelling with other attributes in
1739different targets.  For instance, the ARM and MSP430 targets both have an
1740attribute spelled ``GNU<"interrupt">``, but with different parsing and semantic
1741requirements.  To support this feature, an attribute inheriting from
1742``TargetSpecificAttribute`` make specify a ``ParseKind`` field.  This field
1743should be the same value between all arguments sharing a spelling, and
1744corresponds to the parsed attribute's Kind enumeration.  This allows attributes
1745to share a parsed attribute kind, but have distinct semantic attribute classes.
1746For instance, ``AttributeList::AT_Interrupt`` is the shared parsed attribute
1747kind, but ARMInterruptAttr and MSP430InterruptAttr are the semantic attributes
1748generated.
1749
1750By default, when declarations are merging attributes, an attribute will not be
1751duplicated. However, if an attribute can be duplicated during this merging
1752stage, set ``DuplicatesAllowedWhileMerging`` to ``1``, and the attribute will
1753be merged.
1754
1755By default, attribute arguments are parsed in an evaluated context. If the
1756arguments for an attribute should be parsed in an unevaluated context (akin to
1757the way the argument to a ``sizeof`` expression is parsed), you can set
1758``ParseArgumentsAsUnevaluated`` to ``1``.
1759
1760If additional functionality is desired for the semantic form of the attribute,
1761the ``AdditionalMembers`` field specifies code to be copied verbatim into the
1762semantic attribute class object.
1763
1764All attributes must have one or more form of documentation, which is provided
1765in the ``Documentation`` list. Generally, the documentation for an attribute
1766is a stand-alone definition in `include/clang/Basic/AttrDocs.td
1767<http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/AttdDocs.td?view=markup>`_
1768that is named after the attribute being documented. Each documentation element
1769is given a ``Category`` (variable, function, or type) and ``Content``. A single
1770attribute may contain multiple documentation elements for distinct categories.
1771For instance, an attribute which can appertain to both function and types (such
1772as a calling convention attribute), should contain two documentation elements.
1773The ``Content`` for an attribute uses reStructuredText (RST) syntax.
1774
1775If an attribute is used internally by the compiler, but is not written by users
1776(such as attributes with an empty spelling list), it can use the
1777``Undocumented`` documentation element.
1778
1779Boilerplate
1780^^^^^^^^^^^
1781
1782All semantic processing of declaration attributes happens in `lib/Sema/SemaDeclAttr.cpp
1783<http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaDeclAttr.cpp?view=markup>`_,
1784and generally starts in the ``ProcessDeclAttribute`` function.  If your
1785attribute is a "simple" attribute -- meaning that it requires no custom
1786semantic processing aside from what is automatically  provided for you, you can
1787add a call to ``handleSimpleAttribute<YourAttr>(S, D, Attr);`` to the switch
1788statement. Otherwise, write a new ``handleYourAttr()`` function, and add that
1789to the switch statement.
1790
1791If your attribute causes extra warnings to fire, define a ``DiagGroup`` in
1792`include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticGroups.td
1793<http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticGroups.td?view=markup>`_
1794named after the attribute's ``Spelling`` with "_"s replaced by "-"s.  If you're
1795only defining one diagnostic, you can skip ``DiagnosticGroups.td`` and use
1796``InGroup<DiagGroup<"your-attribute">>`` directly in `DiagnosticSemaKinds.td
1797<http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td?view=markup>`_
1798
1799All semantic diagnostics generated for your attribute, including automatically-
1800generated ones (such as subjects and argument counts), should have a
1801corresponding test case.
1802
1803The meat of your attribute
1804^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
1805
1806Find an appropriate place in Clang to do whatever your attribute needs to do.
1807Check for the attribute's presence using ``Decl::getAttr<YourAttr>()``.
1808
1809Update the :doc:`LanguageExtensions` document to describe your new attribute.
1810
1811How to add an expression or statement
1812-------------------------------------
1813
1814Expressions and statements are one of the most fundamental constructs within a
1815compiler, because they interact with many different parts of the AST, semantic
1816analysis, and IR generation.  Therefore, adding a new expression or statement
1817kind into Clang requires some care.  The following list details the various
1818places in Clang where an expression or statement needs to be introduced, along
1819with patterns to follow to ensure that the new expression or statement works
1820well across all of the C languages.  We focus on expressions, but statements
1821are similar.
1822
1823#. Introduce parsing actions into the parser.  Recursive-descent parsing is
1824   mostly self-explanatory, but there are a few things that are worth keeping
1825   in mind:
1826
1827   * Keep as much source location information as possible! You'll want it later
1828     to produce great diagnostics and support Clang's various features that map
1829     between source code and the AST.
1830   * Write tests for all of the "bad" parsing cases, to make sure your recovery
1831     is good.  If you have matched delimiters (e.g., parentheses, square
1832     brackets, etc.), use ``Parser::BalancedDelimiterTracker`` to give nice
1833     diagnostics when things go wrong.
1834
1835#. Introduce semantic analysis actions into ``Sema``.  Semantic analysis should
1836   always involve two functions: an ``ActOnXXX`` function that will be called
1837   directly from the parser, and a ``BuildXXX`` function that performs the
1838   actual semantic analysis and will (eventually!) build the AST node.  It's
1839   fairly common for the ``ActOnCXX`` function to do very little (often just
1840   some minor translation from the parser's representation to ``Sema``'s
1841   representation of the same thing), but the separation is still important:
1842   C++ template instantiation, for example, should always call the ``BuildXXX``
1843   variant.  Several notes on semantic analysis before we get into construction
1844   of the AST:
1845
1846   * Your expression probably involves some types and some subexpressions.
1847     Make sure to fully check that those types, and the types of those
1848     subexpressions, meet your expectations.  Add implicit conversions where
1849     necessary to make sure that all of the types line up exactly the way you
1850     want them.  Write extensive tests to check that you're getting good
1851     diagnostics for mistakes and that you can use various forms of
1852     subexpressions with your expression.
1853   * When type-checking a type or subexpression, make sure to first check
1854     whether the type is "dependent" (``Type::isDependentType()``) or whether a
1855     subexpression is type-dependent (``Expr::isTypeDependent()``).  If any of
1856     these return ``true``, then you're inside a template and you can't do much
1857     type-checking now.  That's normal, and your AST node (when you get there)
1858     will have to deal with this case.  At this point, you can write tests that
1859     use your expression within templates, but don't try to instantiate the
1860     templates.
1861   * For each subexpression, be sure to call ``Sema::CheckPlaceholderExpr()``
1862     to deal with "weird" expressions that don't behave well as subexpressions.
1863     Then, determine whether you need to perform lvalue-to-rvalue conversions
1864     (``Sema::DefaultLvalueConversions``) or the usual unary conversions
1865     (``Sema::UsualUnaryConversions``), for places where the subexpression is
1866     producing a value you intend to use.
1867   * Your ``BuildXXX`` function will probably just return ``ExprError()`` at
1868     this point, since you don't have an AST.  That's perfectly fine, and
1869     shouldn't impact your testing.
1870
1871#. Introduce an AST node for your new expression.  This starts with declaring
1872   the node in ``include/Basic/StmtNodes.td`` and creating a new class for your
1873   expression in the appropriate ``include/AST/Expr*.h`` header.  It's best to
1874   look at the class for a similar expression to get ideas, and there are some
1875   specific things to watch for:
1876
1877   * If you need to allocate memory, use the ``ASTContext`` allocator to
1878     allocate memory.  Never use raw ``malloc`` or ``new``, and never hold any
1879     resources in an AST node, because the destructor of an AST node is never
1880     called.
1881   * Make sure that ``getSourceRange()`` covers the exact source range of your
1882     expression.  This is needed for diagnostics and for IDE support.
1883   * Make sure that ``children()`` visits all of the subexpressions.  This is
1884     important for a number of features (e.g., IDE support, C++ variadic
1885     templates).  If you have sub-types, you'll also need to visit those
1886     sub-types in ``RecursiveASTVisitor`` and ``DataRecursiveASTVisitor``.
1887   * Add printing support (``StmtPrinter.cpp``) for your expression.
1888   * Add profiling support (``StmtProfile.cpp``) for your AST node, noting the
1889     distinguishing (non-source location) characteristics of an instance of
1890     your expression.  Omitting this step will lead to hard-to-diagnose
1891     failures regarding matching of template declarations.
1892   * Add serialization support (``ASTReaderStmt.cpp``, ``ASTWriterStmt.cpp``)
1893     for your AST node.
1894
1895#. Teach semantic analysis to build your AST node.  At this point, you can wire
1896   up your ``Sema::BuildXXX`` function to actually create your AST.  A few
1897   things to check at this point:
1898
1899   * If your expression can construct a new C++ class or return a new
1900     Objective-C object, be sure to update and then call
1901     ``Sema::MaybeBindToTemporary`` for your just-created AST node to be sure
1902     that the object gets properly destructed.  An easy way to test this is to
1903     return a C++ class with a private destructor: semantic analysis should
1904     flag an error here with the attempt to call the destructor.
1905   * Inspect the generated AST by printing it using ``clang -cc1 -ast-print``,
1906     to make sure you're capturing all of the important information about how
1907     the AST was written.
1908   * Inspect the generated AST under ``clang -cc1 -ast-dump`` to verify that
1909     all of the types in the generated AST line up the way you want them.
1910     Remember that clients of the AST should never have to "think" to
1911     understand what's going on.  For example, all implicit conversions should
1912     show up explicitly in the AST.
1913   * Write tests that use your expression as a subexpression of other,
1914     well-known expressions.  Can you call a function using your expression as
1915     an argument?  Can you use the ternary operator?
1916
1917#. Teach code generation to create IR to your AST node.  This step is the first
1918   (and only) that requires knowledge of LLVM IR.  There are several things to
1919   keep in mind:
1920
1921   * Code generation is separated into scalar/aggregate/complex and
1922     lvalue/rvalue paths, depending on what kind of result your expression
1923     produces.  On occasion, this requires some careful factoring of code to
1924     avoid duplication.
1925   * ``CodeGenFunction`` contains functions ``ConvertType`` and
1926     ``ConvertTypeForMem`` that convert Clang's types (``clang::Type*`` or
1927     ``clang::QualType``) to LLVM types.  Use the former for values, and the
1928     later for memory locations: test with the C++ "``bool``" type to check
1929     this.  If you find that you are having to use LLVM bitcasts to make the
1930     subexpressions of your expression have the type that your expression
1931     expects, STOP!  Go fix semantic analysis and the AST so that you don't
1932     need these bitcasts.
1933   * The ``CodeGenFunction`` class has a number of helper functions to make
1934     certain operations easy, such as generating code to produce an lvalue or
1935     an rvalue, or to initialize a memory location with a given value.  Prefer
1936     to use these functions rather than directly writing loads and stores,
1937     because these functions take care of some of the tricky details for you
1938     (e.g., for exceptions).
1939   * If your expression requires some special behavior in the event of an
1940     exception, look at the ``push*Cleanup`` functions in ``CodeGenFunction``
1941     to introduce a cleanup.  You shouldn't have to deal with
1942     exception-handling directly.
1943   * Testing is extremely important in IR generation.  Use ``clang -cc1
1944     -emit-llvm`` and `FileCheck
1945     <http://llvm.org/docs/CommandGuide/FileCheck.html>`_ to verify that you're
1946     generating the right IR.
1947
1948#. Teach template instantiation how to cope with your AST node, which requires
1949   some fairly simple code:
1950
1951   * Make sure that your expression's constructor properly computes the flags
1952     for type dependence (i.e., the type your expression produces can change
1953     from one instantiation to the next), value dependence (i.e., the constant
1954     value your expression produces can change from one instantiation to the
1955     next), instantiation dependence (i.e., a template parameter occurs
1956     anywhere in your expression), and whether your expression contains a
1957     parameter pack (for variadic templates).  Often, computing these flags
1958     just means combining the results from the various types and
1959     subexpressions.
1960   * Add ``TransformXXX`` and ``RebuildXXX`` functions to the ``TreeTransform``
1961     class template in ``Sema``.  ``TransformXXX`` should (recursively)
1962     transform all of the subexpressions and types within your expression,
1963     using ``getDerived().TransformYYY``.  If all of the subexpressions and
1964     types transform without error, it will then call the ``RebuildXXX``
1965     function, which will in turn call ``getSema().BuildXXX`` to perform
1966     semantic analysis and build your expression.
1967   * To test template instantiation, take those tests you wrote to make sure
1968     that you were type checking with type-dependent expressions and dependent
1969     types (from step #2) and instantiate those templates with various types,
1970     some of which type-check and some that don't, and test the error messages
1971     in each case.
1972
1973#. There are some "extras" that make other features work better.  It's worth
1974   handling these extras to give your expression complete integration into
1975   Clang:
1976
1977   * Add code completion support for your expression in
1978     ``SemaCodeComplete.cpp``.
1979   * If your expression has types in it, or has any "interesting" features
1980     other than subexpressions, extend libclang's ``CursorVisitor`` to provide
1981     proper visitation for your expression, enabling various IDE features such
1982     as syntax highlighting, cross-referencing, and so on.  The
1983     ``c-index-test`` helper program can be used to test these features.
1984
1985