llvm-capstone/clang/test/ARCMT/cxx-checking.mm
Richard Smith 6fa28ffd5a Fix "regression" caused by updating our notion of POD to better match the C++11
rules: instead of requiring flexible array members to be POD, require them to
be trivially-destructible. This seems to be the only constraint that actually
matters here (and even then, it's questionable whether this matters).

llvm-svn: 198983
2014-01-11 00:53:35 +00:00

101 lines
2.1 KiB
Plaintext

// RUN: %clang_cc1 -arcmt-check -verify -triple x86_64-apple-darwin10 -fsyntax-only -fblocks %s
// Classes that have an Objective-C object pointer.
struct HasObjectMember0 {
id x;
};
struct HasObjectMember1 {
id x[3];
};
struct HasObjectMember2 {
id x[3][2];
};
// Don't complain if the type has non-external linkage
namespace {
struct HasObjectMember3 {
id x[3][2];
};
}
// Don't complain if the Objective-C pointer type was explicitly given
// no lifetime.
struct HasObjectMember3 {
__unsafe_unretained id x[3][2];
};
struct HasBlockPointerMember0 {
int (^bp)(int);
};
struct HasBlockPointerMember1 {
int (^bp[2][3])(int);
};
struct NonPOD {
NonPOD(const NonPOD&);
};
struct HasObjectMemberAndNonPOD0 {
id x;
NonPOD np;
};
struct HasObjectMemberAndNonPOD1 {
NonPOD np;
id x[3];
};
struct HasObjectMemberAndNonPOD2 {
NonPOD np;
id x[3][2];
};
struct HasObjectMemberAndNonPOD3 {
HasObjectMemberAndNonPOD3 &operator=(const HasObjectMemberAndNonPOD3&);
~HasObjectMemberAndNonPOD3();
NonPOD np;
id x[3][2];
};
struct HasBlockPointerMemberAndNonPOD0 {
NonPOD np;
int (^bp)(int);
};
struct HasBlockPointerMemberAndNonPOD1 {
NonPOD np;
int (^bp[2][3])(int);
};
int check_non_pod_objc_pointer0[__is_pod(id)? 1 : -1];
int check_non_pod_objc_pointer1[__is_pod(__strong id)? -1 : 1];
int check_non_pod_objc_pointer2[__is_pod(__unsafe_unretained id)? 1 : -1];
int check_non_pod_objc_pointer3[__is_pod(id[2][3])? 1 : -1];
int check_non_pod_objc_pointer4[__is_pod(__unsafe_unretained id[2][3])? 1 : -1];
int check_non_pod_block0[__is_pod(int (^)(int))? 1 : -1];
int check_non_pod_block1[__is_pod(int (^ __unsafe_unretained)(int))? 1 : -1];
struct FlexibleArrayMember0 {
int length;
id array[]; // expected-error{{flexible array member 'array' of type 'id __strong[]' with non-trivial destruction}}
};
struct FlexibleArrayMember1 {
int length;
__unsafe_unretained id array[];
};
// It's okay to pass a retainable type through an ellipsis.
void variadic(...);
void test_variadic() {
variadic(1, 17, @"Foo");
}
// It's okay to create a VLA of retainable types.
void vla(int n) {
id vla[n];
}