1 ============================ 2 "Clang" CFE Internals Manual 3 ============================ 4 5 .. contents:: 6 :local: 7 8 Introduction 9 ============ 10 11 This document describes some of the more important APIs and internal design 12 decisions made in the Clang C front-end. The purpose of this document is to 13 both capture some of this high level information and also describe some of the 14 design decisions behind it. This is meant for people interested in hacking on 15 Clang, not for end-users. The description below is categorized by libraries, 16 and does not describe any of the clients of the libraries. 17 18 LLVM Support Library 19 ==================== 20 21 The LLVM ``libSupport`` library provides many underlying libraries and 22 `data-structures <http://llvm.org/docs/ProgrammersManual.html>`_, including 23 command line option processing, various containers and a system abstraction 24 layer, which is used for file system access. 25 26 The Clang "Basic" Library 27 ========================= 28 29 This library certainly needs a better name. The "basic" library contains a 30 number of low-level utilities for tracking and manipulating source buffers, 31 locations within the source buffers, diagnostics, tokens, target abstraction, 32 and information about the subset of the language being compiled for. 33 34 Part of this infrastructure is specific to C (such as the ``TargetInfo`` 35 class), other parts could be reused for other non-C-based languages 36 (``SourceLocation``, ``SourceManager``, ``Diagnostics``, ``FileManager``). 37 When and if there is future demand we can figure out if it makes sense to 38 introduce a new library, move the general classes somewhere else, or introduce 39 some other solution. 40 41 We describe the roles of these classes in order of their dependencies. 42 43 The Diagnostics Subsystem 44 ------------------------- 45 46 The Clang Diagnostics subsystem is an important part of how the compiler 47 communicates with the human. Diagnostics are the warnings and errors produced 48 when 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 52 arguments to the dianostic (which fill in "%0"'s in the string) as well as a 53 number of source ranges that related to the diagnostic. 54 55 In this section, we'll be giving examples produced by the Clang command line 56 driver, but diagnostics can be :ref:`rendered in many different ways 57 <DiagnosticClient>` depending on how the ``DiagnosticClient`` interface is 58 implemented. 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 66 In this example, you can see the English translation, the severity (error), you 67 can see the source location (the caret ("``^``") and file/line/column info), 68 the source ranges "``~~~~``", arguments to the diagnostic ("``int*``" and 69 "``_Complex float``"). You'll have to believe me that there is a unique ID 70 backing the diagnostic :). 71 72 Getting all of this to happen has several steps and involves many moving 73 pieces, this section describes them and talks about best practices when adding 74 a new diagnostic. 75 76 The ``Diagnostic*Kinds.td`` files 77 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 78 79 Diagnostics are created by adding an entry to one of the 80 ``clang/Basic/Diagnostic*Kinds.td`` files, depending on what library will be 81 using it. From this file, :program:`tblgen` generates the unique ID of the 82 diagnostic, the severity of the diagnostic and the English translation + format 83 string. 84 85 There is little sanity with the naming of the unique ID's right now. Some 86 start with ``err_``, ``warn_``, ``ext_`` to encode the severity into the name. 87 Since the enum is referenced in the C++ code that produces the diagnostic, it 88 is somewhat useful for it to be reasonably short. 89 90 The severity of the diagnostic comes from the set {``NOTE``, ``REMARK``, 91 ``WARNING``, 92 ``EXTENSION``, ``EXTWARN``, ``ERROR``}. The ``ERROR`` severity is used for 93 diagnostics indicating the program is never acceptable under any circumstances. 94 When an error is emitted, the AST for the input code may not be fully built. 95 The ``EXTENSION`` and ``EXTWARN`` severities are used for extensions to the 96 language that Clang accepts. This means that Clang fully understands and can 97 represent them in the AST, but we produce diagnostics to tell the user their 98 code is non-portable. The difference is that the former are ignored by 99 default, and the later warn by default. The ``WARNING`` severity is used for 100 constructs that are valid in the currently selected source language but that 101 are dubious in some way. The ``REMARK`` severity provides generic information 102 about the compilation that is not necessarily related to any dubious code. The 103 ``NOTE`` level is used to staple more information onto previous diagnostics. 104 105 These *severities* are mapped into a smaller set (the ``Diagnostic::Level`` 106 enum, {``Ignored``, ``Note``, ``Remark``, ``Warning``, ``Error``, ``Fatal``}) of 107 output 108 *levels* by the diagnostics subsystem based on various configuration options. 109 Clang internally supports a fully fine grained mapping mechanism that allows 110 you to map almost any diagnostic to the output level that you want. The only 111 diagnostics that cannot be mapped are ``NOTE``\ s, which always follow the 112 severity of the previously emitted diagnostic and ``ERROR``\ s, which can only 113 be mapped to ``Fatal`` (it is not possible to turn an error into a warning, for 114 example). 115 116 Diagnostic 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 119 options like ``-Wunused_macros``, ``-Wundef`` etc. 120 121 Mapping to ``Fatal`` should only be used for diagnostics that are considered so 122 severe that error recovery won't be able to recover sensibly from them (thus 123 spewing a ton of bogus errors). One example of this class of error are failure 124 to ``#include`` a file. 125 126 The Format String 127 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 128 129 The format string for the diagnostic is very simple, but it has some power. It 130 takes the form of a string in English with markers that indicate where and how 131 arguments to the diagnostic are inserted and formatted. For example, here are 132 some 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)" 142 143 These examples show some important points of format strings. You can use any 144 plain ASCII character in the diagnostic string except "``%``" without a 145 problem, but these are C strings, so you have to use and be aware of all the C 146 escape sequences (as in the second example). If you want to produce a "``%``" 147 in the output, use the "``%%``" escape sequence, like the third diagnostic. 148 Finally, Clang uses the "``%...[digit]``" sequences to specify where and how 149 arguments to the diagnostic are formatted. 150 151 Arguments to the diagnostic are numbered according to how they are specified by 152 the C++ code that :ref:`produces them <internals-producing-diag>`, and are 153 referenced by ``%0`` .. ``%9``. If you have more than 10 arguments to your 154 diagnostic, you are doing something wrong :). Unlike ``printf``, there is no 155 requirement that arguments to the diagnostic end up in the output in the same 156 order as they are specified, you could have a format string with "``%1 %0``" 157 that swaps them, for example. The text in between the percent and digit are 158 formatting instructions. If there are no instructions, the argument is just 159 turned into a string and substituted in. 160 161 Here 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. 172 173 Diagnostics should never take random English strings as arguments: you 174 shouldn't use "``you have a problem with %0``" and pass in things like "``your 175 argument``" or "``your return value``" as arguments. Doing this prevents 176 :ref:`translating <internals-diag-translation>` the Clang diagnostics to other 177 languages (because they'll get random English words in their otherwise 178 localized diagnostic). The exceptions to this are C/C++ language keywords 179 (e.g., ``auto``, ``const``, ``mutable``, etc) and C/C++ operators (``/=``). 180 Note that things like "pointer" and "reference" are not keywords. On the other 181 hand, you *can* include anything that comes from the user's source code, 182 including variable names, types, labels, etc. The "``select``" format can be 183 used to achieve this sort of thing in a localizable way, see below. 184 185 Formatting a Diagnostic Argument 186 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 187 188 Arguments to diagnostics are fully typed internally, and come from a couple 189 different classes: integers, types, names, and random strings. Depending on 190 the class of the argument, it can be optionally formatted in different ways. 191 This gives the ``DiagnosticClient`` information about what the argument means 192 without requiring it to use a specific presentation (consider this MVC for 193 Clang :). 194 195 Here are the different diagnostic argument formats currently supported by 196 Clang: 197 198 **"s" format** 199 200 Example: 201 ``"requires %1 parameter%s1"`` 202 Class: 203 Integers 204 Description: 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** 212 213 Example: 214 ``"must be a %select{unary|binary|unary or binary}2 operator"`` 215 Class: 216 Integers 217 Description: 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** 230 231 Example: 232 ``"you have %1 %plural{1:mouse|:mice}1 connected to your computer"`` 233 Class: 234 Integers 235 Description: 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** 261 262 Example: 263 ``"ambiguity in %ordinal0 argument"`` 264 Class: 265 Integers 266 Description: 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** 273 274 Example: 275 ``"method %objcclass0 not found"`` 276 Class: 277 ``DeclarationName`` 278 Description: 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** 284 285 Example: 286 ``"method %objcinstance0 not found"`` 287 Class: 288 ``DeclarationName`` 289 Description: 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** 295 296 Example: 297 ``"candidate found by name lookup is %q0"`` 298 Class: 299 ``NamedDecl *`` 300 Description: 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** 305 306 Example: 307 ``"no known conversion %diff{from $ to $|from argument type to parameter type}1,2"`` 308 Class: 309 ``QualType`` 310 Description: 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. 316 317 It is really easy to add format specifiers to the Clang diagnostics system, but 318 they should be discussed before they are added. If you are creating a lot of 319 repetitive diagnostics and/or have an idea for a useful formatter, please bring 320 it up on the cfe-dev mailing list. 321 322 .. _internals-producing-diag: 323 324 Producing the Diagnostic 325 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 326 327 Now that you've created the diagnostic in the ``Diagnostic*Kinds.td`` file, you 328 need to write the code that detects the condition in question and emits the new 329 diagnostic. Various components of Clang (e.g., the preprocessor, ``Sema``, 330 etc.) provide a helper function named "``Diag``". It creates a diagnostic and 331 accepts the arguments, ranges, and other information that goes along with it. 332 333 For 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(); 341 342 This 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 345 arguments, they are specified with the ``<<`` operator: the first argument 346 becomes ``%0``, the second becomes ``%1``, etc. The diagnostic interface 347 allows you to specify arguments of many different types, including ``int`` and 348 ``unsigned`` for integer arguments, ``const char*`` and ``std::string`` for 349 string 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. 352 353 As you can see, adding and producing a diagnostic is pretty straightforward. 354 The hard part is deciding exactly what you need to say to help the user, 355 picking a suitable wording, and providing the information needed to format it 356 correctly. The good news is that the call site that issues a diagnostic should 357 be completely independent of how the diagnostic is formatted and in what 358 language it is rendered. 359 360 Fix-It Hints 361 ^^^^^^^^^^^^ 362 363 In some cases, the front end emits diagnostics when it is clear that some small 364 change to the source code would fix the problem. For example, a missing 365 semicolon at the end of a statement or a use of deprecated syntax that is 366 easily rewritten into a more modern form. Clang tries very hard to emit the 367 diagnostic and recover gracefully in these and other cases. 368 369 However, for these cases where the fix is obvious, the diagnostic can be 370 annotated with a hint (referred to as a "fix-it hint") that describes how to 371 change the code referenced by the diagnostic to fix the problem. For example, 372 it might add the missing semicolon at the end of the statement or rewrite the 373 use of a deprecated construct into something more palatable. Here is one such 374 example from the C++ front end, where we warn about the right-shift operator 375 changing 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 ( ) 384 385 Here, the fix-it hint is suggesting that parentheses be added, and showing 386 exactly where those parentheses would be inserted into the source code. The 387 fix-it hints themselves describe what changes to make to the source code in an 388 abstract 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 391 markup inline) or even give the user the ability to automatically fix the 392 problem. 393 394 Fix-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. 400 401 If a fix-it can't obey these rules, put the fix-it on a note. Fix-its on notes 402 are not applied automatically. 403 404 All fix-it hints are described by the ``FixItHint`` class, instances of which 405 should be attached to the diagnostic using the ``<<`` operator in the same way 406 that highlighted source ranges and arguments are passed to the diagnostic. 407 Fix-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: 424 425 The ``DiagnosticClient`` Interface 426 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 427 428 Once code generates a diagnostic with all of the arguments and the rest of the 429 relevant information, Clang needs to know what to do with it. As previously 430 mentioned, the diagnostic machinery goes through some filtering to map a 431 severity onto a diagnostic level, then (assuming the diagnostic is not mapped 432 to "``Ignore``") it invokes an object that implements the ``DiagnosticClient`` 433 interface with the information. 434 435 It is possible to implement this interface in many different ways. For 436 example, the normal Clang ``DiagnosticClient`` (named 437 ``TextDiagnosticPrinter``) turns the arguments into strings (according to the 438 various formatting rules), prints out the file/line/column information and the 439 string, then prints out the line of code, the source ranges, and the caret. 440 However, this behavior isn't required. 441 442 Another implementation of the ``DiagnosticClient`` interface is the 443 ``TextDiagnosticBuffer`` class, which is used when Clang is in ``-verify`` 444 mode. Instead of formatting and printing out the diagnostics, this 445 implementation just captures and remembers the diagnostics as they fly by. 446 Then ``-verify`` compares the list of produced diagnostics to the list of 447 expected ones. If they disagree, it prints out its own output. Full 448 documentation for the ``-verify`` mode can be found in the Clang API 449 documentation for `VerifyDiagnosticConsumer 450 </doxygen/classclang_1_1VerifyDiagnosticConsumer.html#details>`_. 451 452 There are many other possible implementations of this interface, and this is 453 why we prefer diagnostics to pass down rich structured information in 454 arguments. For example, an HTML output might want declaration names be 455 linkified to where they come from in the source. Another example is that a GUI 456 might let you click on typedefs to expand them. This application would want to 457 pass significantly more information about types through to the GUI than a 458 simple flat string. The interface allows this to happen. 459 460 .. _internals-diag-translation: 461 462 Adding Translations to Clang 463 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 464 465 Not possible yet! Diagnostic strings should be written in UTF-8, the client can 466 translate to the relevant code page if needed. Each translation completely 467 replaces the format string for the diagnostic. 468 469 .. _SourceLocation: 470 .. _SourceManager: 471 472 The ``SourceLocation`` and ``SourceManager`` classes 473 ---------------------------------------------------- 474 475 Strangely enough, the ``SourceLocation`` class represents a location within the 476 source 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. 493 494 In practice, the ``SourceLocation`` works together with the ``SourceManager`` 495 class to encode two pieces of information about a location: its spelling 496 location and its instantiation location. For most tokens, these will be the 497 same. However, for a macro expansion (or tokens that came from a ``_Pragma`` 498 directive) these will describe the location of the characters corresponding to 499 the token and the location where the token was used (i.e., the macro 500 instantiation point or the location of the ``_Pragma`` itself). 501 502 The Clang front-end inherently depends on the location of a token being tracked 503 correctly. If it is ever incorrect, the front-end may get confused and die. 504 The reason for this is that the notion of the "spelling" of a ``Token`` in 505 Clang depends on being able to find the original input characters for the 506 token. This concept maps directly to the "spelling location" for the token. 507 508 ``SourceRange`` and ``CharSourceRange`` 509 --------------------------------------- 510 511 .. mostly taken from http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2010-August/010595.html 512 513 Clang represents most source ranges by [first, last], where "first" and "last" 514 each point to the beginning of their respective tokens. For example consider 515 the ``SourceRange`` of the following statement: 516 517 .. code-block:: c++ 518 519 x = foo + bar; 520 ^first ^last 521 522 To map from this representation to a character-based representation, the "last" 523 location needs to be adjusted to point to (or past) the end of that token with 524 either ``Lexer::MeasureTokenLength()`` or ``Lexer::getLocForEndOfToken()``. For 525 the rare cases where character-level source ranges information is needed we use 526 the ``CharSourceRange`` class. 527 528 The Driver Library 529 ================== 530 531 The clang Driver and library are documented :doc:`here <DriverInternals>`. 532 533 Precompiled Headers 534 =================== 535 536 Clang supports two implementations of precompiled headers. The default 537 implementation, precompiled headers (:doc:`PCH <PCHInternals>`) uses a 538 serialized representation of Clang's internal data structures, encoded with the 539 `LLVM bitstream format <http://llvm.org/docs/BitCodeFormat.html>`_. 540 Pretokenized headers (:doc:`PTH <PTHInternals>`), on the other hand, contain a 541 serialized representation of the tokens encountered when preprocessing a header 542 (and anything that header includes). 543 544 The Frontend Library 545 ==================== 546 547 The Frontend library contains functionality useful for building tools on top of 548 the Clang libraries, for example several methods for outputting diagnostics. 549 550 The Lexer and Preprocessor Library 551 ================================== 552 553 The Lexer library contains several tightly-connected classes that are involved 554 with the nasty process of lexing and preprocessing C source code. The main 555 interface to this library for outside clients is the large ``Preprocessor`` 556 class. It contains the various pieces of state that are required to coherently 557 read tokens out of a translation unit. 558 559 The 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 561 the preprocessor stream. There are two types of token providers that the 562 preprocessor 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: 567 568 The Token class 569 --------------- 570 571 The ``Token`` class is used to represent a single lexed token. Tokens are 572 intended to be used by the lexer/preprocess and parser libraries, but are not 573 intended to live beyond them (for example, they should not live in the ASTs). 574 575 Tokens most often live on the stack (or some other location that is efficient 576 to access) as the parser is running, but occasionally do get buffered up. For 577 example, macro definitions are stored as a series of tokens, and the C++ 578 front-end periodically needs to buffer tokens up for tentative parsing and 579 various pieces of look-ahead. As such, the size of a ``Token`` matters. On a 580 32-bit system, ``sizeof(Token)`` is currently 16 bytes. 581 582 Tokens occur in two forms: :ref:`annotation tokens <AnnotationToken>` and 583 normal tokens. Normal tokens are those returned by the lexer, annotation 584 tokens represent semantic information and are produced by the parser, replacing 585 normal tokens in the token stream. Normal tokens contain the following 586 information: 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. 630 631 One interesting (and somewhat unusual) aspect of normal tokens is that they 632 don't contain any semantic information about the lexed value. For example, if 633 the token was a pp-number token, we do not represent the value of the number 634 that was lexed (this is left for later pieces of code to decide). 635 Additionally, the lexer library has no notion of typedef names vs variable 636 names: both are returned as identifiers, and the parser is left to decide 637 whether a specific identifier is a typedef or a variable (tracking this 638 requires scope information among other things). The parser can do this 639 translation by replacing tokens returned by the preprocessor with "Annotation 640 Tokens". 641 642 .. _AnnotationToken: 643 644 Annotation Tokens 645 ----------------- 646 647 Annotation tokens are tokens that are synthesized by the parser and injected 648 into the preprocessor's token stream (replacing existing tokens) to record 649 semantic information found by the parser. For example, if "``foo``" is found 650 to 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 652 it easy to handle qualified type names (e.g., "``foo::bar::baz<42>::t``") in 653 C++ as a single "token" in the parser. 2) if the parser backtracks, the 654 reparse does not need to redo semantic analysis to determine whether a token 655 sequence is a variable, type, template, etc. 656 657 Annotation tokens are created by the parser and reinjected into the parser's 658 token stream (when backtracking is enabled). Because they can only exist in 659 tokens that the preprocessor-proper is done with, it doesn't need to keep 660 around flags like "start of line" that the preprocessor uses to do its job. 661 Additionally, 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 663 of an annotation token are different than the fields for a normal token (but 664 they 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. 677 678 Annotation 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. 700 701 As mentioned above, annotation tokens are not returned by the preprocessor, 702 they are formed on demand by the parser. This means that the parser has to be 703 aware of cases where an annotation could occur and form it where appropriate. 704 This is somewhat similar to how the parser handles Translation Phase 6 of C99: 705 String Concatenation (see C99 5.1.1.2). In the case of string concatenation, 706 the preprocessor just returns distinct ``tok::string_literal`` and 707 ``tok::wide_string_literal`` tokens and the parser eats a sequence of them 708 wherever the grammar indicates that a string literal can occur. 709 710 In 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 713 methods will maximally form the specified annotation tokens and replace the 714 current token with them, if applicable. If the current tokens is not valid for 715 an annotation token, it will remain an identifier or "``::``" token. 716 717 .. _Lexer: 718 719 The ``Lexer`` class 720 ------------------- 721 722 The ``Lexer`` class provides the mechanics of lexing tokens out of a source 723 buffer and deciding what they mean. The ``Lexer`` is complicated by the fact 724 that it operates on raw buffers that have not had spelling eliminated (this is 725 a necessity to get decent performance), but this is countered with careful 726 coding as well as standard performance techniques (for example, the comment 727 handling code is vectorized on X86 and PowerPC hosts). 728 729 The 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. 747 748 In addition to these modes, the lexer keeps track of a couple of other features 749 that 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: 764 765 The ``TokenLexer`` class 766 ------------------------ 767 768 The ``TokenLexer`` class is a token provider that returns tokens from a list of 769 tokens that came from somewhere else. It typically used for two things: 1) 770 returning tokens from a macro definition as it is being expanded 2) returning 771 tokens 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 773 C++ parser. 774 775 .. _MultipleIncludeOpt: 776 777 The ``MultipleIncludeOpt`` class 778 -------------------------------- 779 780 The ``MultipleIncludeOpt`` class implements a really simple little state 781 machine that is used to detect the standard "``#ifndef XX`` / ``#define XX``" 782 idiom that people typically use to prevent multiple inclusion of headers. If a 783 buffer uses this idiom and is subsequently ``#include``'d, the preprocessor can 784 simply check to see whether the guarding condition is defined or not. If so, 785 the preprocessor can completely ignore the include of the header. 786 787 .. _Parser: 788 789 The Parser Library 790 ================== 791 792 This library contains a recursive-descent parser that polls tokens from the 793 preprocessor and notifies a client of the parsing progress. 794 795 Historically, the parser used to talk to an abstract ``Action`` interface that 796 had virtual methods for parse events, for example ``ActOnBinOp()``. When Clang 797 grew C++ support, the parser stopped supporting general ``Action`` clients -- 798 it now always talks to the :ref:`Sema libray <Sema>`. However, the Parser 799 still accesses AST objects only through opaque types like ``ExprResult`` and 800 ``StmtResult``. Only :ref:`Sema <Sema>` looks at the AST node contents of these 801 wrappers. 802 803 .. _AST: 804 805 The AST Library 806 =============== 807 808 .. _Type: 809 810 The ``Type`` class and its subclasses 811 ------------------------------------- 812 813 The ``Type`` class (and its subclasses) are an important part of the AST. 814 Types are accessed through the ``ASTContext`` class, which implicitly creates 815 and uniques them as they are needed. Types have a couple of non-obvious 816 features: 1) they do not capture type qualifiers like ``const`` or ``volatile`` 817 (see :ref:`QualType <QualType>`), and 2) they implicitly capture typedef 818 information. Once created, types are immutable (unlike decls). 819 820 Typedefs in C make semantic analysis a bit more complex than it would be without 821 them. The issue is that we want to capture typedef information and represent it 822 in the AST perfectly, but the semantics of operations need to "see through" 823 typedefs. 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 } 836 837 The code above is illegal, and thus we expect there to be diagnostics emitted 838 on 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 ^~~ 851 852 While this example is somewhat silly, it illustrates the point: we want to 853 retain typedef information where possible, so that we can emit errors about 854 "``std::string``" instead of "``std::basic_string<char, std:...``". Doing this 855 requires properly keeping typedef information (for example, the type of ``X`` 856 is "``foo``", not "``int``"), and requires properly propagating it through the 857 various operators (for example, the type of ``*Y`` is "``foo``", not 858 "``int``"). In order to retain this information, the type of these expressions 859 is an instance of the ``TypedefType`` class, which indicates that the type of 860 these expressions is a typedef for "``foo``". 861 862 Representing types like this is great for diagnostics, because the 863 user-specified type is always immediately available. There are two problems 864 with this: first, various semantic checks need to make judgements about the 865 *actual structure* of a type, ignoring typedefs. Second, we need an efficient 866 way to query whether two types are structurally identical to each other, 867 ignoring typedefs. The solution to both of these problems is the idea of 868 canonical types. 869 870 Canonical Types 871 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 872 873 Every instance of the ``Type`` class contains a canonical type pointer. For 874 simple types with no typedefs involved (e.g., "``int``", "``int*``", 875 "``int**``"), the type just points to itself. For types that have a typedef 876 somewhere in their structure (e.g., "``foo``", "``foo*``", "``foo**``", 877 "``bar``"), the canonical type pointer points to their structurally equivalent 878 type without any typedefs (e.g., "``int``", "``int*``", "``int**``", and 879 "``int*``" respectively). 880 881 This design provides a constant time operation (dereferencing the canonical type 882 pointer) that gives us access to the structure of types. For example, we can 883 trivially tell that "``bar``" and "``foo*``" are the same type by dereferencing 884 their canonical type pointers and doing a pointer comparison (they both point 885 to the single "``int*``" type). 886 887 Canonical types and typedef types bring up some complexities that must be 888 carefully managed. Specifically, the ``isa``/``cast``/``dyn_cast`` operators 889 generally shouldn't be used in code that is inspecting the AST. For example, 890 when type checking the indirection operator (unary "``*``" on a pointer), the 891 type checker must verify that the operand has a pointer type. It would not be 892 correct to check that with "``isa<PointerType>(SubExpr->getType())``", because 893 this predicate would fail if the subexpression had a typedef type. 894 895 The solution to this problem are a set of helper methods on ``Type``, used to 896 check their properties. In this case, it would be correct to use 897 "``SubExpr->getType()->isPointerType()``" to do the check. This predicate will 898 return true if the *canonical type is a pointer*, which is true any time the 899 type is structurally a pointer type. The only hard part here is remembering 900 not to use the ``isa``/``cast``/``dyn_cast`` operations. 901 902 The second problem we face is how to get access to the pointer type once we 903 know it exists. To continue the example, the result type of the indirection 904 operator is the pointee type of the subexpression. In order to determine the 905 type, we need to get the instance of ``PointerType`` that best captures the 906 typedef information in the program. If the type of the expression is literally 907 a ``PointerType``, we can return that, otherwise we have to dig through the 908 typedefs 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 910 type "``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 914 pointer. 915 916 This structure is somewhat mystical, but after meditating on it, it will make 917 sense to you :). 918 919 .. _QualType: 920 921 The ``QualType`` class 922 ---------------------- 923 924 The ``QualType`` class is designed as a trivial value class that is small, 925 passed by-value and is efficient to query. The idea of ``QualType`` is that it 926 stores the type qualifiers (``const``, ``volatile``, ``restrict``, plus some 927 extended qualifiers required by language extensions) separately from the types 928 themselves. ``QualType`` is conceptually a pair of "``Type*``" and the bits 929 for these type qualifiers. 930 931 By storing the type qualifiers as bits in the conceptual pair, it is extremely 932 efficient to get the set of qualifiers on a ``QualType`` (just return the field 933 of the pair), add a type qualifier (which is a trivial constant-time operation 934 that sets a bit), and remove one or more type qualifiers (just return a 935 ``QualType`` with the bitfield set to empty). 936 937 Further, because the bits are stored outside of the type itself, we do not need 938 to create duplicates of types with different sets of qualifiers (i.e. there is 939 only a single heap allocated "``int``" type: "``const int``" and "``volatile 940 const int``" both point to the same heap allocated "``int``" type). This 941 reduces the heap size used to represent bits and also means we do not have to 942 consider qualifiers when uniquing types (:ref:`Type <Type>` does not even 943 contain qualifiers). 944 945 In practice, the two most common type qualifiers (``const`` and ``restrict``) 946 are stored in the low bits of the pointer to the ``Type`` object, together with 947 a flag indicating whether extended qualifiers are present (which must be 948 heap-allocated). This means that ``QualType`` is exactly the same size as a 949 pointer. 950 951 .. _DeclarationName: 952 953 Declaration names 954 ----------------- 955 956 The ``DeclarationName`` class represents the name of a declaration in Clang. 957 Declarations in the C family of languages can take several different forms. 958 Most declarations are named by simple identifiers, e.g., "``f``" and "``x``" in 959 the function declaration ``f(int x)``. In C++, declaration names can also name 960 class constructors ("``Class``" in ``struct Class { Class(); }``), class 961 destructors ("``~Class``"), overloaded operator names ("``operator+``"), and 962 conversion functions ("``operator void const *``"). In Objective-C, 963 declaration names can refer to the names of Objective-C methods, which involve 964 the method name and the parameters, collectively called a *selector*, e.g., 965 "``setWidth:height:``". Since all of these kinds of entities --- variables, 966 functions, 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. 969 970 Given a ``DeclarationName`` ``N``, ``N.getNameKind()`` will produce a value 971 that describes what kind of name ``N`` stores. There are 10 options (all of 972 the 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 1032 only a single pointer's worth of storage in the common cases (identifiers, 1033 zero- and one-argument Objective-C selectors) and use dense, uniqued storage 1034 for the other kinds of names. Two ``DeclarationName``\ s can be compared for 1035 equality (``==``, ``!=``) using a simple bitwise comparison, can be ordered 1036 with ``<``, ``>``, ``<=``, and ``>=`` (which provide a lexicographical ordering 1037 for normal identifiers but an unspecified ordering for other kinds of names), 1038 and can be placed into LLVM ``DenseMap``\ s and ``DenseSet``\ s. 1039 1040 ``DeclarationName`` instances can be created in different ways depending on 1041 what kind of name the instance will store. Normal identifiers 1042 (``IdentifierInfo`` pointers) and Objective-C selectors (``Selector``) can be 1043 implicitly converted to ``DeclarationNames``. Names for C++ constructors, 1044 destructors, conversion functions, and overloaded operators can be retrieved 1045 from the ``DeclarationNameTable``, an instance of which is available as 1046 ``ASTContext::DeclarationNames``. The member functions 1047 ``getCXXConstructorName``, ``getCXXDestructorName``, 1048 ``getCXXConversionFunctionName``, and ``getCXXOperatorName``, respectively, 1049 return ``DeclarationName`` instances for the four kinds of C++ special function 1050 names. 1051 1052 .. _DeclContext: 1053 1054 Declaration contexts 1055 -------------------- 1056 1057 Every declaration in a program exists within some *declaration context*, such 1058 as a translation unit, namespace, class, or function. Declaration contexts in 1059 Clang are represented by the ``DeclContext`` class, from which the various 1060 declaration-context AST nodes (``TranslationUnitDecl``, ``NamespaceDecl``, 1061 ``RecordDecl``, ``FunctionDecl``, etc.) will derive. The ``DeclContext`` class 1062 provides several facilities common to each declaration context: 1063 1064 Source-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 1074 Storage 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 1084 Lookup 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 1094 Ownership 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 1100 All declarations are stored within a declaration context, and one can query 1101 information about the context in which each declaration lives. One can 1102 retrieve 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 1105 this context information. 1106 1107 .. _Redeclarations: 1108 1109 Redeclarations and Overloads 1110 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 1111 1112 Within a translation unit, it is common for an entity to be declared several 1113 times. For example, we might declare a function "``f``" and then later 1114 re-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 1122 The representation of "``f``" differs in the source-centric and 1123 semantics-centric views of a declaration context. In the source-centric view, 1124 all redeclarations will be present, in the order they occurred in the source 1125 code, making this view suitable for clients that wish to see the structure of 1126 the source code. In the semantics-centric view, only the most recent "``f``" 1127 will be found by the lookup, since it effectively replaces the first 1128 declaration of "``f``". 1129 1130 In the semantics-centric view, overloading of functions is represented 1131 explicitly. For example, given two declarations of a function "``g``" that are 1132 overloaded, e.g., 1133 1134 .. code-block:: c++ 1135 1136 void g(); 1137 void g(int); 1138 1139 the ``DeclContext::lookup`` operation will return a 1140 ``DeclContext::lookup_result`` that contains a range of iterators over 1141 declarations of "``g``". Clients that perform semantic analysis on a program 1142 that is not concerned with the actual source code will primarily use this 1143 semantics-centric view. 1144 1145 .. _LexicalAndSemanticContexts: 1146 1147 Lexical and Semantic Contexts 1148 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 1149 1150 Each declaration has two potentially different declaration contexts: a 1151 *lexical* context, which corresponds to the source-centric view of the 1152 declaration context, and a *semantic* context, which corresponds to the 1153 semantics-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 1156 most 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 1165 Here, the semantic and lexical contexts of ``X::f`` are the ``DeclContext`` 1166 associated with the class ``X`` (itself stored as a ``RecordDecl`` AST node). 1167 However, we can now define ``X::f`` out-of-line: 1168 1169 .. code-block:: c++ 1170 1171 void X::f(int x = 17) { /* ... */ } 1172 1173 This definition of "``f``" has different lexical and semantic contexts. The 1174 lexical context corresponds to the declaration context in which the actual 1175 declaration 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 1177 declarations provided by [``decls_begin()``, ``decls_end()``) in the 1178 translation unit. 1179 1180 The semantic context of ``X::f`` corresponds to the class ``X``, since this 1181 member function is (semantically) a member of ``X``. Lookup of the name ``f`` 1182 into the ``DeclContext`` associated with ``X`` will then return the definition 1183 of ``X::f`` (including information about the default argument). 1184 1185 Transparent Declaration Contexts 1186 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 1187 1188 In C and C++, there are several contexts in which names that are logically 1189 declared inside another declaration will actually "leak" out into the enclosing 1190 scope from the perspective of name lookup. The most obvious instance of this 1191 behavior is in enumeration types, e.g., 1192 1193 .. code-block:: c++ 1194 1195 enum Color { 1196 Red, 1197 Green, 1198 Blue 1199 }; 1200 1201 Here, ``Color`` is an enumeration, which is a declaration context that contains 1202 the enumerators ``Red``, ``Green``, and ``Blue``. Thus, traversing the list of 1203 declarations contained in the enumeration ``Color`` will yield ``Red``, 1204 ``Green``, and ``Blue``. However, outside of the scope of ``Color`` one can 1205 name the enumerator ``Red`` without qualifying the name, e.g., 1206 1207 .. code-block:: c++ 1208 1209 Color c = Red; 1210 1211 There are other entities in C++ that provide similar behavior. For example, 1212 linkage 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 1222 For source-level accuracy, we treat the linkage specification and enumeration 1223 type as a declaration context in which its enclosed declarations ("``Red``", 1224 "``Green``", and "``Blue``"; "``f``" and "``g``") are declared. However, these 1225 declarations are visible outside of the scope of the declaration context. 1226 1227 These language features (and several others, described below) have roughly the 1228 same set of requirements: declarations are declared within a particular lexical 1229 context, but the declarations are also found via name lookup in scopes 1230 enclosing the declaration itself. This feature is implemented via 1231 *transparent* declaration contexts (see 1232 ``DeclContext::isTransparentContext()``), whose declarations are visible in the 1233 nearest enclosing non-transparent declaration context. This means that the 1234 lexical context of the declaration (e.g., an enumerator) will be the 1235 transparent ``DeclContext`` itself, as will the semantic context, but the 1236 declaration will be visible in every outer context up to and including the 1237 first non-transparent declaration context (since transparent declaration 1238 contexts can be nested). 1239 1240 The 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 1291 Multiply-Defined Declaration Contexts 1292 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 1293 1294 C++ namespaces have the interesting --- and, so far, unique --- property that 1295 the namespace can be defined multiple times, and the declarations provided by 1296 each namespace definition are effectively merged (from the semantic point of 1297 view). For example, the following two code snippets are semantically 1298 indistinguishable: 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 1316 In Clang's representation, the source-centric view of declaration contexts will 1317 actually have two separate ``NamespaceDecl`` nodes in Snippet #1, each of which 1318 is a declaration context that contains a single declaration of "``f``". 1319 However, the semantics-centric view provided by name lookup into the namespace 1320 ``N`` for "``f``" will return a ``DeclContext::lookup_result`` that contains a 1321 range of iterators over declarations of "``f``". 1322 1323 ``DeclContext`` manages multiply-defined declaration contexts internally. The 1324 function ``DeclContext::getPrimaryContext`` retrieves the "primary" context for 1325 a given ``DeclContext`` instance, which is the ``DeclContext`` responsible for 1326 maintaining the lookup table used for the semantics-centric view. Given a 1327 DeclContext, one can obtain the set of declaration contexts that are semanticaly 1328 connected 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 1331 internally within the lookup and insertion methods of the ``DeclContext``, so 1332 the vast majority of clients can ignore them. 1333 1334 .. _CFG: 1335 1336 The ``CFG`` class 1337 ----------------- 1338 1339 The ``CFG`` class is designed to represent a source-level control-flow graph 1340 for a single statement (``Stmt*``). Typically instances of ``CFG`` are 1341 constructed for function bodies (usually an instance of ``CompoundStmt``), but 1342 can also be instantiated to represent the control-flow of any class that 1343 subclasses ``Stmt``, which includes simple expressions. Control-flow graphs 1344 are especially useful for performing `flow- or path-sensitive 1345 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_flow_analysis#Sensitivities>`_ program 1346 analyses on a given function. 1347 1348 Basic Blocks 1349 ^^^^^^^^^^^^ 1350 1351 Concretely, an instance of ``CFG`` is a collection of basic blocks. Each basic 1352 block is an instance of ``CFGBlock``, which simply contains an ordered sequence 1353 of ``Stmt*`` (each referring to statements in the AST). The ordering of 1354 statements within a block indicates unconditional flow of control from one 1355 statement to the next. :ref:`Conditional control-flow 1356 <ConditionalControlFlow>` is represented using edges between basic blocks. The 1357 statements within a given ``CFGBlock`` can be traversed using the 1358 ``CFGBlock::*iterator`` interface. 1359 1360 A ``CFG`` object owns the instances of ``CFGBlock`` within the control-flow 1361 graph it represents. Each ``CFGBlock`` within a CFG is also uniquely numbered 1362 (accessible via ``CFGBlock::getBlockID()``). Currently the number is based on 1363 the 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 1365 are numbered from 0..N-1 (where N is the number of basic blocks in the CFG). 1366 1367 Entry and Exit Blocks 1368 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 1369 1370 Each 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. 1373 Neither block contains any statements, and they serve the role of providing a 1374 clear entrance and exit for a body of code such as a function body. The 1375 presence of these empty blocks greatly simplifies the implementation of many 1376 analyses built on top of CFGs. 1377 1378 .. _ConditionalControlFlow: 1379 1380 Conditional Control-Flow 1381 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 1382 1383 Conditional control-flow (such as those induced by if-statements and loops) is 1384 represented as edges between ``CFGBlocks``. Because different C language 1385 constructs can induce control-flow, each ``CFGBlock`` also records an extra 1386 ``Stmt*`` that represents the *terminator* of the block. A terminator is 1387 simply the statement that caused the control-flow, and is used to identify the 1388 nature of the conditional control-flow between blocks. For example, in the 1389 case of an if-statement, the terminator refers to the ``IfStmt`` object in the 1390 AST that represented the given branch. 1391 1392 To 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 1408 After invoking the parser+semantic analyzer on this code fragment, the AST of 1409 the body of ``foo`` is referenced by a single ``Stmt*``. We can then construct 1410 an instance of ``CFG`` representing the control-flow graph of this function 1411 body 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 1418 Along with providing an interface to iterate over its ``CFGBlocks``, the 1419 ``CFG`` class also provides methods that are useful for debugging and 1420 visualizing CFGs. For example, the method ``CFG::dump()`` dumps a 1421 pretty-printed version of the CFG to standard error. This is especially useful 1422 when 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 1458 For 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 1460 block) and *successor* blocks (blocks that have control-flow that have incoming 1461 control-flow from the given block). We can also clearly see the special entry 1462 and exit blocks at the beginning and end of the pretty-printed output. For the 1463 entry block (block B5), the number of predecessor blocks is 0, while for the 1464 exit block (block B0) the number of successor blocks is 0. 1465 1466 The most interesting block here is B4, whose outgoing control-flow represents 1467 the branching caused by the sole if-statement in ``foo``. Of particular 1468 interest is the second statement in the block, ``(x > 2)``, and the terminator, 1469 printed as ``if [B4.2]``. The second statement represents the evaluation of 1470 the condition of the if-statement, which occurs before the actual branching of 1471 control-flow. Within the ``CFGBlock`` for B4, the ``Stmt*`` for the second 1472 statement refers to the actual expression in the AST for ``(x > 2)``. Thus 1473 pointers to subclasses of ``Expr`` can appear in the list of statements in a 1474 block, and not just subclasses of ``Stmt`` that refer to proper C statements. 1475 1476 The terminator of block B4 is a pointer to the ``IfStmt`` object in the AST. 1477 The pretty-printer outputs ``if [B4.2]`` because the condition expression of 1478 the if-statement has an actual place in the basic block, and thus the 1479 terminator is essentially *referring* to the expression that is the second 1480 statement of block B4 (i.e., B4.2). In this manner, conditions for 1481 control-flow (which also includes conditions for loops and switch statements) 1482 are 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 1493 Constant Folding in the Clang AST 1494 --------------------------------- 1495 1496 There are several places where constants and constant folding matter a lot to 1497 the Clang front-end. First, in general, we prefer the AST to retain the source 1498 code as close to how the user wrote it as possible. This means that if they 1499 wrote "``5+4``", we want to keep the addition and two constants in the AST, we 1500 don't want to fold to "``9``". This means that constant folding in various 1501 ways turns into a tree walk that needs to handle the various cases. 1502 1503 However, there are places in both C and C++ that require constants to be 1504 folded. For example, the C standard defines what an "integer constant 1505 expression" (i-c-e) is with very precise and specific requirements. The 1506 language then requires i-c-e's in a lot of places (for example, the size of a 1507 bitfield, the value for a case statement, etc). For these, we have to be able 1508 to constant fold the constants, to do semantic checks (e.g., verify bitfield 1509 size is non-negative and that case statements aren't duplicated). We aim for 1510 Clang to be very pedantic about this, diagnosing cases when the code does not 1511 use an i-c-e where one is required, but accepting the code unless running with 1512 ``-pedantic-errors``. 1513 1514 Things get a little bit more tricky when it comes to compatibility with 1515 real-world source code. Specifically, GCC has historically accepted a huge 1516 superset of expressions as i-c-e's, and a lot of real world code depends on 1517 this unfortuate accident of history (including, e.g., the glibc system 1518 headers). GCC accepts anything its "fold" optimizer is capable of reducing to 1519 an integer constant, which means that the definition of what it accepts changes 1520 as its optimizer does. One example is that GCC accepts things like "``case 1521 X-X:``" even when ``X`` is a variable, because it can fold this to 0. 1522 1523 Another issue are how constants interact with the extensions we support, such 1524 as ``__builtin_constant_p``, ``__builtin_inf``, ``__extension__`` and many 1525 others. C99 obviously does not specify the semantics of any of these 1526 extensions, and the definition of i-c-e does not include them. However, these 1527 extensions are often used in real code, and we have to have a way to reason 1528 about them. 1529 1530 Finally, this is not just a problem for semantic analysis. The code generator 1531 and other clients have to be able to fold constants (e.g., to initialize global 1532 variables) and has to handle a superset of what C99 allows. Further, these 1533 clients can benefit from extended information. For example, we know that 1534 "``foo() || 1``" always evaluates to ``true``, but we can't replace the 1535 expression with ``true`` because it has side effects. 1536 1537 Implementation Approach 1538 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 1539 1540 After 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, 1542 consider this a design goal!). Our basic approach is to define a single 1543 recursive method evaluation method (``Expr::Evaluate``), which is implemented 1544 in ``AST/ExprConstant.cpp``. Given an expression with "scalar" type (integer, 1545 fp, 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 1561 This information gives various clients the flexibility that they want, and we 1562 will eventually have some helper methods for various extensions. For example, 1563 ``Sema`` should have a ``Sema::VerifyIntegerConstantExpression`` method, which 1564 calls ``Evaluate`` on the expression. If the expression is not foldable, the 1565 error is emitted, and it would return ``true``. If the expression is not an 1566 i-c-e, the ``EXTENSION`` diagnostic is emitted. Finally it would return 1567 ``false`` to indicate that the AST is OK. 1568 1569 Other clients can use the information in other ways, for example, codegen can 1570 just use expressions that are foldable in any way. 1571 1572 Extensions 1573 ^^^^^^^^^^ 1574 1575 This section describes how some of the various extensions Clang supports 1576 interacts 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 1604 The Sema Library 1605 ================ 1606 1607 This library is called by the :ref:`Parser library <Parser>` during parsing to 1608 do semantic analysis of the input. For valid programs, Sema builds an AST for 1609 parsed constructs. 1610 1611 .. _CodeGen: 1612 1613 The CodeGen Library 1614 =================== 1615 1616 CodeGen takes an :ref:`AST <AST>` as input and produces `LLVM IR code 1617 <//llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html>`_ from it. 1618 1619 How to change Clang 1620 =================== 1621 1622 How to add an attribute 1623 ----------------------- 1624 Attributes are a form of metadata that can be attached to a program construct, 1625 allowing the programmer to pass semantic information along to the compiler for 1626 various uses. For example, attributes may be used to alter the code generation 1627 for a program construct, or to provide extra semantic information for static 1628 analysis. This document explains how to add a custom attribute to Clang. 1629 Documentation on existing attributes can be found `here 1630 <//clang.llvm.org/docs/AttributeReference.html>`_. 1631 1632 Attribute Basics 1633 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 1634 Attributes in Clang are handled in three stages: parsing into a parsed attribute 1635 representation, conversion from a parsed attribute into a semantic attribute, 1636 and then the semantic handling of the attribute. 1637 1638 Parsing of the attribute is determined by the various syntactic forms attributes 1639 can take, such as GNU, C++11, and Microsoft style attributes, as well as other 1640 information provided by the table definition of the attribute. Ultimately, the 1641 parsed representation of an attribute object is an ``AttributeList`` object. 1642 These parsed attributes chain together as a list of parsed attributes attached 1643 to a declarator or declaration specifier. The parsing of attributes is handled 1644 automatically by Clang, except for attributes spelled as keywords. When 1645 implementing a keyword attribute, the parsing of the keyword and creation of the 1646 ``AttributeList`` object must be done manually. 1647 1648 Eventually, ``Sema::ProcessDeclAttributeList()`` is called with a ``Decl`` and 1649 an ``AttributeList``, at which point the parsed attribute can be transformed 1650 into a semantic attribute. The process by which a parsed attribute is converted 1651 into a semantic attribute depends on the attribute definition and semantic 1652 requirements of the attribute. The end result, however, is that the semantic 1653 attribute object is attached to the ``Decl`` object, and can be obtained by a 1654 call to ``Decl::getAttr<T>()``. 1655 1656 The structure of the semantic attribute is also governed by the attribute 1657 definition given in Attr.td. This definition is used to automatically generate 1658 functionality used for the implementation of the attribute, such as a class 1659 derived from ``clang::Attr``, information for the parser to use, automated 1660 semantic checking for some attributes, etc. 1661 1662 1663 ``include/clang/Basic/Attr.td`` 1664 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 1665 The first step to adding a new attribute to Clang is to add its definition to 1666 `include/clang/Basic/Attr.td 1667 <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/Attr.td?view=markup>`_. 1668 This tablegen definition must derive from the ``Attr`` (tablegen, not 1669 semantic) type, or one of its derivatives. Most attributes will derive from the 1670 ``InheritableAttr`` type, which specifies that the attribute can be inherited by 1671 later redeclarations of the ``Decl`` it is associated with. 1672 ``InheritableParamAttr`` is similar to ``InheritableAttr``, except that the 1673 attribute is written on a parameter instead of a declaration. If the attribute 1674 is intended to apply to a type instead of a declaration, such an attribute 1675 should derive from ``TypeAttr``, and will generally not be given an AST 1676 representation. (Note that this document does not cover the creation of type 1677 attributes.) An attribute that inherits from ``IgnoredAttr`` is parsed, but will 1678 generate an ignored attribute diagnostic when used, which may be useful when an 1679 attribute is supported by another vendor but not supported by clang. 1680 1681 The definition will specify several key pieces of information, such as the 1682 semantic name of the attribute, the spellings the attribute supports, the 1683 arguments the attribute expects, and more. Most members of the ``Attr`` tablegen 1684 type do not require definitions in the derived definition as the default 1685 suffice. However, every attribute must specify at least a spelling list, a 1686 subject list, and a documentation list. 1687 1688 Spellings 1689 ~~~~~~~~~ 1690 All attributes are required to specify a spelling list that denotes the ways in 1691 which the attribute can be spelled. For instance, a single semantic attribute 1692 may have a keyword spelling, as well as a C++11 spelling and a GNU spelling. An 1693 empty spelling list is also permissible and may be useful for attributes which 1694 are created implicitly. The following spellings are accepted: 1695 1696 ============ ================================================================ 1697 Spelling Description 1698 ============ ================================================================ 1699 ``GNU`` Spelled with a GNU-style ``__attribute__((attr))`` syntax and 1700 placement. 1701 ``CXX11`` Spelled with a C++-style ``[[attr]]`` syntax. If the attribute 1702 is meant to be used by Clang, it should set the namespace to 1703 ``"clang"``. 1704 ``Declspec`` Spelled with a Microsoft-style ``__declspec(attr)`` syntax. 1705 ``Keyword`` The attribute is spelled as a keyword, and required custom 1706 parsing. 1707 ``GCC`` Specifies two spellings: the first is a GNU-style spelling, and 1708 the second is a C++-style spelling with the ``gnu`` namespace. 1709 Attributes should only specify this spelling for attributes 1710 supported by GCC. 1711 ``Pragma`` The attribute is spelled as a ``#pragma``, and requires custom 1712 processing within the preprocessor. If the attribute is meant to 1713 be used by Clang, it should set the namespace to ``"clang"``. 1714 Note that this spelling is not used for declaration attributes. 1715 ============ ================================================================ 1716 1717 Subjects 1718 ~~~~~~~~ 1719 Attributes appertain to one or more ``Decl`` subjects. If the attribute attempts 1720 to attach to a subject that is not in the subject list, a diagnostic is issued 1721 automatically. Whether the diagnostic is a warning or an error depends on how 1722 the attribute's ``SubjectList`` is defined, but the default behavior is to warn. 1723 The diagnostics displayed to the user are automatically determined based on the 1724 subjects in the list, but a custom diagnostic parameter can also be specified in 1725 the ``SubjectList``. The diagnostics generated for subject list violations are 1726 either ``diag::warn_attribute_wrong_decl_type`` or 1727 ``diag::err_attribute_wrong_decl_type``, and the parameter enumeration is found 1728 in `include/clang/Sema/AttributeList.h 1729 <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/include/clang/Sema/AttributeList.h?view=markup>`_ 1730 If a previously unused Decl node is added to the ``SubjectList``, the logic used 1731 to automatically determine the diagnostic parameter in `utils/TableGen/ClangAttrEmitter.cpp 1732 <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/utils/TableGen/ClangAttrEmitter.cpp?view=markup>`_ 1733 may need to be updated. 1734 1735 By default, all subjects in the SubjectList must either be a Decl node defined 1736 in ``DeclNodes.td``, or a statement node defined in ``StmtNodes.td``. However, 1737 more complex subjects can be created by creating a ``SubsetSubject`` object. 1738 Each such object has a base subject which it appertains to (which must be a 1739 Decl or Stmt node, and not a SubsetSubject node), and some custom code which is 1740 called when determining whether an attribute appertains to the subject. For 1741 instance, a ``NonBitField`` SubsetSubject appertains to a ``FieldDecl``, and 1742 tests whether the given FieldDecl is a bit field. When a SubsetSubject is 1743 specified in a SubjectList, a custom diagnostic parameter must also be provided. 1744 1745 Diagnostic checking for attribute subject lists is automated except when 1746 ``HasCustomParsing`` is set to ``1``. 1747 1748 Documentation 1749 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 1750 All attributes must have some form of documentation associated with them. 1751 Documentation is table generated on the public web server by a server-side 1752 process that runs daily. Generally, the documentation for an attribute is a 1753 stand-alone definition in `include/clang/Basic/AttrDocs.td 1754 <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/AttdDocs.td?view=markup>`_ 1755 that is named after the attribute being documented. 1756 1757 If the attribute is not for public consumption, or is an implicitly-created 1758 attribute that has no visible spelling, the documentation list can specify the 1759 ``Undocumented`` object. Otherwise, the attribute should have its documentation 1760 added to AttrDocs.td. 1761 1762 Documentation derives from the ``Documentation`` tablegen type. All derived 1763 types must specify a documentation category and the actual documentation itself. 1764 Additionally, it can specify a custom heading for the attribute, though a 1765 default heading will be chosen when possible. 1766 1767 There are four predefined documentation categories: ``DocCatFunction`` for 1768 attributes that appertain to function-like subjects, ``DocCatVariable`` for 1769 attributes that appertain to variable-like subjects, ``DocCatType`` for type 1770 attributes, and ``DocCatStmt`` for statement attributes. A custom documentation 1771 category should be used for groups of attributes with similar functionality. 1772 Custom categories are good for providing overview information for the attributes 1773 grouped under it. For instance, the consumed annotation attributes define a 1774 custom category, ``DocCatConsumed``, that explains what consumed annotations are 1775 at a high level. 1776 1777 Documentation content (whether it is for an attribute or a category) is written 1778 using reStructuredText (RST) syntax. 1779 1780 After writing the documentation for the attribute, it should be locally tested 1781 to ensure that there are no issues generating the documentation on the server. 1782 Local testing requires a fresh build of clang-tblgen. To generate the attribute 1783 documentation, execute the following command:: 1784 1785 clang-tblgen -gen-attr-docs -I /path/to/clang/include /path/to/clang/include/clang/Basic/Attr.td -o /path/to/clang/docs/AttributeReference.rst 1786 1787 When testing locally, *do not* commit changes to ``AttributeReference.rst``. 1788 This file is generated by the server automatically, and any changes made to this 1789 file will be overwritten. 1790 1791 Arguments 1792 ~~~~~~~~~ 1793 Attributes may optionally specify a list of arguments that can be passed to the 1794 attribute. Attribute arguments specify both the parsed form and the semantic 1795 form of the attribute. For example, if ``Args`` is 1796 ``[StringArgument<"Arg1">, IntArgument<"Arg2">]`` then 1797 ``__attribute__((myattribute("Hello", 3)))`` will be a valid use; it requires 1798 two arguments while parsing, and the Attr subclass' constructor for the 1799 semantic attribute will require a string and integer argument. 1800 1801 All arguments have a name and a flag that specifies whether the argument is 1802 optional. The associated C++ type of the argument is determined by the argument 1803 definition type. If the existing argument types are insufficient, new types can 1804 be created, but it requires modifying `utils/TableGen/ClangAttrEmitter.cpp 1805 <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/utils/TableGen/ClangAttrEmitter.cpp?view=markup>`_ 1806 to properly support the type. 1807 1808 Other Properties 1809 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 1810 The ``Attr`` definition has other members which control the behavior of the 1811 attribute. Many of them are special-purpose and beyond the scope of this 1812 document, however a few deserve mention. 1813 1814 If the parsed form of the attribute is more complex, or differs from the 1815 semantic form, the ``HasCustomParsing`` bit can be set to ``1`` for the class, 1816 and the parsing code in `Parser::ParseGNUAttributeArgs() 1817 <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/lib/Parse/ParseDecl.cpp?view=markup>`_ 1818 can be updated for the special case. Note that this only applies to arguments 1819 with a GNU spelling -- attributes with a __declspec spelling currently ignore 1820 this flag and are handled by ``Parser::ParseMicrosoftDeclSpec``. 1821 1822 Note that setting this member to 1 will opt out of common attribute semantic 1823 handling, requiring extra implementation efforts to ensure the attribute 1824 appertains to the appropriate subject, etc. 1825 1826 If the attribute should not be propagated from from a template declaration to an 1827 instantiation of the template, set the ``Clone`` member to 0. By default, all 1828 attributes will be cloned to template instantiations. 1829 1830 Attributes that do not require an AST node should set the ``ASTNode`` field to 1831 ``0`` to avoid polluting the AST. Note that anything inheriting from 1832 ``TypeAttr`` or ``IgnoredAttr`` automatically do not generate an AST node. All 1833 other attributes generate an AST node by default. The AST node is the semantic 1834 representation of the attribute. 1835 1836 The ``LangOpts`` field specifies a list of language options required by the 1837 attribute. For instance, all of the CUDA-specific attributes specify ``[CUDA]`` 1838 for the ``LangOpts`` field, and when the CUDA language option is not enabled, an 1839 "attribute ignored" warning diagnostic is emitted. Since language options are 1840 not table generated nodes, new language options must be created manually and 1841 should specify the spelling used by ``LangOptions`` class. 1842 1843 Custom accessors can be generated for an attribute based on the spelling list 1844 for that attribute. For instance, if an attribute has two different spellings: 1845 'Foo' and 'Bar', accessors can be created: 1846 ``[Accessor<"isFoo", [GNU<"Foo">]>, Accessor<"isBar", [GNU<"Bar">]>]`` 1847 These accessors will be generated on the semantic form of the attribute, 1848 accepting no arguments and returning a ``bool``. 1849 1850 Attributes that do not require custom semantic handling should set the 1851 ``SemaHandler`` field to ``0``. Note that anything inheriting from 1852 ``IgnoredAttr`` automatically do not get a semantic handler. All other 1853 attributes are assumed to use a semantic handler by default. Attributes 1854 without a semantic handler are not given a parsed attribute ``Kind`` enumerator. 1855 1856 Target-specific attributes may share a spelling with other attributes in 1857 different targets. For instance, the ARM and MSP430 targets both have an 1858 attribute spelled ``GNU<"interrupt">``, but with different parsing and semantic 1859 requirements. To support this feature, an attribute inheriting from 1860 ``TargetSpecificAttribute`` may specify a ``ParseKind`` field. This field 1861 should be the same value between all arguments sharing a spelling, and 1862 corresponds to the parsed attribute's ``Kind`` enumerator. This allows 1863 attributes to share a parsed attribute kind, but have distinct semantic 1864 attribute classes. For instance, ``AttributeList::AT_Interrupt`` is the shared 1865 parsed attribute kind, but ARMInterruptAttr and MSP430InterruptAttr are the 1866 semantic attributes generated. 1867 1868 By default, when declarations are merging attributes, an attribute will not be 1869 duplicated. However, if an attribute can be duplicated during this merging 1870 stage, set ``DuplicatesAllowedWhileMerging`` to ``1``, and the attribute will 1871 be merged. 1872 1873 By default, attribute arguments are parsed in an evaluated context. If the 1874 arguments for an attribute should be parsed in an unevaluated context (akin to 1875 the way the argument to a ``sizeof`` expression is parsed), set 1876 ``ParseArgumentsAsUnevaluated`` to ``1``. 1877 1878 If additional functionality is desired for the semantic form of the attribute, 1879 the ``AdditionalMembers`` field specifies code to be copied verbatim into the 1880 semantic attribute class object, with ``public`` access. 1881 1882 Boilerplate 1883 ^^^^^^^^^^^ 1884 All semantic processing of declaration attributes happens in `lib/Sema/SemaDeclAttr.cpp 1885 <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/lib/Sema/SemaDeclAttr.cpp?view=markup>`_, 1886 and generally starts in the ``ProcessDeclAttribute()`` function. If the 1887 attribute is a "simple" attribute -- meaning that it requires no custom semantic 1888 processing aside from what is automatically provided, add a call to 1889 ``handleSimpleAttribute<YourAttr>(S, D, Attr);`` to the switch statement. 1890 Otherwise, write a new ``handleYourAttr()`` function, and add that to the switch 1891 statement. Please do not implement handling logic directly in the ``case`` for 1892 the attribute. 1893 1894 Unless otherwise specified by the attribute definition, common semantic checking 1895 of the parsed attribute is handled automatically. This includes diagnosing 1896 parsed attributes that do not appertain to the given ``Decl``, ensuring the 1897 correct minimum number of arguments are passed, etc. 1898 1899 If the attribute adds additional warnings, define a ``DiagGroup`` in 1900 `include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticGroups.td 1901 <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticGroups.td?view=markup>`_ 1902 named after the attribute's ``Spelling`` with "_"s replaced by "-"s. If there 1903 is only a single diagnostic, it is permissible to use ``InGroup<DiagGroup<"your-attribute">>`` 1904 directly in `DiagnosticSemaKinds.td 1905 <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td?view=markup>`_ 1906 1907 All semantic diagnostics generated for your attribute, including automatically- 1908 generated ones (such as subjects and argument counts), should have a 1909 corresponding test case. 1910 1911 Semantic handling 1912 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 1913 Most attributes are implemented to have some effect on the compiler. For 1914 instance, to modify the way code is generated, or to add extra semantic checks 1915 for an analysis pass, etc. Having added the attribute definition and conversion 1916 to the semantic representation for the attribute, what remains is to implement 1917 the custom logic requiring use of the attribute. 1918 1919 The ``clang::Decl`` object can be queried for the presence or absence of an 1920 attribute using ``hasAttr<T>()``. To obtain a pointer to the semantic 1921 representation of the attribute, ``getAttr<T>`` may be used. 1922 1923 How to add an expression or statement 1924 ------------------------------------- 1925 1926 Expressions and statements are one of the most fundamental constructs within a 1927 compiler, because they interact with many different parts of the AST, semantic 1928 analysis, and IR generation. Therefore, adding a new expression or statement 1929 kind into Clang requires some care. The following list details the various 1930 places in Clang where an expression or statement needs to be introduced, along 1931 with patterns to follow to ensure that the new expression or statement works 1932 well across all of the C languages. We focus on expressions, but statements 1933 are similar. 1934 1935 #. Introduce parsing actions into the parser. Recursive-descent parsing is 1936 mostly self-explanatory, but there are a few things that are worth keeping 1937 in mind: 1938 1939 * Keep as much source location information as possible! You'll want it later 1940 to produce great diagnostics and support Clang's various features that map 1941 between source code and the AST. 1942 * Write tests for all of the "bad" parsing cases, to make sure your recovery 1943 is good. If you have matched delimiters (e.g., parentheses, square 1944 brackets, etc.), use ``Parser::BalancedDelimiterTracker`` to give nice 1945 diagnostics when things go wrong. 1946 1947 #. Introduce semantic analysis actions into ``Sema``. Semantic analysis should 1948 always involve two functions: an ``ActOnXXX`` function that will be called 1949 directly from the parser, and a ``BuildXXX`` function that performs the 1950 actual semantic analysis and will (eventually!) build the AST node. It's 1951 fairly common for the ``ActOnCXX`` function to do very little (often just 1952 some minor translation from the parser's representation to ``Sema``'s 1953 representation of the same thing), but the separation is still important: 1954 C++ template instantiation, for example, should always call the ``BuildXXX`` 1955 variant. Several notes on semantic analysis before we get into construction 1956 of the AST: 1957 1958 * Your expression probably involves some types and some subexpressions. 1959 Make sure to fully check that those types, and the types of those 1960 subexpressions, meet your expectations. Add implicit conversions where 1961 necessary to make sure that all of the types line up exactly the way you 1962 want them. Write extensive tests to check that you're getting good 1963 diagnostics for mistakes and that you can use various forms of 1964 subexpressions with your expression. 1965 * When type-checking a type or subexpression, make sure to first check 1966 whether the type is "dependent" (``Type::isDependentType()``) or whether a 1967 subexpression is type-dependent (``Expr::isTypeDependent()``). If any of 1968 these return ``true``, then you're inside a template and you can't do much 1969 type-checking now. That's normal, and your AST node (when you get there) 1970 will have to deal with this case. At this point, you can write tests that 1971 use your expression within templates, but don't try to instantiate the 1972 templates. 1973 * For each subexpression, be sure to call ``Sema::CheckPlaceholderExpr()`` 1974 to deal with "weird" expressions that don't behave well as subexpressions. 1975 Then, determine whether you need to perform lvalue-to-rvalue conversions 1976 (``Sema::DefaultLvalueConversions``) or the usual unary conversions 1977 (``Sema::UsualUnaryConversions``), for places where the subexpression is 1978 producing a value you intend to use. 1979 * Your ``BuildXXX`` function will probably just return ``ExprError()`` at 1980 this point, since you don't have an AST. That's perfectly fine, and 1981 shouldn't impact your testing. 1982 1983 #. Introduce an AST node for your new expression. This starts with declaring 1984 the node in ``include/Basic/StmtNodes.td`` and creating a new class for your 1985 expression in the appropriate ``include/AST/Expr*.h`` header. It's best to 1986 look at the class for a similar expression to get ideas, and there are some 1987 specific things to watch for: 1988 1989 * If you need to allocate memory, use the ``ASTContext`` allocator to 1990 allocate memory. Never use raw ``malloc`` or ``new``, and never hold any 1991 resources in an AST node, because the destructor of an AST node is never 1992 called. 1993 * Make sure that ``getSourceRange()`` covers the exact source range of your 1994 expression. This is needed for diagnostics and for IDE support. 1995 * Make sure that ``children()`` visits all of the subexpressions. This is 1996 important for a number of features (e.g., IDE support, C++ variadic 1997 templates). If you have sub-types, you'll also need to visit those 1998 sub-types in ``RecursiveASTVisitor``. 1999 * Add printing support (``StmtPrinter.cpp``) for your expression. 2000 * Add profiling support (``StmtProfile.cpp``) for your AST node, noting the 2001 distinguishing (non-source location) characteristics of an instance of 2002 your expression. Omitting this step will lead to hard-to-diagnose 2003 failures regarding matching of template declarations. 2004 * Add serialization support (``ASTReaderStmt.cpp``, ``ASTWriterStmt.cpp``) 2005 for your AST node. 2006 2007 #. Teach semantic analysis to build your AST node. At this point, you can wire 2008 up your ``Sema::BuildXXX`` function to actually create your AST. A few 2009 things to check at this point: 2010 2011 * If your expression can construct a new C++ class or return a new 2012 Objective-C object, be sure to update and then call 2013 ``Sema::MaybeBindToTemporary`` for your just-created AST node to be sure 2014 that the object gets properly destructed. An easy way to test this is to 2015 return a C++ class with a private destructor: semantic analysis should 2016 flag an error here with the attempt to call the destructor. 2017 * Inspect the generated AST by printing it using ``clang -cc1 -ast-print``, 2018 to make sure you're capturing all of the important information about how 2019 the AST was written. 2020 * Inspect the generated AST under ``clang -cc1 -ast-dump`` to verify that 2021 all of the types in the generated AST line up the way you want them. 2022 Remember that clients of the AST should never have to "think" to 2023 understand what's going on. For example, all implicit conversions should 2024 show up explicitly in the AST. 2025 * Write tests that use your expression as a subexpression of other, 2026 well-known expressions. Can you call a function using your expression as 2027 an argument? Can you use the ternary operator? 2028 2029 #. Teach code generation to create IR to your AST node. This step is the first 2030 (and only) that requires knowledge of LLVM IR. There are several things to 2031 keep in mind: 2032 2033 * Code generation is separated into scalar/aggregate/complex and 2034 lvalue/rvalue paths, depending on what kind of result your expression 2035 produces. On occasion, this requires some careful factoring of code to 2036 avoid duplication. 2037 * ``CodeGenFunction`` contains functions ``ConvertType`` and 2038 ``ConvertTypeForMem`` that convert Clang's types (``clang::Type*`` or 2039 ``clang::QualType``) to LLVM types. Use the former for values, and the 2040 later for memory locations: test with the C++ "``bool``" type to check 2041 this. If you find that you are having to use LLVM bitcasts to make the 2042 subexpressions of your expression have the type that your expression 2043 expects, STOP! Go fix semantic analysis and the AST so that you don't 2044 need these bitcasts. 2045 * The ``CodeGenFunction`` class has a number of helper functions to make 2046 certain operations easy, such as generating code to produce an lvalue or 2047 an rvalue, or to initialize a memory location with a given value. Prefer 2048 to use these functions rather than directly writing loads and stores, 2049 because these functions take care of some of the tricky details for you 2050 (e.g., for exceptions). 2051 * If your expression requires some special behavior in the event of an 2052 exception, look at the ``push*Cleanup`` functions in ``CodeGenFunction`` 2053 to introduce a cleanup. You shouldn't have to deal with 2054 exception-handling directly. 2055 * Testing is extremely important in IR generation. Use ``clang -cc1 2056 -emit-llvm`` and `FileCheck 2057 <http://llvm.org/docs/CommandGuide/FileCheck.html>`_ to verify that you're 2058 generating the right IR. 2059 2060 #. Teach template instantiation how to cope with your AST node, which requires 2061 some fairly simple code: 2062 2063 * Make sure that your expression's constructor properly computes the flags 2064 for type dependence (i.e., the type your expression produces can change 2065 from one instantiation to the next), value dependence (i.e., the constant 2066 value your expression produces can change from one instantiation to the 2067 next), instantiation dependence (i.e., a template parameter occurs 2068 anywhere in your expression), and whether your expression contains a 2069 parameter pack (for variadic templates). Often, computing these flags 2070 just means combining the results from the various types and 2071 subexpressions. 2072 * Add ``TransformXXX`` and ``RebuildXXX`` functions to the ``TreeTransform`` 2073 class template in ``Sema``. ``TransformXXX`` should (recursively) 2074 transform all of the subexpressions and types within your expression, 2075 using ``getDerived().TransformYYY``. If all of the subexpressions and 2076 types transform without error, it will then call the ``RebuildXXX`` 2077 function, which will in turn call ``getSema().BuildXXX`` to perform 2078 semantic analysis and build your expression. 2079 * To test template instantiation, take those tests you wrote to make sure 2080 that you were type checking with type-dependent expressions and dependent 2081 types (from step #2) and instantiate those templates with various types, 2082 some of which type-check and some that don't, and test the error messages 2083 in each case. 2084 2085 #. There are some "extras" that make other features work better. It's worth 2086 handling these extras to give your expression complete integration into 2087 Clang: 2088 2089 * Add code completion support for your expression in 2090 ``SemaCodeComplete.cpp``. 2091 * If your expression has types in it, or has any "interesting" features 2092 other than subexpressions, extend libclang's ``CursorVisitor`` to provide 2093 proper visitation for your expression, enabling various IDE features such 2094 as syntax highlighting, cross-referencing, and so on. The 2095 ``c-index-test`` helper program can be used to test these features. 2096 2097