1============================
2"Clang" CFE Internals Manual
3============================
4
5.. contents::
6   :local:
7
8Introduction
9============
10
11This document describes some of the more important APIs and internal design
12decisions made in the Clang C front-end.  The purpose of this document is to
13both capture some of this high level information and also describe some of the
14design decisions behind it.  This is meant for people interested in hacking on
15Clang, not for end-users.  The description below is categorized by libraries,
16and does not describe any of the clients of the libraries.
17
18LLVM Support Library
19====================
20
21The LLVM ``libSupport`` library provides many underlying libraries and
22`data-structures <https://llvm.org/docs/ProgrammersManual.html>`_, including
23command line option processing, various containers and a system abstraction
24layer, which is used for file system access.
25
26The Clang "Basic" Library
27=========================
28
29This library certainly needs a better name.  The "basic" library contains a
30number of low-level utilities for tracking and manipulating source buffers,
31locations within the source buffers, diagnostics, tokens, target abstraction,
32and information about the subset of the language being compiled for.
33
34Part of this infrastructure is specific to C (such as the ``TargetInfo``
35class), other parts could be reused for other non-C-based languages
36(``SourceLocation``, ``SourceManager``, ``Diagnostics``, ``FileManager``).
37When and if there is future demand we can figure out if it makes sense to
38introduce a new library, move the general classes somewhere else, or introduce
39some other solution.
40
41We describe the roles of these classes in order of their dependencies.
42
43The Diagnostics Subsystem
44-------------------------
45
46The Clang Diagnostics subsystem is an important part of how the compiler
47communicates with the human.  Diagnostics are the warnings and errors produced
48when the code is incorrect or dubious.  In Clang, each diagnostic produced has
49(at the minimum) a unique ID, an English translation associated with it, a
50:ref:`SourceLocation <SourceLocation>` to "put the caret", and a severity
51(e.g., ``WARNING`` or ``ERROR``).  They can also optionally include a number of
52arguments to the diagnostic (which fill in "%0"'s in the string) as well as a
53number of source ranges that related to the diagnostic.
54
55In this section, we'll be giving examples produced by the Clang command line
56driver, but diagnostics can be :ref:`rendered in many different ways
57<DiagnosticConsumer>` depending on how the ``DiagnosticConsumer`` interface is
58implemented.  A representative example of a diagnostic is:
59
60.. code-block:: text
61
62  t.c:38:15: error: invalid operands to binary expression ('int *' and '_Complex float')
63  P = (P-42) + Gamma*4;
64      ~~~~~~ ^ ~~~~~~~
65
66In this example, you can see the English translation, the severity (error), you
67can see the source location (the caret ("``^``") and file/line/column info),
68the source ranges "``~~~~``", arguments to the diagnostic ("``int*``" and
69"``_Complex float``").  You'll have to believe me that there is a unique ID
70backing the diagnostic :).
71
72Getting all of this to happen has several steps and involves many moving
73pieces, this section describes them and talks about best practices when adding
74a new diagnostic.
75
76The ``Diagnostic*Kinds.td`` files
77^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
78
79Diagnostics are created by adding an entry to one of the
80``clang/Basic/Diagnostic*Kinds.td`` files, depending on what library will be
81using it.  From this file, :program:`tblgen` generates the unique ID of the
82diagnostic, the severity of the diagnostic and the English translation + format
83string.
84
85There is little sanity with the naming of the unique ID's right now.  Some
86start with ``err_``, ``warn_``, ``ext_`` to encode the severity into the name.
87Since the enum is referenced in the C++ code that produces the diagnostic, it
88is somewhat useful for it to be reasonably short.
89
90The severity of the diagnostic comes from the set {``NOTE``, ``REMARK``,
91``WARNING``,
92``EXTENSION``, ``EXTWARN``, ``ERROR``}.  The ``ERROR`` severity is used for
93diagnostics indicating the program is never acceptable under any circumstances.
94When an error is emitted, the AST for the input code may not be fully built.
95The ``EXTENSION`` and ``EXTWARN`` severities are used for extensions to the
96language that Clang accepts.  This means that Clang fully understands and can
97represent them in the AST, but we produce diagnostics to tell the user their
98code is non-portable.  The difference is that the former are ignored by
99default, and the later warn by default.  The ``WARNING`` severity is used for
100constructs that are valid in the currently selected source language but that
101are dubious in some way.  The ``REMARK`` severity provides generic information
102about the compilation that is not necessarily related to any dubious code.  The
103``NOTE`` level is used to staple more information onto previous diagnostics.
104
105These *severities* are mapped into a smaller set (the ``Diagnostic::Level``
106enum, {``Ignored``, ``Note``, ``Remark``, ``Warning``, ``Error``, ``Fatal``}) of
107output
108*levels* by the diagnostics subsystem based on various configuration options.
109Clang internally supports a fully fine grained mapping mechanism that allows
110you to map almost any diagnostic to the output level that you want.  The only
111diagnostics that cannot be mapped are ``NOTE``\ s, which always follow the
112severity of the previously emitted diagnostic and ``ERROR``\ s, which can only
113be mapped to ``Fatal`` (it is not possible to turn an error into a warning, for
114example).
115
116Diagnostic mappings are used in many ways.  For example, if the user specifies
117``-pedantic``, ``EXTENSION`` maps to ``Warning``, if they specify
118``-pedantic-errors``, it turns into ``Error``.  This is used to implement
119options like ``-Wunused_macros``, ``-Wundef`` etc.
120
121Mapping to ``Fatal`` should only be used for diagnostics that are considered so
122severe that error recovery won't be able to recover sensibly from them (thus
123spewing a ton of bogus errors).  One example of this class of error are failure
124to ``#include`` a file.
125
126The Format String
127^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
128
129The format string for the diagnostic is very simple, but it has some power.  It
130takes the form of a string in English with markers that indicate where and how
131arguments to the diagnostic are inserted and formatted.  For example, here are
132some simple format strings:
133
134.. code-block:: c++
135
136  "binary integer literals are an extension"
137  "format string contains '\\0' within the string body"
138  "more '%%' conversions than data arguments"
139  "invalid operands to binary expression (%0 and %1)"
140  "overloaded '%0' must be a %select{unary|binary|unary or binary}2 operator"
141       " (has %1 parameter%s1)"
142
143These examples show some important points of format strings.  You can use any
144plain ASCII character in the diagnostic string except "``%``" without a
145problem, but these are C strings, so you have to use and be aware of all the C
146escape sequences (as in the second example).  If you want to produce a "``%``"
147in the output, use the "``%%``" escape sequence, like the third diagnostic.
148Finally, Clang uses the "``%...[digit]``" sequences to specify where and how
149arguments to the diagnostic are formatted.
150
151Arguments to the diagnostic are numbered according to how they are specified by
152the C++ code that :ref:`produces them <internals-producing-diag>`, and are
153referenced by ``%0`` .. ``%9``.  If you have more than 10 arguments to your
154diagnostic, you are doing something wrong :).  Unlike ``printf``, there is no
155requirement that arguments to the diagnostic end up in the output in the same
156order as they are specified, you could have a format string with "``%1 %0``"
157that swaps them, for example.  The text in between the percent and digit are
158formatting instructions.  If there are no instructions, the argument is just
159turned into a string and substituted in.
160
161Here are some "best practices" for writing the English format string:
162
163* Keep the string short.  It should ideally fit in the 80 column limit of the
164  ``DiagnosticKinds.td`` file.  This avoids the diagnostic wrapping when
165  printed, and forces you to think about the important point you are conveying
166  with the diagnostic.
167* Take advantage of location information.  The user will be able to see the
168  line and location of the caret, so you don't need to tell them that the
169  problem is with the 4th argument to the function: just point to it.
170* Do not capitalize the diagnostic string, and do not end it with a period.
171* If you need to quote something in the diagnostic string, use single quotes.
172
173Diagnostics should never take random English strings as arguments: you
174shouldn't use "``you have a problem with %0``" and pass in things like "``your
175argument``" or "``your return value``" as arguments.  Doing this prevents
176:ref:`translating <internals-diag-translation>` the Clang diagnostics to other
177languages (because they'll get random English words in their otherwise
178localized diagnostic).  The exceptions to this are C/C++ language keywords
179(e.g., ``auto``, ``const``, ``mutable``, etc) and C/C++ operators (``/=``).
180Note that things like "pointer" and "reference" are not keywords.  On the other
181hand, you *can* include anything that comes from the user's source code,
182including variable names, types, labels, etc.  The "``select``" format can be
183used to achieve this sort of thing in a localizable way, see below.
184
185Formatting a Diagnostic Argument
186^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
187
188Arguments to diagnostics are fully typed internally, and come from a couple
189different classes: integers, types, names, and random strings.  Depending on
190the class of the argument, it can be optionally formatted in different ways.
191This gives the ``DiagnosticConsumer`` information about what the argument means
192without requiring it to use a specific presentation (consider this MVC for
193Clang :).
194
195Here are the different diagnostic argument formats currently supported by
196Clang:
197
198**"s" format**
199
200Example:
201  ``"requires %1 parameter%s1"``
202Class:
203  Integers
204Description:
205  This is a simple formatter for integers that is useful when producing English
206  diagnostics.  When the integer is 1, it prints as nothing.  When the integer
207  is not 1, it prints as "``s``".  This allows some simple grammatical forms to
208  be to be handled correctly, and eliminates the need to use gross things like
209  ``"requires %1 parameter(s)"``.
210
211**"select" format**
212
213Example:
214  ``"must be a %select{unary|binary|unary or binary}2 operator"``
215Class:
216  Integers
217Description:
218  This format specifier is used to merge multiple related diagnostics together
219  into one common one, without requiring the difference to be specified as an
220  English string argument.  Instead of specifying the string, the diagnostic
221  gets an integer argument and the format string selects the numbered option.
222  In this case, the "``%2``" value must be an integer in the range [0..2].  If
223  it is 0, it prints "unary", if it is 1 it prints "binary" if it is 2, it
224  prints "unary or binary".  This allows other language translations to
225  substitute reasonable words (or entire phrases) based on the semantics of the
226  diagnostic instead of having to do things textually.  The selected string
227  does undergo formatting.
228
229**"plural" format**
230
231Example:
232  ``"you have %1 %plural{1:mouse|:mice}1 connected to your computer"``
233Class:
234  Integers
235Description:
236  This is a formatter for complex plural forms.  It is designed to handle even
237  the requirements of languages with very complex plural forms, as many Baltic
238  languages have.  The argument consists of a series of expression/form pairs,
239  separated by ":", where the first form whose expression evaluates to true is
240  the result of the modifier.
241
242  An expression can be empty, in which case it is always true.  See the example
243  at the top.  Otherwise, it is a series of one or more numeric conditions,
244  separated by ",".  If any condition matches, the expression matches.  Each
245  numeric condition can take one of three forms.
246
247  * number: A simple decimal number matches if the argument is the same as the
248    number.  Example: ``"%plural{1:mouse|:mice}4"``
249  * range: A range in square brackets matches if the argument is within the
250    range.  Then range is inclusive on both ends.  Example:
251    ``"%plural{0:none|1:one|[2,5]:some|:many}2"``
252  * modulo: A modulo operator is followed by a number, and equals sign and
253    either a number or a range.  The tests are the same as for plain numbers
254    and ranges, but the argument is taken modulo the number first.  Example:
255    ``"%plural{%100=0:even hundred|%100=[1,50]:lower half|:everything else}1"``
256
257  The parser is very unforgiving.  A syntax error, even whitespace, will abort,
258  as will a failure to match the argument against any expression.
259
260**"ordinal" format**
261
262Example:
263  ``"ambiguity in %ordinal0 argument"``
264Class:
265  Integers
266Description:
267  This is a formatter which represents the argument number as an ordinal: the
268  value ``1`` becomes ``1st``, ``3`` becomes ``3rd``, and so on.  Values less
269  than ``1`` are not supported.  This formatter is currently hard-coded to use
270  English ordinals.
271
272**"objcclass" format**
273
274Example:
275  ``"method %objcclass0 not found"``
276Class:
277  ``DeclarationName``
278Description:
279  This is a simple formatter that indicates the ``DeclarationName`` corresponds
280  to an Objective-C class method selector.  As such, it prints the selector
281  with a leading "``+``".
282
283**"objcinstance" format**
284
285Example:
286  ``"method %objcinstance0 not found"``
287Class:
288  ``DeclarationName``
289Description:
290  This is a simple formatter that indicates the ``DeclarationName`` corresponds
291  to an Objective-C instance method selector.  As such, it prints the selector
292  with a leading "``-``".
293
294**"q" format**
295
296Example:
297  ``"candidate found by name lookup is %q0"``
298Class:
299  ``NamedDecl *``
300Description:
301  This formatter indicates that the fully-qualified name of the declaration
302  should be printed, e.g., "``std::vector``" rather than "``vector``".
303
304**"diff" format**
305
306Example:
307  ``"no known conversion %diff{from $ to $|from argument type to parameter type}1,2"``
308Class:
309  ``QualType``
310Description:
311  This formatter takes two ``QualType``\ s and attempts to print a template
312  difference between the two.  If tree printing is off, the text inside the
313  braces before the pipe is printed, with the formatted text replacing the $.
314  If tree printing is on, the text after the pipe is printed and a type tree is
315  printed after the diagnostic message.
316
317It is really easy to add format specifiers to the Clang diagnostics system, but
318they should be discussed before they are added.  If you are creating a lot of
319repetitive diagnostics and/or have an idea for a useful formatter, please bring
320it up on the cfe-dev mailing list.
321
322**"sub" format**
323
324Example:
325  Given the following record definition of type ``TextSubstitution``:
326
327  .. code-block:: text
328
329    def select_ovl_candidate : TextSubstitution<
330      "%select{function|constructor}0%select{| template| %2}1">;
331
332  which can be used as
333
334  .. code-block:: text
335
336    def note_ovl_candidate : Note<
337      "candidate %sub{select_ovl_candidate}3,2,1 not viable">;
338
339  and will act as if it was written
340  ``"candidate %select{function|constructor}3%select{| template| %1}2 not viable"``.
341Description:
342  This format specifier is used to avoid repeating strings verbatim in multiple
343  diagnostics. The argument to ``%sub`` must name a ``TextSubstitution`` tblgen
344  record. The substitution must specify all arguments used by the substitution,
345  and the modifier indexes in the substitution are re-numbered accordingly. The
346  substituted text must itself be a valid format string before substitution.
347
348.. _internals-producing-diag:
349
350Producing the Diagnostic
351^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
352
353Now that you've created the diagnostic in the ``Diagnostic*Kinds.td`` file, you
354need to write the code that detects the condition in question and emits the new
355diagnostic.  Various components of Clang (e.g., the preprocessor, ``Sema``,
356etc.) provide a helper function named "``Diag``".  It creates a diagnostic and
357accepts the arguments, ranges, and other information that goes along with it.
358
359For example, the binary expression error comes from code like this:
360
361.. code-block:: c++
362
363  if (various things that are bad)
364    Diag(Loc, diag::err_typecheck_invalid_operands)
365      << lex->getType() << rex->getType()
366      << lex->getSourceRange() << rex->getSourceRange();
367
368This shows that use of the ``Diag`` method: it takes a location (a
369:ref:`SourceLocation <SourceLocation>` object) and a diagnostic enum value
370(which matches the name from ``Diagnostic*Kinds.td``).  If the diagnostic takes
371arguments, they are specified with the ``<<`` operator: the first argument
372becomes ``%0``, the second becomes ``%1``, etc.  The diagnostic interface
373allows you to specify arguments of many different types, including ``int`` and
374``unsigned`` for integer arguments, ``const char*`` and ``std::string`` for
375string arguments, ``DeclarationName`` and ``const IdentifierInfo *`` for names,
376``QualType`` for types, etc.  ``SourceRange``\ s are also specified with the
377``<<`` operator, but do not have a specific ordering requirement.
378
379As you can see, adding and producing a diagnostic is pretty straightforward.
380The hard part is deciding exactly what you need to say to help the user,
381picking a suitable wording, and providing the information needed to format it
382correctly.  The good news is that the call site that issues a diagnostic should
383be completely independent of how the diagnostic is formatted and in what
384language it is rendered.
385
386Fix-It Hints
387^^^^^^^^^^^^
388
389In some cases, the front end emits diagnostics when it is clear that some small
390change to the source code would fix the problem.  For example, a missing
391semicolon at the end of a statement or a use of deprecated syntax that is
392easily rewritten into a more modern form.  Clang tries very hard to emit the
393diagnostic and recover gracefully in these and other cases.
394
395However, for these cases where the fix is obvious, the diagnostic can be
396annotated with a hint (referred to as a "fix-it hint") that describes how to
397change the code referenced by the diagnostic to fix the problem.  For example,
398it might add the missing semicolon at the end of the statement or rewrite the
399use of a deprecated construct into something more palatable.  Here is one such
400example from the C++ front end, where we warn about the right-shift operator
401changing meaning from C++98 to C++11:
402
403.. code-block:: text
404
405  test.cpp:3:7: warning: use of right-shift operator ('>>') in template argument
406                         will require parentheses in C++11
407  A<100 >> 2> *a;
408        ^
409    (       )
410
411Here, the fix-it hint is suggesting that parentheses be added, and showing
412exactly where those parentheses would be inserted into the source code.  The
413fix-it hints themselves describe what changes to make to the source code in an
414abstract manner, which the text diagnostic printer renders as a line of
415"insertions" below the caret line.  :ref:`Other diagnostic clients
416<DiagnosticConsumer>` might choose to render the code differently (e.g., as
417markup inline) or even give the user the ability to automatically fix the
418problem.
419
420Fix-it hints on errors and warnings need to obey these rules:
421
422* Since they are automatically applied if ``-Xclang -fixit`` is passed to the
423  driver, they should only be used when it's very likely they match the user's
424  intent.
425* Clang must recover from errors as if the fix-it had been applied.
426* Fix-it hints on a warning must not change the meaning of the code.
427  However, a hint may clarify the meaning as intentional, for example by adding
428  parentheses when the precedence of operators isn't obvious.
429
430If a fix-it can't obey these rules, put the fix-it on a note.  Fix-its on notes
431are not applied automatically.
432
433All fix-it hints are described by the ``FixItHint`` class, instances of which
434should be attached to the diagnostic using the ``<<`` operator in the same way
435that highlighted source ranges and arguments are passed to the diagnostic.
436Fix-it hints can be created with one of three constructors:
437
438* ``FixItHint::CreateInsertion(Loc, Code)``
439
440    Specifies that the given ``Code`` (a string) should be inserted before the
441    source location ``Loc``.
442
443* ``FixItHint::CreateRemoval(Range)``
444
445    Specifies that the code in the given source ``Range`` should be removed.
446
447* ``FixItHint::CreateReplacement(Range, Code)``
448
449    Specifies that the code in the given source ``Range`` should be removed,
450    and replaced with the given ``Code`` string.
451
452.. _DiagnosticConsumer:
453
454The ``DiagnosticConsumer`` Interface
455^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
456
457Once code generates a diagnostic with all of the arguments and the rest of the
458relevant information, Clang needs to know what to do with it.  As previously
459mentioned, the diagnostic machinery goes through some filtering to map a
460severity onto a diagnostic level, then (assuming the diagnostic is not mapped
461to "``Ignore``") it invokes an object that implements the ``DiagnosticConsumer``
462interface with the information.
463
464It is possible to implement this interface in many different ways.  For
465example, the normal Clang ``DiagnosticConsumer`` (named
466``TextDiagnosticPrinter``) turns the arguments into strings (according to the
467various formatting rules), prints out the file/line/column information and the
468string, then prints out the line of code, the source ranges, and the caret.
469However, this behavior isn't required.
470
471Another implementation of the ``DiagnosticConsumer`` interface is the
472``TextDiagnosticBuffer`` class, which is used when Clang is in ``-verify``
473mode.  Instead of formatting and printing out the diagnostics, this
474implementation just captures and remembers the diagnostics as they fly by.
475Then ``-verify`` compares the list of produced diagnostics to the list of
476expected ones.  If they disagree, it prints out its own output.  Full
477documentation for the ``-verify`` mode can be found in the Clang API
478documentation for `VerifyDiagnosticConsumer
479</doxygen/classclang_1_1VerifyDiagnosticConsumer.html#details>`_.
480
481There are many other possible implementations of this interface, and this is
482why we prefer diagnostics to pass down rich structured information in
483arguments.  For example, an HTML output might want declaration names be
484linkified to where they come from in the source.  Another example is that a GUI
485might let you click on typedefs to expand them.  This application would want to
486pass significantly more information about types through to the GUI than a
487simple flat string.  The interface allows this to happen.
488
489.. _internals-diag-translation:
490
491Adding Translations to Clang
492^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
493
494Not possible yet! Diagnostic strings should be written in UTF-8, the client can
495translate to the relevant code page if needed.  Each translation completely
496replaces the format string for the diagnostic.
497
498.. _SourceLocation:
499.. _SourceManager:
500
501The ``SourceLocation`` and ``SourceManager`` classes
502----------------------------------------------------
503
504Strangely enough, the ``SourceLocation`` class represents a location within the
505source code of the program.  Important design points include:
506
507#. ``sizeof(SourceLocation)`` must be extremely small, as these are embedded
508   into many AST nodes and are passed around often.  Currently it is 32 bits.
509#. ``SourceLocation`` must be a simple value object that can be efficiently
510   copied.
511#. We should be able to represent a source location for any byte of any input
512   file.  This includes in the middle of tokens, in whitespace, in trigraphs,
513   etc.
514#. A ``SourceLocation`` must encode the current ``#include`` stack that was
515   active when the location was processed.  For example, if the location
516   corresponds to a token, it should contain the set of ``#include``\ s active
517   when the token was lexed.  This allows us to print the ``#include`` stack
518   for a diagnostic.
519#. ``SourceLocation`` must be able to describe macro expansions, capturing both
520   the ultimate instantiation point and the source of the original character
521   data.
522
523In practice, the ``SourceLocation`` works together with the ``SourceManager``
524class to encode two pieces of information about a location: its spelling
525location and its expansion location.  For most tokens, these will be the
526same.  However, for a macro expansion (or tokens that came from a ``_Pragma``
527directive) these will describe the location of the characters corresponding to
528the token and the location where the token was used (i.e., the macro
529expansion point or the location of the ``_Pragma`` itself).
530
531The Clang front-end inherently depends on the location of a token being tracked
532correctly.  If it is ever incorrect, the front-end may get confused and die.
533The reason for this is that the notion of the "spelling" of a ``Token`` in
534Clang depends on being able to find the original input characters for the
535token.  This concept maps directly to the "spelling location" for the token.
536
537``SourceRange`` and ``CharSourceRange``
538---------------------------------------
539
540.. mostly taken from https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2010-August/010595.html
541
542Clang represents most source ranges by [first, last], where "first" and "last"
543each point to the beginning of their respective tokens.  For example consider
544the ``SourceRange`` of the following statement:
545
546.. code-block:: text
547
548  x = foo + bar;
549  ^first    ^last
550
551To map from this representation to a character-based representation, the "last"
552location needs to be adjusted to point to (or past) the end of that token with
553either ``Lexer::MeasureTokenLength()`` or ``Lexer::getLocForEndOfToken()``.  For
554the rare cases where character-level source ranges information is needed we use
555the ``CharSourceRange`` class.
556
557The Driver Library
558==================
559
560The clang Driver and library are documented :doc:`here <DriverInternals>`.
561
562Precompiled Headers
563===================
564
565Clang supports precompiled headers (:doc:`PCH <PCHInternals>`), which  uses a
566serialized representation of Clang's internal data structures, encoded with the
567`LLVM bitstream format <https://llvm.org/docs/BitCodeFormat.html>`_.
568
569The Frontend Library
570====================
571
572The Frontend library contains functionality useful for building tools on top of
573the Clang libraries, for example several methods for outputting diagnostics.
574
575Compiler Invocation
576-------------------
577
578One of the classes provided by the Frontend library is ``CompilerInvocation``,
579which holds information that describe current invocation of the Clang ``-cc1``
580frontend. The information typically comes from the command line constructed by
581the Clang driver or from clients performing custom initialization. The data
582structure is split into logical units used by different parts of the compiler,
583for example ``PreprocessorOptions``, ``LanguageOptions`` or ``CodeGenOptions``.
584
585Command Line Interface
586----------------------
587
588The command line interface of the Clang ``-cc1`` frontend is defined alongside
589the driver options in ``clang/Driver/Options.td``. The information making up an
590option definition includes its prefix and name (for example ``-std=``), form and
591position of the option value, help text, aliases and more. Each option may
592belong to a certain group and can be marked with zero or more flags. Options
593accepted by the ``-cc1`` frontend are marked with the ``CC1Option`` flag.
594
595Command Line Parsing
596--------------------
597
598Option definitions are processed by the ``-gen-opt-parser-defs`` tablegen
599backend during early stages of the build. Options are then used for querying an
600instance ``llvm::opt::ArgList``, a wrapper around the command line arguments.
601This is done in the Clang driver to construct individual jobs based on the
602driver arguments and also in the ``CompilerInvocation::CreateFromArgs`` function
603that parses the ``-cc1`` frontend arguments.
604
605Command Line Generation
606-----------------------
607
608Any valid ``CompilerInvocation`` created from a ``-cc1`` command line  can be
609also serialized back into semantically equivalent command line in a
610deterministic manner. This enables features such as implicitly discovered,
611explicitly built modules.
612
613..
614  TODO: Create and link corresponding section in Modules.rst.
615
616Adding new Command Line Option
617------------------------------
618
619When adding a new command line option, the first place of interest is the header
620file declaring the corresponding options class (e.g. ``CodeGenOptions.h`` for
621command line option that affects the code generation). Create new member
622variable for the option value:
623
624.. code-block:: diff
625
626    class CodeGenOptions : public CodeGenOptionsBase {
627
628  +   /// List of dynamic shared object files to be loaded as pass plugins.
629  +   std::vector<std::string> PassPlugins;
630
631    }
632
633Next, declare the command line interface of the option in the tablegen file
634``clang/include/clang/Driver/Options.td``. This is done by instantiating the
635``Option`` class (defined in ``llvm/include/llvm/Option/OptParser.td``). The
636instance is typically created through one of the helper classes that encode the
637acceptable ways to specify the option value on the command line:
638
639* ``Flag`` - the option does not accept any value,
640* ``Joined`` - the value must immediately follow the option name within the same
641  argument,
642* ``Separate`` - the value must follow the option name in the next command line
643  argument,
644* ``JoinedOrSeparate`` - the value can be specified either as ``Joined`` or
645  ``Separate``,
646* ``CommaJoined`` - the values are comma-separated and must immediately follow
647  the option name within the same argument (see ``Wl,`` for an example).
648
649The helper classes take a list of acceptable prefixes of the option (e.g.
650``"-"``, ``"--"`` or ``"/"``) and the option name:
651
652.. code-block:: diff
653
654    // Options.td
655
656  + def fpass_plugin_EQ : Joined<["-"], "fpass-plugin=">;
657
658Then, specify additional attributes via mix-ins:
659
660* ``HelpText`` holds the text that will be printed besides the option name when
661  the user requests help (e.g. via ``clang --help``).
662* ``Group`` specifies the "category" of options this option belongs to. This is
663  used by various tools to filter certain options of interest.
664* ``Flags`` may contain a number of "tags" associated with the option. This
665  enables more granular filtering than the ``Group`` attribute.
666* ``Alias`` denotes that the option is an alias of another option. This may be
667  combined with ``AliasArgs`` that holds the implied value.
668
669.. code-block:: diff
670
671    // Options.td
672
673    def fpass_plugin_EQ : Joined<["-"], "fpass-plugin=">,
674  +   Group<f_Group>, Flags<[CC1Option]>,
675  +   HelpText<"Load pass plugin from a dynamic shared object file.">;
676
677New options are recognized by the Clang driver unless marked with the
678``NoDriverOption`` flag. On the other hand, options intended for the ``-cc1``
679frontend must be explicitly marked with the ``CC1Option`` flag.
680
681Next, parse (or manufacture) the command line arguments in the Clang driver and
682use them to construct the ``-cc1`` job:
683
684.. code-block:: diff
685
686    void Clang::ConstructJob(const ArgList &Args /*...*/) const {
687      ArgStringList CmdArgs;
688      // ...
689
690  +   for (const Arg *A : Args.filtered(OPT_fpass_plugin_EQ)) {
691  +     CmdArgs.push_back(Args.MakeArgString(Twine("-fpass-plugin=") + A->getValue()));
692  +     A->claim();
693  +   }
694    }
695
696The last step is implementing the ``-cc1`` command line argument
697parsing/generation that initializes/serializes the option class (in our case
698``CodeGenOptions``) stored within ``CompilerInvocation``. This can be done
699automatically by using the marshalling annotations on the option definition:
700
701.. code-block:: diff
702
703    // Options.td
704
705    def fpass_plugin_EQ : Joined<["-"], "fpass-plugin=">,
706      Group<f_Group>, Flags<[CC1Option]>,
707      HelpText<"Load pass plugin from a dynamic shared object file.">,
708  +   MarshallingInfoStringVector<CodeGenOpts<"PassPlugins">>;
709
710Inner workings of the system are introduced in the :ref:`marshalling
711infrastructure <OptionMarshalling>` section and the available annotations are
712listed :ref:`here <OptionMarshallingAnnotations>`.
713
714In case the marshalling infrastructure does not support the desired semantics,
715consider simplifying it to fit the existing model. This makes the command line
716more uniform and reduces the amount of custom, manually written code. Remember
717that the ``-cc1`` command line interface is intended only for Clang developers,
718meaning it does not need to mirror the driver interface, maintain backward
719compatibility or be compatible with GCC.
720
721If the option semantics cannot be encoded via marshalling annotations, you can
722resort to parsing/serializing the command line arguments manually:
723
724.. code-block:: diff
725
726    // CompilerInvocation.cpp
727
728    static bool ParseCodeGenArgs(CodeGenOptions &Opts, ArgList &Args /*...*/) {
729      // ...
730
731  +   Opts.PassPlugins = Args.getAllArgValues(OPT_fpass_plugin_EQ);
732    }
733
734    static void GenerateCodeGenArgs(const CodeGenOptions &Opts,
735                                    SmallVectorImpl<const char *> &Args,
736                                    CompilerInvocation::StringAllocator SA /*...*/) {
737      // ...
738
739  +   for (const std::string &PassPlugin : Opts.PassPlugins)
740  +     GenerateArg(Args, OPT_fpass_plugin_EQ, PassPlugin, SA);
741    }
742
743Finally, you can specify the argument on the command line:
744``clang -fpass-plugin=a -fpass-plugin=b`` and use the new member variable as
745desired.
746
747.. code-block:: diff
748
749    void EmitAssemblyHelper::EmitAssemblyWithNewPassManager(/*...*/) {
750      // ...
751  +   for (auto &PluginFN : CodeGenOpts.PassPlugins)
752  +     if (auto PassPlugin = PassPlugin::Load(PluginFN))
753  +        PassPlugin->registerPassBuilderCallbacks(PB);
754    }
755
756.. _OptionMarshalling:
757
758Option Marshalling Infrastructure
759---------------------------------
760
761The option marshalling infrastructure automates the parsing of the Clang
762``-cc1`` frontend command line arguments into ``CompilerInvocation`` and their
763generation from ``CompilerInvocation``. The system replaces lots of repetitive
764C++ code with simple, declarative tablegen annotations and it's being used for
765the majority of the ``-cc1`` command line interface. This section provides an
766overview of the system.
767
768**Note:** The marshalling infrastructure is not intended for driver-only
769options. Only options of the ``-cc1`` frontend need to be marshalled to/from
770``CompilerInvocation`` instance.
771
772To read and modify contents of ``CompilerInvocation``, the marshalling system
773uses key paths, which are declared in two steps. First, a tablegen definition
774for the ``CompilerInvocation`` member is created by inheriting from
775``KeyPathAndMacro``:
776
777.. code-block:: text
778
779  // Options.td
780
781  class LangOpts<string field> : KeyPathAndMacro<"LangOpts->", field, "LANG_"> {}
782  //                   CompilerInvocation member  ^^^^^^^^^^
783  //                                    OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING prefix ^^^^^
784
785The first argument to the parent class is the beginning of the key path that
786references the ``CompilerInvocation`` member. This argument ends with ``->`` if
787the member is a pointer type or with ``.`` if it's a value type. The child class
788takes a single parameter ``field`` that is forwarded as the second argument to
789the base class. The child class can then be used like so:
790``LangOpts<"IgnoreExceptions">``, constructing a key path to the field
791``LangOpts->IgnoreExceptions``. The third argument passed to the parent class is
792a string that the tablegen backend uses as a prefix to the
793``OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING`` macro. Using the key path as a mix-in on an
794``Option`` instance instructs the backend to generate the following code:
795
796.. code-block:: c++
797
798  // Options.inc
799
800  #ifdef LANG_OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING
801  LANG_OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING([...], LangOpts->IgnoreExceptions, [...])
802  #endif // LANG_OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING
803
804Such definition can be used used in the function for parsing and generating
805command line:
806
807.. code-block:: c++
808
809  // clang/lib/Frontend/CompilerInvoation.cpp
810
811  bool CompilerInvocation::ParseLangArgs(LangOptions *LangOpts, ArgList &Args,
812                                         DiagnosticsEngine &Diags) {
813    bool Success = true;
814
815  #define LANG_OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING(                                          \
816      PREFIX_TYPE, NAME, ID, KIND, GROUP, ALIAS, ALIASARGS, FLAGS, PARAM,        \
817      HELPTEXT, METAVAR, VALUES, SPELLING, SHOULD_PARSE, ALWAYS_EMIT, KEYPATH,   \
818      DEFAULT_VALUE, IMPLIED_CHECK, IMPLIED_VALUE, NORMALIZER, DENORMALIZER,     \
819      MERGER, EXTRACTOR, TABLE_INDEX)                                            \
820    PARSE_OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING(Args, Diags, Success, ID, FLAGS, PARAM,        \
821                                  SHOULD_PARSE, KEYPATH, DEFAULT_VALUE,          \
822                                  IMPLIED_CHECK, IMPLIED_VALUE, NORMALIZER,      \
823                                  MERGER, TABLE_INDEX)
824  #include "clang/Driver/Options.inc"
825  #undef LANG_OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING
826
827    // ...
828
829    return Success;
830  }
831
832  void CompilerInvocation::GenerateLangArgs(LangOptions *LangOpts,
833                                            SmallVectorImpl<const char *> &Args,
834                                            StringAllocator SA) {
835  #define LANG_OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING(                                          \
836      PREFIX_TYPE, NAME, ID, KIND, GROUP, ALIAS, ALIASARGS, FLAGS, PARAM,        \
837      HELPTEXT, METAVAR, VALUES, SPELLING, SHOULD_PARSE, ALWAYS_EMIT, KEYPATH,   \
838      DEFAULT_VALUE, IMPLIED_CHECK, IMPLIED_VALUE, NORMALIZER, DENORMALIZER,     \
839      MERGER, EXTRACTOR, TABLE_INDEX)                                            \
840    GENERATE_OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING(                                            \
841        Args, SA, KIND, FLAGS, SPELLING, ALWAYS_EMIT, KEYPATH, DEFAULT_VALUE,    \
842        IMPLIED_CHECK, IMPLIED_VALUE, DENORMALIZER, EXTRACTOR, TABLE_INDEX)
843  #include "clang/Driver/Options.inc"
844  #undef LANG_OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING
845
846    // ...
847  }
848
849The ``PARSE_OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING`` and ``GENERATE_OPTION_WITH_MARSHALLING``
850macros are defined in ``CompilerInvocation.cpp`` and they implement the generic
851algorithm for parsing and generating command line arguments.
852
853.. _OptionMarshallingAnnotations:
854
855Option Marshalling Annotations
856------------------------------
857
858How does the tablegen backend know what to put in place of ``[...]`` in the
859generated ``Options.inc``? This is specified by the ``Marshalling`` utilities
860described below. All of them take a key path argument and possibly other
861information required for parsing or generating the command line argument.
862
863**Note:** The marshalling infrastructure is not intended for driver-only
864options. Only options of the ``-cc1`` frontend need to be marshalled to/from
865``CompilerInvocation`` instance.
866
867**Positive Flag**
868
869The key path defaults to ``false`` and is set to ``true`` when the flag is
870present on command line.
871
872.. code-block:: text
873
874  def fignore_exceptions : Flag<["-"], "fignore-exceptions">, Flags<[CC1Option]>,
875    MarshallingInfoFlag<LangOpts<"IgnoreExceptions">>;
876
877**Negative Flag**
878
879The key path defaults to ``true`` and is set to ``false`` when the flag is
880present on command line.
881
882.. code-block:: text
883
884  def fno_verbose_asm : Flag<["-"], "fno-verbose-asm">, Flags<[CC1Option]>,
885    MarshallingInfoNegativeFlag<CodeGenOpts<"AsmVerbose">>;
886
887**Negative and Positive Flag**
888
889The key path defaults to the specified value (``false``, ``true`` or some
890boolean value that's statically unknown in the tablegen file). Then, the key
891path is set to the value associated with the flag that appears last on command
892line.
893
894.. code-block:: text
895
896  defm legacy_pass_manager : BoolOption<"f", "legacy-pass-manager",
897    CodeGenOpts<"LegacyPassManager">, DefaultFalse,
898    PosFlag<SetTrue, [], "Use the legacy pass manager in LLVM">,
899    NegFlag<SetFalse, [], "Use the new pass manager in LLVM">,
900    BothFlags<[CC1Option]>>;
901
902With most such pair of flags, the ``-cc1`` frontend accepts only the flag that
903changes the default key path value. The Clang driver is responsible for
904accepting both and either forwarding the changing flag or discarding the flag
905that would just set the key path to its default.
906
907The first argument to ``BoolOption`` is a prefix that is used to construct the
908full names of both flags. The positive flag would then be named
909``flegacy-pass-manager`` and the negative ``fno-legacy-pass-manager``.
910``BoolOption`` also implies the ``-`` prefix for both flags. It's also possible
911to use ``BoolFOption`` that implies the ``"f"`` prefix and ``Group<f_Group>``.
912The ``PosFlag`` and ``NegFlag`` classes hold the associated boolean value, an
913array of elements passed to the ``Flag`` class and the help text. The optional
914``BothFlags`` class holds an array of ``Flag`` elements that are common for both
915the positive and negative flag and their common help text suffix.
916
917**String**
918
919The key path defaults to the specified string, or an empty one, if omitted. When
920the option appears on the command line, the argument value is simply copied.
921
922.. code-block:: text
923
924  def isysroot : JoinedOrSeparate<["-"], "isysroot">, Flags<[CC1Option]>,
925    MarshallingInfoString<HeaderSearchOpts<"Sysroot">, [{"/"}]>;
926
927**List of Strings**
928
929The key path defaults to an empty ``std::vector<std::string>``. Values specified
930with each appearance of the option on the command line are appended to the
931vector.
932
933.. code-block:: text
934
935  def frewrite_map_file : Separate<["-"], "frewrite-map-file">, Flags<[CC1Option]>,
936    MarshallingInfoStringVector<CodeGenOpts<"RewriteMapFiles">>;
937
938**Integer**
939
940The key path defaults to the specified integer value, or ``0`` if omitted. When
941the option appears on the command line, its value gets parsed by ``llvm::APInt``
942and the result is assigned to the key path on success.
943
944.. code-block:: text
945
946  def mstack_probe_size : Joined<["-"], "mstack-probe-size=">, Flags<[CC1Option]>,
947    MarshallingInfoInt<CodeGenOpts<"StackProbeSize">, "4096">;
948
949**Enumeration**
950
951The key path defaults to the value specified in ``MarshallingInfoEnum`` prefixed
952by the contents of ``NormalizedValuesScope`` and ``::``. This ensures correct
953reference to an enum case is formed even if the enum resides in different
954namespace or is an enum class. If the value present on command line does not
955match any of the comma-separated values from ``Values``, an error diagnostics is
956issued. Otherwise, the corresponding element from ``NormalizedValues`` at the
957same index is assigned to the key path (also correctly scoped). The number of
958comma-separated string values and elements of the array within
959``NormalizedValues`` must match.
960
961.. code-block:: text
962
963  def mthread_model : Separate<["-"], "mthread-model">, Flags<[CC1Option]>,
964    Values<"posix,single">, NormalizedValues<["POSIX", "Single"]>,
965    NormalizedValuesScope<"LangOptions::ThreadModelKind">,
966    MarshallingInfoEnum<LangOpts<"ThreadModel">, "POSIX">;
967
968..
969  Intentionally omitting MarshallingInfoBitfieldFlag. It's adding some
970  complexity to the marshalling infrastructure and might be removed.
971
972It is also possible to define relationships between options.
973
974**Implication**
975
976The key path defaults to the default value from the primary ``Marshalling``
977annotation. Then, if any of the elements of ``ImpliedByAnyOf`` evaluate to true,
978the key path value is changed to the specified value or ``true`` if missing.
979Finally, the command line is parsed according to the primary annotation.
980
981.. code-block:: text
982
983  def fms_extensions : Flag<["-"], "fms-extensions">, Flags<[CC1Option]>,
984    MarshallingInfoFlag<LangOpts<"MicrosoftExt">>,
985    ImpliedByAnyOf<[fms_compatibility.KeyPath], "true">;
986
987**Condition**
988
989The option is parsed only if the expression in ``ShouldParseIf`` evaluates to
990true.
991
992.. code-block:: text
993
994  def fopenmp_enable_irbuilder : Flag<["-"], "fopenmp-enable-irbuilder">, Flags<[CC1Option]>,
995    MarshallingInfoFlag<LangOpts<"OpenMPIRBuilder">>,
996    ShouldParseIf<fopenmp.KeyPath>;
997
998The Lexer and Preprocessor Library
999==================================
1000
1001The Lexer library contains several tightly-connected classes that are involved
1002with the nasty process of lexing and preprocessing C source code.  The main
1003interface to this library for outside clients is the large ``Preprocessor``
1004class.  It contains the various pieces of state that are required to coherently
1005read tokens out of a translation unit.
1006
1007The core interface to the ``Preprocessor`` object (once it is set up) is the
1008``Preprocessor::Lex`` method, which returns the next :ref:`Token <Token>` from
1009the preprocessor stream.  There are two types of token providers that the
1010preprocessor is capable of reading from: a buffer lexer (provided by the
1011:ref:`Lexer <Lexer>` class) and a buffered token stream (provided by the
1012:ref:`TokenLexer <TokenLexer>` class).
1013
1014.. _Token:
1015
1016The Token class
1017---------------
1018
1019The ``Token`` class is used to represent a single lexed token.  Tokens are
1020intended to be used by the lexer/preprocess and parser libraries, but are not
1021intended to live beyond them (for example, they should not live in the ASTs).
1022
1023Tokens most often live on the stack (or some other location that is efficient
1024to access) as the parser is running, but occasionally do get buffered up.  For
1025example, macro definitions are stored as a series of tokens, and the C++
1026front-end periodically needs to buffer tokens up for tentative parsing and
1027various pieces of look-ahead.  As such, the size of a ``Token`` matters.  On a
102832-bit system, ``sizeof(Token)`` is currently 16 bytes.
1029
1030Tokens occur in two forms: :ref:`annotation tokens <AnnotationToken>` and
1031normal tokens.  Normal tokens are those returned by the lexer, annotation
1032tokens represent semantic information and are produced by the parser, replacing
1033normal tokens in the token stream.  Normal tokens contain the following
1034information:
1035
1036* **A SourceLocation** --- This indicates the location of the start of the
1037  token.
1038
1039* **A length** --- This stores the length of the token as stored in the
1040  ``SourceBuffer``.  For tokens that include them, this length includes
1041  trigraphs and escaped newlines which are ignored by later phases of the
1042  compiler.  By pointing into the original source buffer, it is always possible
1043  to get the original spelling of a token completely accurately.
1044
1045* **IdentifierInfo** --- If a token takes the form of an identifier, and if
1046  identifier lookup was enabled when the token was lexed (e.g., the lexer was
1047  not reading in "raw" mode) this contains a pointer to the unique hash value
1048  for the identifier.  Because the lookup happens before keyword
1049  identification, this field is set even for language keywords like "``for``".
1050
1051* **TokenKind** --- This indicates the kind of token as classified by the
1052  lexer.  This includes things like ``tok::starequal`` (for the "``*=``"
1053  operator), ``tok::ampamp`` for the "``&&``" token, and keyword values (e.g.,
1054  ``tok::kw_for``) for identifiers that correspond to keywords.  Note that
1055  some tokens can be spelled multiple ways.  For example, C++ supports
1056  "operator keywords", where things like "``and``" are treated exactly like the
1057  "``&&``" operator.  In these cases, the kind value is set to ``tok::ampamp``,
1058  which is good for the parser, which doesn't have to consider both forms.  For
1059  something that cares about which form is used (e.g., the preprocessor
1060  "stringize" operator) the spelling indicates the original form.
1061
1062* **Flags** --- There are currently four flags tracked by the
1063  lexer/preprocessor system on a per-token basis:
1064
1065  #. **StartOfLine** --- This was the first token that occurred on its input
1066     source line.
1067  #. **LeadingSpace** --- There was a space character either immediately before
1068     the token or transitively before the token as it was expanded through a
1069     macro.  The definition of this flag is very closely defined by the
1070     stringizing requirements of the preprocessor.
1071  #. **DisableExpand** --- This flag is used internally to the preprocessor to
1072     represent identifier tokens which have macro expansion disabled.  This
1073     prevents them from being considered as candidates for macro expansion ever
1074     in the future.
1075  #. **NeedsCleaning** --- This flag is set if the original spelling for the
1076     token includes a trigraph or escaped newline.  Since this is uncommon,
1077     many pieces of code can fast-path on tokens that did not need cleaning.
1078
1079One interesting (and somewhat unusual) aspect of normal tokens is that they
1080don't contain any semantic information about the lexed value.  For example, if
1081the token was a pp-number token, we do not represent the value of the number
1082that was lexed (this is left for later pieces of code to decide).
1083Additionally, the lexer library has no notion of typedef names vs variable
1084names: both are returned as identifiers, and the parser is left to decide
1085whether a specific identifier is a typedef or a variable (tracking this
1086requires scope information among other things).  The parser can do this
1087translation by replacing tokens returned by the preprocessor with "Annotation
1088Tokens".
1089
1090.. _AnnotationToken:
1091
1092Annotation Tokens
1093-----------------
1094
1095Annotation tokens are tokens that are synthesized by the parser and injected
1096into the preprocessor's token stream (replacing existing tokens) to record
1097semantic information found by the parser.  For example, if "``foo``" is found
1098to be a typedef, the "``foo``" ``tok::identifier`` token is replaced with an
1099``tok::annot_typename``.  This is useful for a couple of reasons: 1) this makes
1100it easy to handle qualified type names (e.g., "``foo::bar::baz<42>::t``") in
1101C++ as a single "token" in the parser.  2) if the parser backtracks, the
1102reparse does not need to redo semantic analysis to determine whether a token
1103sequence is a variable, type, template, etc.
1104
1105Annotation tokens are created by the parser and reinjected into the parser's
1106token stream (when backtracking is enabled).  Because they can only exist in
1107tokens that the preprocessor-proper is done with, it doesn't need to keep
1108around flags like "start of line" that the preprocessor uses to do its job.
1109Additionally, an annotation token may "cover" a sequence of preprocessor tokens
1110(e.g., "``a::b::c``" is five preprocessor tokens).  As such, the valid fields
1111of an annotation token are different than the fields for a normal token (but
1112they are multiplexed into the normal ``Token`` fields):
1113
1114* **SourceLocation "Location"** --- The ``SourceLocation`` for the annotation
1115  token indicates the first token replaced by the annotation token.  In the
1116  example above, it would be the location of the "``a``" identifier.
1117* **SourceLocation "AnnotationEndLoc"** --- This holds the location of the last
1118  token replaced with the annotation token.  In the example above, it would be
1119  the location of the "``c``" identifier.
1120* **void* "AnnotationValue"** --- This contains an opaque object that the
1121  parser gets from ``Sema``.  The parser merely preserves the information for
1122  ``Sema`` to later interpret based on the annotation token kind.
1123* **TokenKind "Kind"** --- This indicates the kind of Annotation token this is.
1124  See below for the different valid kinds.
1125
1126Annotation tokens currently come in three kinds:
1127
1128#. **tok::annot_typename**: This annotation token represents a resolved
1129   typename token that is potentially qualified.  The ``AnnotationValue`` field
1130   contains the ``QualType`` returned by ``Sema::getTypeName()``, possibly with
1131   source location information attached.
1132#. **tok::annot_cxxscope**: This annotation token represents a C++ scope
1133   specifier, such as "``A::B::``".  This corresponds to the grammar
1134   productions "*::*" and "*:: [opt] nested-name-specifier*".  The
1135   ``AnnotationValue`` pointer is a ``NestedNameSpecifier *`` returned by the
1136   ``Sema::ActOnCXXGlobalScopeSpecifier`` and
1137   ``Sema::ActOnCXXNestedNameSpecifier`` callbacks.
1138#. **tok::annot_template_id**: This annotation token represents a C++
1139   template-id such as "``foo<int, 4>``", where "``foo``" is the name of a
1140   template.  The ``AnnotationValue`` pointer is a pointer to a ``malloc``'d
1141   ``TemplateIdAnnotation`` object.  Depending on the context, a parsed
1142   template-id that names a type might become a typename annotation token (if
1143   all we care about is the named type, e.g., because it occurs in a type
1144   specifier) or might remain a template-id token (if we want to retain more
1145   source location information or produce a new type, e.g., in a declaration of
1146   a class template specialization).  template-id annotation tokens that refer
1147   to a type can be "upgraded" to typename annotation tokens by the parser.
1148
1149As mentioned above, annotation tokens are not returned by the preprocessor,
1150they are formed on demand by the parser.  This means that the parser has to be
1151aware of cases where an annotation could occur and form it where appropriate.
1152This is somewhat similar to how the parser handles Translation Phase 6 of C99:
1153String Concatenation (see C99 5.1.1.2).  In the case of string concatenation,
1154the preprocessor just returns distinct ``tok::string_literal`` and
1155``tok::wide_string_literal`` tokens and the parser eats a sequence of them
1156wherever the grammar indicates that a string literal can occur.
1157
1158In order to do this, whenever the parser expects a ``tok::identifier`` or
1159``tok::coloncolon``, it should call the ``TryAnnotateTypeOrScopeToken`` or
1160``TryAnnotateCXXScopeToken`` methods to form the annotation token.  These
1161methods will maximally form the specified annotation tokens and replace the
1162current token with them, if applicable.  If the current tokens is not valid for
1163an annotation token, it will remain an identifier or "``::``" token.
1164
1165.. _Lexer:
1166
1167The ``Lexer`` class
1168-------------------
1169
1170The ``Lexer`` class provides the mechanics of lexing tokens out of a source
1171buffer and deciding what they mean.  The ``Lexer`` is complicated by the fact
1172that it operates on raw buffers that have not had spelling eliminated (this is
1173a necessity to get decent performance), but this is countered with careful
1174coding as well as standard performance techniques (for example, the comment
1175handling code is vectorized on X86 and PowerPC hosts).
1176
1177The lexer has a couple of interesting modal features:
1178
1179* The lexer can operate in "raw" mode.  This mode has several features that
1180  make it possible to quickly lex the file (e.g., it stops identifier lookup,
1181  doesn't specially handle preprocessor tokens, handles EOF differently, etc).
1182  This mode is used for lexing within an "``#if 0``" block, for example.
1183* The lexer can capture and return comments as tokens.  This is required to
1184  support the ``-C`` preprocessor mode, which passes comments through, and is
1185  used by the diagnostic checker to identifier expect-error annotations.
1186* The lexer can be in ``ParsingFilename`` mode, which happens when
1187  preprocessing after reading a ``#include`` directive.  This mode changes the
1188  parsing of "``<``" to return an "angled string" instead of a bunch of tokens
1189  for each thing within the filename.
1190* When parsing a preprocessor directive (after "``#``") the
1191  ``ParsingPreprocessorDirective`` mode is entered.  This changes the parser to
1192  return EOD at a newline.
1193* The ``Lexer`` uses a ``LangOptions`` object to know whether trigraphs are
1194  enabled, whether C++ or ObjC keywords are recognized, etc.
1195
1196In addition to these modes, the lexer keeps track of a couple of other features
1197that are local to a lexed buffer, which change as the buffer is lexed:
1198
1199* The ``Lexer`` uses ``BufferPtr`` to keep track of the current character being
1200  lexed.
1201* The ``Lexer`` uses ``IsAtStartOfLine`` to keep track of whether the next
1202  lexed token will start with its "start of line" bit set.
1203* The ``Lexer`` keeps track of the current "``#if``" directives that are active
1204  (which can be nested).
1205* The ``Lexer`` keeps track of an :ref:`MultipleIncludeOpt
1206  <MultipleIncludeOpt>` object, which is used to detect whether the buffer uses
1207  the standard "``#ifndef XX`` / ``#define XX``" idiom to prevent multiple
1208  inclusion.  If a buffer does, subsequent includes can be ignored if the
1209  "``XX``" macro is defined.
1210
1211.. _TokenLexer:
1212
1213The ``TokenLexer`` class
1214------------------------
1215
1216The ``TokenLexer`` class is a token provider that returns tokens from a list of
1217tokens that came from somewhere else.  It typically used for two things: 1)
1218returning tokens from a macro definition as it is being expanded 2) returning
1219tokens from an arbitrary buffer of tokens.  The later use is used by
1220``_Pragma`` and will most likely be used to handle unbounded look-ahead for the
1221C++ parser.
1222
1223.. _MultipleIncludeOpt:
1224
1225The ``MultipleIncludeOpt`` class
1226--------------------------------
1227
1228The ``MultipleIncludeOpt`` class implements a really simple little state
1229machine that is used to detect the standard "``#ifndef XX`` / ``#define XX``"
1230idiom that people typically use to prevent multiple inclusion of headers.  If a
1231buffer uses this idiom and is subsequently ``#include``'d, the preprocessor can
1232simply check to see whether the guarding condition is defined or not.  If so,
1233the preprocessor can completely ignore the include of the header.
1234
1235.. _Parser:
1236
1237The Parser Library
1238==================
1239
1240This library contains a recursive-descent parser that polls tokens from the
1241preprocessor and notifies a client of the parsing progress.
1242
1243Historically, the parser used to talk to an abstract ``Action`` interface that
1244had virtual methods for parse events, for example ``ActOnBinOp()``.  When Clang
1245grew C++ support, the parser stopped supporting general ``Action`` clients --
1246it now always talks to the :ref:`Sema library <Sema>`.  However, the Parser
1247still accesses AST objects only through opaque types like ``ExprResult`` and
1248``StmtResult``.  Only :ref:`Sema <Sema>` looks at the AST node contents of these
1249wrappers.
1250
1251.. _AST:
1252
1253The AST Library
1254===============
1255
1256.. _ASTPhilosophy:
1257
1258Design philosophy
1259-----------------
1260
1261Immutability
1262^^^^^^^^^^^^
1263
1264Clang AST nodes (types, declarations, statements, expressions, and so on) are
1265generally designed to be immutable once created. This provides a number of key
1266benefits:
1267
1268  * Canonicalization of the "meaning" of nodes is possible as soon as the nodes
1269    are created, and is not invalidated by later addition of more information.
1270    For example, we :ref:`canonicalize types <CanonicalType>`, and use a
1271    canonicalized representation of expressions when determining whether two
1272    function template declarations involving dependent expressions declare the
1273    same entity.
1274  * AST nodes can be reused when they have the same meaning. For example, we
1275    reuse ``Type`` nodes when representing the same type (but maintain separate
1276    ``TypeLoc``\s for each instance where a type is written), and we reuse
1277    non-dependent ``Stmt`` and ``Expr`` nodes across instantiations of a
1278    template.
1279  * Serialization and deserialization of the AST to/from AST files is simpler:
1280    we do not need to track modifications made to AST nodes imported from AST
1281    files and serialize separate "update records".
1282
1283There are unfortunately exceptions to this general approach, such as:
1284
1285  * The first declaration of a redeclarable entity maintains a pointer to the
1286    most recent declaration of that entity, which naturally needs to change as
1287    more declarations are parsed.
1288  * Name lookup tables in declaration contexts change after the namespace
1289    declaration is formed.
1290  * We attempt to maintain only a single declaration for an instantiation of a
1291    template, rather than having distinct declarations for an instantiation of
1292    the declaration versus the definition, so template instantiation often
1293    updates parts of existing declarations.
1294  * Some parts of declarations are required to be instantiated separately (this
1295    includes default arguments and exception specifications), and such
1296    instantiations update the existing declaration.
1297
1298These cases tend to be fragile; mutable AST state should be avoided where
1299possible.
1300
1301As a consequence of this design principle, we typically do not provide setters
1302for AST state. (Some are provided for short-term modifications intended to be
1303used immediately after an AST node is created and before it's "published" as
1304part of the complete AST, or where language semantics require after-the-fact
1305updates.)
1306
1307Faithfulness
1308^^^^^^^^^^^^
1309
1310The AST intends to provide a representation of the program that is faithful to
1311the original source. We intend for it to be possible to write refactoring tools
1312using only information stored in, or easily reconstructible from, the Clang AST.
1313This means that the AST representation should either not desugar source-level
1314constructs to simpler forms, or -- where made necessary by language semantics
1315or a clear engineering tradeoff -- should desugar minimally and wrap the result
1316in a construct representing the original source form.
1317
1318For example, ``CXXForRangeStmt`` directly represents the syntactic form of a
1319range-based for statement, but also holds a semantic representation of the
1320range declaration and iterator declarations. It does not contain a
1321fully-desugared ``ForStmt``, however.
1322
1323Some AST nodes (for example, ``ParenExpr``) represent only syntax, and others
1324(for example, ``ImplicitCastExpr``) represent only semantics, but most nodes
1325will represent a combination of syntax and associated semantics. Inheritance
1326is typically used when representing different (but related) syntaxes for nodes
1327with the same or similar semantics.
1328
1329.. _Type:
1330
1331The ``Type`` class and its subclasses
1332-------------------------------------
1333
1334The ``Type`` class (and its subclasses) are an important part of the AST.
1335Types are accessed through the ``ASTContext`` class, which implicitly creates
1336and uniques them as they are needed.  Types have a couple of non-obvious
1337features: 1) they do not capture type qualifiers like ``const`` or ``volatile``
1338(see :ref:`QualType <QualType>`), and 2) they implicitly capture typedef
1339information.  Once created, types are immutable (unlike decls).
1340
1341Typedefs in C make semantic analysis a bit more complex than it would be without
1342them.  The issue is that we want to capture typedef information and represent it
1343in the AST perfectly, but the semantics of operations need to "see through"
1344typedefs.  For example, consider this code:
1345
1346.. code-block:: c++
1347
1348  void func() {
1349    typedef int foo;
1350    foo X, *Y;
1351    typedef foo *bar;
1352    bar Z;
1353    *X; // error
1354    **Y; // error
1355    **Z; // error
1356  }
1357
1358The code above is illegal, and thus we expect there to be diagnostics emitted
1359on the annotated lines.  In this example, we expect to get:
1360
1361.. code-block:: text
1362
1363  test.c:6:1: error: indirection requires pointer operand ('foo' invalid)
1364    *X; // error
1365    ^~
1366  test.c:7:1: error: indirection requires pointer operand ('foo' invalid)
1367    **Y; // error
1368    ^~~
1369  test.c:8:1: error: indirection requires pointer operand ('foo' invalid)
1370    **Z; // error
1371    ^~~
1372
1373While this example is somewhat silly, it illustrates the point: we want to
1374retain typedef information where possible, so that we can emit errors about
1375"``std::string``" instead of "``std::basic_string<char, std:...``".  Doing this
1376requires properly keeping typedef information (for example, the type of ``X``
1377is "``foo``", not "``int``"), and requires properly propagating it through the
1378various operators (for example, the type of ``*Y`` is "``foo``", not
1379"``int``").  In order to retain this information, the type of these expressions
1380is an instance of the ``TypedefType`` class, which indicates that the type of
1381these expressions is a typedef for "``foo``".
1382
1383Representing types like this is great for diagnostics, because the
1384user-specified type is always immediately available.  There are two problems
1385with this: first, various semantic checks need to make judgements about the
1386*actual structure* of a type, ignoring typedefs.  Second, we need an efficient
1387way to query whether two types are structurally identical to each other,
1388ignoring typedefs.  The solution to both of these problems is the idea of
1389canonical types.
1390
1391.. _CanonicalType:
1392
1393Canonical Types
1394^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
1395
1396Every instance of the ``Type`` class contains a canonical type pointer.  For
1397simple types with no typedefs involved (e.g., "``int``", "``int*``",
1398"``int**``"), the type just points to itself.  For types that have a typedef
1399somewhere in their structure (e.g., "``foo``", "``foo*``", "``foo**``",
1400"``bar``"), the canonical type pointer points to their structurally equivalent
1401type without any typedefs (e.g., "``int``", "``int*``", "``int**``", and
1402"``int*``" respectively).
1403
1404This design provides a constant time operation (dereferencing the canonical type
1405pointer) that gives us access to the structure of types.  For example, we can
1406trivially tell that "``bar``" and "``foo*``" are the same type by dereferencing
1407their canonical type pointers and doing a pointer comparison (they both point
1408to the single "``int*``" type).
1409
1410Canonical types and typedef types bring up some complexities that must be
1411carefully managed.  Specifically, the ``isa``/``cast``/``dyn_cast`` operators
1412generally shouldn't be used in code that is inspecting the AST.  For example,
1413when type checking the indirection operator (unary "``*``" on a pointer), the
1414type checker must verify that the operand has a pointer type.  It would not be
1415correct to check that with "``isa<PointerType>(SubExpr->getType())``", because
1416this predicate would fail if the subexpression had a typedef type.
1417
1418The solution to this problem are a set of helper methods on ``Type``, used to
1419check their properties.  In this case, it would be correct to use
1420"``SubExpr->getType()->isPointerType()``" to do the check.  This predicate will
1421return true if the *canonical type is a pointer*, which is true any time the
1422type is structurally a pointer type.  The only hard part here is remembering
1423not to use the ``isa``/``cast``/``dyn_cast`` operations.
1424
1425The second problem we face is how to get access to the pointer type once we
1426know it exists.  To continue the example, the result type of the indirection
1427operator is the pointee type of the subexpression.  In order to determine the
1428type, we need to get the instance of ``PointerType`` that best captures the
1429typedef information in the program.  If the type of the expression is literally
1430a ``PointerType``, we can return that, otherwise we have to dig through the
1431typedefs to find the pointer type.  For example, if the subexpression had type
1432"``foo*``", we could return that type as the result.  If the subexpression had
1433type "``bar``", we want to return "``foo*``" (note that we do *not* want
1434"``int*``").  In order to provide all of this, ``Type`` has a
1435``getAsPointerType()`` method that checks whether the type is structurally a
1436``PointerType`` and, if so, returns the best one.  If not, it returns a null
1437pointer.
1438
1439This structure is somewhat mystical, but after meditating on it, it will make
1440sense to you :).
1441
1442.. _QualType:
1443
1444The ``QualType`` class
1445----------------------
1446
1447The ``QualType`` class is designed as a trivial value class that is small,
1448passed by-value and is efficient to query.  The idea of ``QualType`` is that it
1449stores the type qualifiers (``const``, ``volatile``, ``restrict``, plus some
1450extended qualifiers required by language extensions) separately from the types
1451themselves.  ``QualType`` is conceptually a pair of "``Type*``" and the bits
1452for these type qualifiers.
1453
1454By storing the type qualifiers as bits in the conceptual pair, it is extremely
1455efficient to get the set of qualifiers on a ``QualType`` (just return the field
1456of the pair), add a type qualifier (which is a trivial constant-time operation
1457that sets a bit), and remove one or more type qualifiers (just return a
1458``QualType`` with the bitfield set to empty).
1459
1460Further, because the bits are stored outside of the type itself, we do not need
1461to create duplicates of types with different sets of qualifiers (i.e. there is
1462only a single heap allocated "``int``" type: "``const int``" and "``volatile
1463const int``" both point to the same heap allocated "``int``" type).  This
1464reduces the heap size used to represent bits and also means we do not have to
1465consider qualifiers when uniquing types (:ref:`Type <Type>` does not even
1466contain qualifiers).
1467
1468In practice, the two most common type qualifiers (``const`` and ``restrict``)
1469are stored in the low bits of the pointer to the ``Type`` object, together with
1470a flag indicating whether extended qualifiers are present (which must be
1471heap-allocated).  This means that ``QualType`` is exactly the same size as a
1472pointer.
1473
1474.. _DeclarationName:
1475
1476Declaration names
1477-----------------
1478
1479The ``DeclarationName`` class represents the name of a declaration in Clang.
1480Declarations in the C family of languages can take several different forms.
1481Most declarations are named by simple identifiers, e.g., "``f``" and "``x``" in
1482the function declaration ``f(int x)``.  In C++, declaration names can also name
1483class constructors ("``Class``" in ``struct Class { Class(); }``), class
1484destructors ("``~Class``"), overloaded operator names ("``operator+``"), and
1485conversion functions ("``operator void const *``").  In Objective-C,
1486declaration names can refer to the names of Objective-C methods, which involve
1487the method name and the parameters, collectively called a *selector*, e.g.,
1488"``setWidth:height:``".  Since all of these kinds of entities --- variables,
1489functions, Objective-C methods, C++ constructors, destructors, and operators
1490--- are represented as subclasses of Clang's common ``NamedDecl`` class,
1491``DeclarationName`` is designed to efficiently represent any kind of name.
1492
1493Given a ``DeclarationName`` ``N``, ``N.getNameKind()`` will produce a value
1494that describes what kind of name ``N`` stores.  There are 10 options (all of
1495the names are inside the ``DeclarationName`` class).
1496
1497``Identifier``
1498
1499  The name is a simple identifier.  Use ``N.getAsIdentifierInfo()`` to retrieve
1500  the corresponding ``IdentifierInfo*`` pointing to the actual identifier.
1501
1502``ObjCZeroArgSelector``, ``ObjCOneArgSelector``, ``ObjCMultiArgSelector``
1503
1504  The name is an Objective-C selector, which can be retrieved as a ``Selector``
1505  instance via ``N.getObjCSelector()``.  The three possible name kinds for
1506  Objective-C reflect an optimization within the ``DeclarationName`` class:
1507  both zero- and one-argument selectors are stored as a masked
1508  ``IdentifierInfo`` pointer, and therefore require very little space, since
1509  zero- and one-argument selectors are far more common than multi-argument
1510  selectors (which use a different structure).
1511
1512``CXXConstructorName``
1513
1514  The name is a C++ constructor name.  Use ``N.getCXXNameType()`` to retrieve
1515  the :ref:`type <QualType>` that this constructor is meant to construct.  The
1516  type is always the canonical type, since all constructors for a given type
1517  have the same name.
1518
1519``CXXDestructorName``
1520
1521  The name is a C++ destructor name.  Use ``N.getCXXNameType()`` to retrieve
1522  the :ref:`type <QualType>` whose destructor is being named.  This type is
1523  always a canonical type.
1524
1525``CXXConversionFunctionName``
1526
1527  The name is a C++ conversion function.  Conversion functions are named
1528  according to the type they convert to, e.g., "``operator void const *``".
1529  Use ``N.getCXXNameType()`` to retrieve the type that this conversion function
1530  converts to.  This type is always a canonical type.
1531
1532``CXXOperatorName``
1533
1534  The name is a C++ overloaded operator name.  Overloaded operators are named
1535  according to their spelling, e.g., "``operator+``" or "``operator new []``".
1536  Use ``N.getCXXOverloadedOperator()`` to retrieve the overloaded operator (a
1537  value of type ``OverloadedOperatorKind``).
1538
1539``CXXLiteralOperatorName``
1540
1541  The name is a C++11 user defined literal operator.  User defined
1542  Literal operators are named according to the suffix they define,
1543  e.g., "``_foo``" for "``operator "" _foo``".  Use
1544  ``N.getCXXLiteralIdentifier()`` to retrieve the corresponding
1545  ``IdentifierInfo*`` pointing to the identifier.
1546
1547``CXXUsingDirective``
1548
1549  The name is a C++ using directive.  Using directives are not really
1550  NamedDecls, in that they all have the same name, but they are
1551  implemented as such in order to store them in DeclContext
1552  effectively.
1553
1554``DeclarationName``\ s are cheap to create, copy, and compare.  They require
1555only a single pointer's worth of storage in the common cases (identifiers,
1556zero- and one-argument Objective-C selectors) and use dense, uniqued storage
1557for the other kinds of names.  Two ``DeclarationName``\ s can be compared for
1558equality (``==``, ``!=``) using a simple bitwise comparison, can be ordered
1559with ``<``, ``>``, ``<=``, and ``>=`` (which provide a lexicographical ordering
1560for normal identifiers but an unspecified ordering for other kinds of names),
1561and can be placed into LLVM ``DenseMap``\ s and ``DenseSet``\ s.
1562
1563``DeclarationName`` instances can be created in different ways depending on
1564what kind of name the instance will store.  Normal identifiers
1565(``IdentifierInfo`` pointers) and Objective-C selectors (``Selector``) can be
1566implicitly converted to ``DeclarationNames``.  Names for C++ constructors,
1567destructors, conversion functions, and overloaded operators can be retrieved
1568from the ``DeclarationNameTable``, an instance of which is available as
1569``ASTContext::DeclarationNames``.  The member functions
1570``getCXXConstructorName``, ``getCXXDestructorName``,
1571``getCXXConversionFunctionName``, and ``getCXXOperatorName``, respectively,
1572return ``DeclarationName`` instances for the four kinds of C++ special function
1573names.
1574
1575.. _DeclContext:
1576
1577Declaration contexts
1578--------------------
1579
1580Every declaration in a program exists within some *declaration context*, such
1581as a translation unit, namespace, class, or function.  Declaration contexts in
1582Clang are represented by the ``DeclContext`` class, from which the various
1583declaration-context AST nodes (``TranslationUnitDecl``, ``NamespaceDecl``,
1584``RecordDecl``, ``FunctionDecl``, etc.) will derive.  The ``DeclContext`` class
1585provides several facilities common to each declaration context:
1586
1587Source-centric vs. Semantics-centric View of Declarations
1588
1589  ``DeclContext`` provides two views of the declarations stored within a
1590  declaration context.  The source-centric view accurately represents the
1591  program source code as written, including multiple declarations of entities
1592  where present (see the section :ref:`Redeclarations and Overloads
1593  <Redeclarations>`), while the semantics-centric view represents the program
1594  semantics.  The two views are kept synchronized by semantic analysis while
1595  the ASTs are being constructed.
1596
1597Storage of declarations within that context
1598
1599  Every declaration context can contain some number of declarations.  For
1600  example, a C++ class (represented by ``RecordDecl``) contains various member
1601  functions, fields, nested types, and so on.  All of these declarations will
1602  be stored within the ``DeclContext``, and one can iterate over the
1603  declarations via [``DeclContext::decls_begin()``,
1604  ``DeclContext::decls_end()``).  This mechanism provides the source-centric
1605  view of declarations in the context.
1606
1607Lookup of declarations within that context
1608
1609  The ``DeclContext`` structure provides efficient name lookup for names within
1610  that declaration context.  For example, if ``N`` is a namespace we can look
1611  for the name ``N::f`` using ``DeclContext::lookup``.  The lookup itself is
1612  based on a lazily-constructed array (for declaration contexts with a small
1613  number of declarations) or hash table (for declaration contexts with more
1614  declarations).  The lookup operation provides the semantics-centric view of
1615  the declarations in the context.
1616
1617Ownership of declarations
1618
1619  The ``DeclContext`` owns all of the declarations that were declared within
1620  its declaration context, and is responsible for the management of their
1621  memory as well as their (de-)serialization.
1622
1623All declarations are stored within a declaration context, and one can query
1624information about the context in which each declaration lives.  One can
1625retrieve the ``DeclContext`` that contains a particular ``Decl`` using
1626``Decl::getDeclContext``.  However, see the section
1627:ref:`LexicalAndSemanticContexts` for more information about how to interpret
1628this context information.
1629
1630.. _Redeclarations:
1631
1632Redeclarations and Overloads
1633^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
1634
1635Within a translation unit, it is common for an entity to be declared several
1636times.  For example, we might declare a function "``f``" and then later
1637re-declare it as part of an inlined definition:
1638
1639.. code-block:: c++
1640
1641  void f(int x, int y, int z = 1);
1642
1643  inline void f(int x, int y, int z) { /* ...  */ }
1644
1645The representation of "``f``" differs in the source-centric and
1646semantics-centric views of a declaration context.  In the source-centric view,
1647all redeclarations will be present, in the order they occurred in the source
1648code, making this view suitable for clients that wish to see the structure of
1649the source code.  In the semantics-centric view, only the most recent "``f``"
1650will be found by the lookup, since it effectively replaces the first
1651declaration of "``f``".
1652
1653(Note that because ``f`` can be redeclared at block scope, or in a friend
1654declaration, etc. it is possible that the declaration of ``f`` found by name
1655lookup will not be the most recent one.)
1656
1657In the semantics-centric view, overloading of functions is represented
1658explicitly.  For example, given two declarations of a function "``g``" that are
1659overloaded, e.g.,
1660
1661.. code-block:: c++
1662
1663  void g();
1664  void g(int);
1665
1666the ``DeclContext::lookup`` operation will return a
1667``DeclContext::lookup_result`` that contains a range of iterators over
1668declarations of "``g``".  Clients that perform semantic analysis on a program
1669that is not concerned with the actual source code will primarily use this
1670semantics-centric view.
1671
1672.. _LexicalAndSemanticContexts:
1673
1674Lexical and Semantic Contexts
1675^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
1676
1677Each declaration has two potentially different declaration contexts: a
1678*lexical* context, which corresponds to the source-centric view of the
1679declaration context, and a *semantic* context, which corresponds to the
1680semantics-centric view.  The lexical context is accessible via
1681``Decl::getLexicalDeclContext`` while the semantic context is accessible via
1682``Decl::getDeclContext``, both of which return ``DeclContext`` pointers.  For
1683most declarations, the two contexts are identical.  For example:
1684
1685.. code-block:: c++
1686
1687  class X {
1688  public:
1689    void f(int x);
1690  };
1691
1692Here, the semantic and lexical contexts of ``X::f`` are the ``DeclContext``
1693associated with the class ``X`` (itself stored as a ``RecordDecl`` AST node).
1694However, we can now define ``X::f`` out-of-line:
1695
1696.. code-block:: c++
1697
1698  void X::f(int x = 17) { /* ...  */ }
1699
1700This definition of "``f``" has different lexical and semantic contexts.  The
1701lexical context corresponds to the declaration context in which the actual
1702declaration occurred in the source code, e.g., the translation unit containing
1703``X``.  Thus, this declaration of ``X::f`` can be found by traversing the
1704declarations provided by [``decls_begin()``, ``decls_end()``) in the
1705translation unit.
1706
1707The semantic context of ``X::f`` corresponds to the class ``X``, since this
1708member function is (semantically) a member of ``X``.  Lookup of the name ``f``
1709into the ``DeclContext`` associated with ``X`` will then return the definition
1710of ``X::f`` (including information about the default argument).
1711
1712Transparent Declaration Contexts
1713^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
1714
1715In C and C++, there are several contexts in which names that are logically
1716declared inside another declaration will actually "leak" out into the enclosing
1717scope from the perspective of name lookup.  The most obvious instance of this
1718behavior is in enumeration types, e.g.,
1719
1720.. code-block:: c++
1721
1722  enum Color {
1723    Red,
1724    Green,
1725    Blue
1726  };
1727
1728Here, ``Color`` is an enumeration, which is a declaration context that contains
1729the enumerators ``Red``, ``Green``, and ``Blue``.  Thus, traversing the list of
1730declarations contained in the enumeration ``Color`` will yield ``Red``,
1731``Green``, and ``Blue``.  However, outside of the scope of ``Color`` one can
1732name the enumerator ``Red`` without qualifying the name, e.g.,
1733
1734.. code-block:: c++
1735
1736  Color c = Red;
1737
1738There are other entities in C++ that provide similar behavior.  For example,
1739linkage specifications that use curly braces:
1740
1741.. code-block:: c++
1742
1743  extern "C" {
1744    void f(int);
1745    void g(int);
1746  }
1747  // f and g are visible here
1748
1749For source-level accuracy, we treat the linkage specification and enumeration
1750type as a declaration context in which its enclosed declarations ("``Red``",
1751"``Green``", and "``Blue``"; "``f``" and "``g``") are declared.  However, these
1752declarations are visible outside of the scope of the declaration context.
1753
1754These language features (and several others, described below) have roughly the
1755same set of requirements: declarations are declared within a particular lexical
1756context, but the declarations are also found via name lookup in scopes
1757enclosing the declaration itself.  This feature is implemented via
1758*transparent* declaration contexts (see
1759``DeclContext::isTransparentContext()``), whose declarations are visible in the
1760nearest enclosing non-transparent declaration context.  This means that the
1761lexical context of the declaration (e.g., an enumerator) will be the
1762transparent ``DeclContext`` itself, as will the semantic context, but the
1763declaration will be visible in every outer context up to and including the
1764first non-transparent declaration context (since transparent declaration
1765contexts can be nested).
1766
1767The transparent ``DeclContext``\ s are:
1768
1769* Enumerations (but not C++11 "scoped enumerations"):
1770
1771  .. code-block:: c++
1772
1773    enum Color {
1774      Red,
1775      Green,
1776      Blue
1777    };
1778    // Red, Green, and Blue are in scope
1779
1780* C++ linkage specifications:
1781
1782  .. code-block:: c++
1783
1784    extern "C" {
1785      void f(int);
1786      void g(int);
1787    }
1788    // f and g are in scope
1789
1790* Anonymous unions and structs:
1791
1792  .. code-block:: c++
1793
1794    struct LookupTable {
1795      bool IsVector;
1796      union {
1797        std::vector<Item> *Vector;
1798        std::set<Item> *Set;
1799      };
1800    };
1801
1802    LookupTable LT;
1803    LT.Vector = 0; // Okay: finds Vector inside the unnamed union
1804
1805* C++11 inline namespaces:
1806
1807  .. code-block:: c++
1808
1809    namespace mylib {
1810      inline namespace debug {
1811        class X;
1812      }
1813    }
1814    mylib::X *xp; // okay: mylib::X refers to mylib::debug::X
1815
1816.. _MultiDeclContext:
1817
1818Multiply-Defined Declaration Contexts
1819^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
1820
1821C++ namespaces have the interesting property that
1822the namespace can be defined multiple times, and the declarations provided by
1823each namespace definition are effectively merged (from the semantic point of
1824view).  For example, the following two code snippets are semantically
1825indistinguishable:
1826
1827.. code-block:: c++
1828
1829  // Snippet #1:
1830  namespace N {
1831    void f();
1832  }
1833  namespace N {
1834    void f(int);
1835  }
1836
1837  // Snippet #2:
1838  namespace N {
1839    void f();
1840    void f(int);
1841  }
1842
1843In Clang's representation, the source-centric view of declaration contexts will
1844actually have two separate ``NamespaceDecl`` nodes in Snippet #1, each of which
1845is a declaration context that contains a single declaration of "``f``".
1846However, the semantics-centric view provided by name lookup into the namespace
1847``N`` for "``f``" will return a ``DeclContext::lookup_result`` that contains a
1848range of iterators over declarations of "``f``".
1849
1850``DeclContext`` manages multiply-defined declaration contexts internally.  The
1851function ``DeclContext::getPrimaryContext`` retrieves the "primary" context for
1852a given ``DeclContext`` instance, which is the ``DeclContext`` responsible for
1853maintaining the lookup table used for the semantics-centric view.  Given a
1854DeclContext, one can obtain the set of declaration contexts that are
1855semantically connected to this declaration context, in source order, including
1856this context (which will be the only result, for non-namespace contexts) via
1857``DeclContext::collectAllContexts``. Note that these functions are used
1858internally within the lookup and insertion methods of the ``DeclContext``, so
1859the vast majority of clients can ignore them.
1860
1861Because the same entity can be defined multiple times in different modules,
1862it is also possible for there to be multiple definitions of (for instance)
1863a ``CXXRecordDecl``, all of which describe a definition of the same class.
1864In such a case, only one of those "definitions" is considered by Clang to be
1865the definition of the class, and the others are treated as non-defining
1866declarations that happen to also contain member declarations. Corresponding
1867members in each definition of such multiply-defined classes are identified
1868either by redeclaration chains (if the members are ``Redeclarable``)
1869or by simply a pointer to the canonical declaration (if the declarations
1870are not ``Redeclarable`` -- in that case, a ``Mergeable`` base class is used
1871instead).
1872
1873Error Handling
1874--------------
1875
1876Clang produces an AST even when the code contains errors. Clang won't generate
1877and optimize code for it, but it's used as parsing continues to detect further
1878errors in the input. Clang-based tools also depend on such ASTs, and IDEs in
1879particular benefit from a high-quality AST for broken code.
1880
1881In presence of errors, clang uses a few error-recovery strategies to present the
1882broken code in the AST:
1883
1884- correcting errors: in cases where clang is confident about the fix, it
1885  provides a FixIt attaching to the error diagnostic and emits a corrected AST
1886  (reflecting the written code with FixIts applied). The advantage of that is to
1887  provide more accurate subsequent diagnostics. Typo correction is a typical
1888  example.
1889- representing invalid node: the invalid node is preserved in the AST in some
1890  form, e.g. when the "declaration" part of the declaration contains semantic
1891  errors, the Decl node is marked as invalid.
1892- dropping invalid node: this often happens for errors that we don’t have
1893  graceful recovery. Prior to Recovery AST, a mismatched-argument function call
1894  expression was dropped though a CallExpr was created for semantic analysis.
1895
1896With these strategies, clang surfaces better diagnostics, and provides AST
1897consumers a rich AST reflecting the written source code as much as possible even
1898for broken code.
1899
1900Recovery AST
1901^^^^^^^^^^^^
1902
1903The idea of Recovery AST is to use recovery nodes which act as a placeholder to
1904maintain the rough structure of the parsing tree, preserve locations and
1905children but have no language semantics attached to them.
1906
1907For example, consider the following mismatched function call:
1908
1909.. code-block:: c++
1910
1911   int NoArg();
1912   void test(int abc) {
1913     NoArg(abc); // oops, mismatched function arguments.
1914   }
1915
1916Without Recovery AST, the invalid function call expression (and its child
1917expressions) would be dropped in the AST:
1918
1919::
1920
1921    |-FunctionDecl <line:1:1, col:11> NoArg 'int ()'
1922    `-FunctionDecl <line:2:1, line:4:1> test 'void (int)'
1923     |-ParmVarDecl <col:11, col:15> col:15 used abc 'int'
1924     `-CompoundStmt <col:20, line:4:1>
1925
1926
1927With Recovery AST, the AST looks like:
1928
1929::
1930
1931    |-FunctionDecl <line:1:1, col:11> NoArg 'int ()'
1932    `-FunctionDecl <line:2:1, line:4:1> test 'void (int)'
1933      |-ParmVarDecl <col:11, col:15> used abc 'int'
1934      `-CompoundStmt <col:20, line:4:1>
1935        `-RecoveryExpr <line:3:3, col:12> 'int' contains-errors
1936          |-UnresolvedLookupExpr <col:3> '<overloaded function type>' lvalue (ADL) = 'NoArg'
1937          `-DeclRefExpr <col:9> 'int' lvalue ParmVar 'abc' 'int'
1938
1939
1940An alternative is to use existing Exprs, e.g. CallExpr for the above example.
1941This would capture more call details (e.g. locations of parentheses) and allow
1942it to be treated uniformly with valid CallExprs. However, jamming the data we
1943have into CallExpr forces us to weaken its invariants, e.g. arg count may be
1944wrong. This would introduce a huge burden on consumers of the AST to handle such
1945"impossible" cases. So when we're representing (rather than correcting) errors,
1946we use a distinct recovery node type with extremely weak invariants instead.
1947
1948``RecoveryExpr`` is the only recovery node so far. In practice, broken decls
1949need more detailed semantics preserved (the current ``Invalid`` flag works
1950fairly well), and completely broken statements with interesting internal
1951structure are rare (so dropping the statements is OK).
1952
1953Types and dependence
1954^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
1955
1956``RecoveryExpr`` is an ``Expr``, so it must have a type. In many cases the true
1957type can't really be known until the code is corrected (e.g. a call to a
1958function that doesn't exist). And it means that we can't properly perform type
1959checks on some containing constructs, such as ``return 42 + unknownFunction()``.
1960
1961To model this, we generalize the concept of dependence from C++ templates to
1962mean dependence on a template parameter or how an error is repaired. The
1963``RecoveryExpr`` ``unknownFunction()`` has the totally unknown type
1964``DependentTy``, and this suppresses type-based analysis in the same way it
1965would inside a template.
1966
1967In cases where we are confident about the concrete type (e.g. the return type
1968for a broken non-overloaded function call), the ``RecoveryExpr`` will have this
1969type. This allows more code to be typechecked, and produces a better AST and
1970more diagnostics. For example:
1971
1972.. code-block:: C++
1973
1974   unknownFunction().size() // .size() is a CXXDependentScopeMemberExpr
1975   std::string(42).size() // .size() is a resolved MemberExpr
1976
1977Whether or not the ``RecoveryExpr`` has a dependent type, it is always
1978considered value-dependent, because its value isn't well-defined until the error
1979is resolved. Among other things, this means that clang doesn't emit more errors
1980where a RecoveryExpr is used as a constant (e.g. array size), but also won't try
1981to evaluate it.
1982
1983ContainsErrors bit
1984^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
1985
1986Beyond the template dependence bits, we add a new “ContainsErrors” bit to
1987express “Does this expression or anything within it contain errors” semantic,
1988this bit is always set for RecoveryExpr, and propagated to other related nodes.
1989This provides a fast way to query whether any (recursive) child of an expression
1990had an error, which is often used to improve diagnostics.
1991
1992.. code-block:: C++
1993
1994   // C++
1995   void recoveryExpr(int abc) {
1996    unknownFunction(); // type-dependent, value-dependent, contains-errors
1997
1998    std::string(42).size(); // value-dependent, contains-errors,
1999                            // not type-dependent, as we know the type is std::string
2000   }
2001
2002
2003.. code-block:: C
2004
2005   // C
2006   void recoveryExpr(int abc) {
2007     unknownVar + abc; // type-dependent, value-dependent, contains-errors
2008   }
2009
2010
2011The ASTImporter
2012---------------
2013
2014The ``ASTImporter`` class imports nodes of an ``ASTContext`` into another
2015``ASTContext``. Please refer to the document :doc:`ASTImporter: Merging Clang
2016ASTs <LibASTImporter>` for an introduction. And please read through the
2017high-level `description of the import algorithm
2018<LibASTImporter.html#algorithm-of-the-import>`_, this is essential for
2019understanding further implementation details of the importer.
2020
2021.. _templated:
2022
2023Abstract Syntax Graph
2024^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
2025
2026Despite the name, the Clang AST is not a tree. It is a directed graph with
2027cycles. One example of a cycle is the connection between a
2028``ClassTemplateDecl`` and its "templated" ``CXXRecordDecl``. The *templated*
2029``CXXRecordDecl`` represents all the fields and methods inside the class
2030template, while the ``ClassTemplateDecl`` holds the information which is
2031related to being a template, i.e. template arguments, etc. We can get the
2032*templated* class (the ``CXXRecordDecl``) of a ``ClassTemplateDecl`` with
2033``ClassTemplateDecl::getTemplatedDecl()``. And we can get back a pointer of the
2034"described" class template from the *templated* class:
2035``CXXRecordDecl::getDescribedTemplate()``. So, this is a cycle between two
2036nodes: between the *templated* and the *described* node. There may be various
2037other kinds of cycles in the AST especially in case of declarations.
2038
2039.. _structural-eq:
2040
2041Structural Equivalency
2042^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
2043
2044Importing one AST node copies that node into the destination ``ASTContext``. To
2045copy one node means that we create a new node in the "to" context then we set
2046its properties to be equal to the properties of the source node. Before the
2047copy, we make sure that the source node is not *structurally equivalent* to any
2048existing node in the destination context. If it happens to be equivalent then
2049we skip the copy.
2050
2051The informal definition of structural equivalency is the following:
2052Two nodes are **structurally equivalent** if they are
2053
2054- builtin types and refer to the same type, e.g. ``int`` and ``int`` are
2055  structurally equivalent,
2056- function types and all their parameters have structurally equivalent types,
2057- record types and all their fields in order of their definition have the same
2058  identifier names and structurally equivalent types,
2059- variable or function declarations and they have the same identifier name and
2060  their types are structurally equivalent.
2061
2062In C, two types are structurally equivalent if they are *compatible types*. For
2063a formal definition of *compatible types*, please refer to 6.2.7/1 in the C11
2064standard. However, there is no definition for *compatible types* in the C++
2065standard. Still, we extend the definition of structural equivalency to
2066templates and their instantiations similarly: besides checking the previously
2067mentioned properties, we have to check for equivalent template
2068parameters/arguments, etc.
2069
2070The structural equivalent check can be and is used independently from the
2071ASTImporter, e.g. the ``clang::Sema`` class uses it also.
2072
2073The equivalence of nodes may depend on the equivalency of other pairs of nodes.
2074Thus, the check is implemented as a parallel graph traversal. We traverse
2075through the nodes of both graphs at the same time. The actual implementation is
2076similar to breadth-first-search. Let's say we start the traverse with the <A,B>
2077pair of nodes. Whenever the traversal reaches a pair <X,Y> then the following
2078statements are true:
2079
2080- A and X are nodes from the same ASTContext.
2081- B and Y are nodes from the same ASTContext.
2082- A and B may or may not be from the same ASTContext.
2083- if A == X and B == Y (pointer equivalency) then (there is a cycle during the
2084  traverse)
2085
2086  - A and B are structurally equivalent if and only if
2087
2088    - All dependent nodes on the path from <A,B> to <X,Y> are structurally
2089      equivalent.
2090
2091When we compare two classes or enums and one of them is incomplete or has
2092unloaded external lexical declarations then we cannot descend to compare their
2093contained declarations. So in these cases they are considered equal if they
2094have the same names. This is the way how we compare forward declarations with
2095definitions.
2096
2097.. TODO Should we elaborate the actual implementation of the graph traversal,
2098.. which is a very weird BFS traversal?
2099
2100Redeclaration Chains
2101^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
2102
2103The early version of the ``ASTImporter``'s merge mechanism squashed the
2104declarations, i.e. it aimed to have only one declaration instead of maintaining
2105a whole redeclaration chain. This early approach simply skipped importing a
2106function prototype, but it imported a definition. To demonstrate the problem
2107with this approach let's consider an empty "to" context and the following
2108``virtual`` function declarations of ``f`` in the "from" context:
2109
2110.. code-block:: c++
2111
2112  struct B { virtual void f(); };
2113  void B::f() {} // <-- let's import this definition
2114
2115If we imported the definition with the "squashing" approach then we would
2116end-up having one declaration which is indeed a definition, but ``isVirtual()``
2117returns ``false`` for it. The reason is that the definition is indeed not
2118virtual, it is the property of the prototype!
2119
2120Consequently, we must either set the virtual flag for the definition (but then
2121we create a malformed AST which the parser would never create), or we import
2122the whole redeclaration chain of the function. The most recent version of the
2123``ASTImporter`` uses the latter mechanism. We do import all function
2124declarations - regardless if they are definitions or prototypes - in the order
2125as they appear in the "from" context.
2126
2127.. One definition
2128
2129If we have an existing definition in the "to" context, then we cannot import
2130another definition, we will use the existing definition. However, we can import
2131prototype(s): we chain the newly imported prototype(s) to the existing
2132definition. Whenever we import a new prototype from a third context, that will
2133be added to the end of the redeclaration chain. This may result in long
2134redeclaration chains in certain cases, e.g. if we import from several
2135translation units which include the same header with the prototype.
2136
2137.. Squashing prototypes
2138
2139To mitigate the problem of long redeclaration chains of free functions, we
2140could compare prototypes to see if they have the same properties and if yes
2141then we could merge these prototypes. The implementation of squashing of
2142prototypes for free functions is future work.
2143
2144.. Exception: Cannot have more than 1 prototype in-class
2145
2146Chaining functions this way ensures that we do copy all information from the
2147source AST. Nonetheless, there is a problem with member functions: While we can
2148have many prototypes for free functions, we must have only one prototype for a
2149member function.
2150
2151.. code-block:: c++
2152
2153  void f(); // OK
2154  void f(); // OK
2155
2156  struct X {
2157    void f(); // OK
2158    void f(); // ERROR
2159  };
2160  void X::f() {} // OK
2161
2162Thus, prototypes of member functions must be squashed, we cannot just simply
2163attach a new prototype to the existing in-class prototype. Consider the
2164following contexts:
2165
2166.. code-block:: c++
2167
2168  // "to" context
2169  struct X {
2170    void f(); // D0
2171  };
2172
2173.. code-block:: c++
2174
2175  // "from" context
2176  struct X {
2177    void f(); // D1
2178  };
2179  void X::f() {} // D2
2180
2181When we import the prototype and the definition of ``f`` from the "from"
2182context, then the resulting redecl chain will look like this ``D0 -> D2'``,
2183where ``D2'`` is the copy of ``D2`` in the "to" context.
2184
2185.. Redecl chains of other declarations
2186
2187Generally speaking, when we import declarations (like enums and classes) we do
2188attach the newly imported declaration to the existing redeclaration chain (if
2189there is structural equivalency). We do not import, however, the whole
2190redeclaration chain as we do in case of functions. Up till now, we haven't
2191found any essential property of forward declarations which is similar to the
2192case of the virtual flag in a member function prototype. In the future, this
2193may change, though.
2194
2195Traversal during the Import
2196^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
2197
2198The node specific import mechanisms are implemented in
2199``ASTNodeImporter::VisitNode()`` functions, e.g. ``VisitFunctionDecl()``.
2200When we import a declaration then first we import everything which is needed to
2201call the constructor of that declaration node. Everything which can be set
2202later is set after the node is created. For example, in case of  a
2203``FunctionDecl`` we first import the declaration context in which the function
2204is declared, then we create the ``FunctionDecl`` and only then we import the
2205body of the function. This means there are implicit dependencies between AST
2206nodes. These dependencies determine the order in which we visit nodes in the
2207"from" context. As with the regular graph traversal algorithms like DFS, we
2208keep track which nodes we have already visited in
2209``ASTImporter::ImportedDecls``. Whenever we create a node then we immediately
2210add that to the ``ImportedDecls``. We must not start the import of any other
2211declarations before we keep track of the newly created one. This is essential,
2212otherwise, we would not be able to handle circular dependencies. To enforce
2213this, we wrap all constructor calls of all AST nodes in
2214``GetImportedOrCreateDecl()``. This wrapper ensures that all newly created
2215declarations are immediately marked as imported; also, if a declaration is
2216already marked as imported then we just return its counterpart in the "to"
2217context. Consequently, calling a declaration's ``::Create()`` function directly
2218would lead to errors, please don't do that!
2219
2220Even with the use of ``GetImportedOrCreateDecl()`` there is still a
2221probability of having an infinite import recursion if things are imported from
2222each other in wrong way. Imagine that during the import of ``A``, the import of
2223``B`` is requested before we could create the node for ``A`` (the constructor
2224needs a reference to ``B``). And the same could be true for the import of ``B``
2225(``A`` is requested to be imported before we could create the node for ``B``).
2226In case of the :ref:`templated-described swing <templated>` we take
2227extra attention to break the cyclical dependency: we import and set the
2228described template only after the ``CXXRecordDecl`` is created. As a best
2229practice, before creating the node in the "to" context, avoid importing of
2230other nodes which are not needed for the constructor of node ``A``.
2231
2232Error Handling
2233^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
2234
2235Every import function returns with either an ``llvm::Error`` or an
2236``llvm::Expected<T>`` object. This enforces to check the return value of the
2237import functions. If there was an error during one import then we return with
2238that error. (Exception: when we import the members of a class, we collect the
2239individual errors with each member and we concatenate them in one Error
2240object.) We cache these errors in cases of declarations. During the next import
2241call if there is an existing error we just return with that. So, clients of the
2242library receive an Error object, which they must check.
2243
2244During import of a specific declaration, it may happen that some AST nodes had
2245already been created before we recognize an error. In this case, we signal back
2246the error to the caller, but the "to" context remains polluted with those nodes
2247which had been created. Ideally, those nodes should not had been created, but
2248that time we did not know about the error, the error happened later. Since the
2249AST is immutable (most of the cases we can't remove existing nodes) we choose
2250to mark these nodes as erroneous.
2251
2252We cache the errors associated with declarations in the "from" context in
2253``ASTImporter::ImportDeclErrors`` and the ones which are associated with the
2254"to" context in ``ASTImporterSharedState::ImportErrors``. Note that, there may
2255be several ASTImporter objects which import into the same "to" context but from
2256different "from" contexts; in this case, they have to share the associated
2257errors of the "to" context.
2258
2259When an error happens, that propagates through the call stack, through all the
2260dependant nodes. However, in case of dependency cycles, this is not enough,
2261because we strive to mark the erroneous nodes so clients can act upon. In those
2262cases, we have to keep track of the errors for those nodes which are
2263intermediate nodes of a cycle.
2264
2265An **import path** is the list of the AST nodes which we visit during an Import
2266call. If node ``A`` depends on node ``B`` then the path contains an ``A->B``
2267edge. From the call stack of the import functions, we can read the very same
2268path.
2269
2270Now imagine the following AST, where the ``->`` represents dependency in terms
2271of the import (all nodes are declarations).
2272
2273.. code-block:: text
2274
2275  A->B->C->D
2276     `->E
2277
2278We would like to import A.
2279The import behaves like a DFS, so we will visit the nodes in this order: ABCDE.
2280During the visitation we will have the following import paths:
2281
2282.. code-block:: text
2283
2284  A
2285  AB
2286  ABC
2287  ABCD
2288  ABC
2289  AB
2290  ABE
2291  AB
2292  A
2293
2294If during the visit of E there is an error then we set an error for E, then as
2295the call stack shrinks for B, then for A:
2296
2297.. code-block:: text
2298
2299  A
2300  AB
2301  ABC
2302  ABCD
2303  ABC
2304  AB
2305  ABE // Error! Set an error to E
2306  AB  // Set an error to B
2307  A   // Set an error to A
2308
2309However, during the import we could import C and D without any error and they
2310are independent of A,B and E. We must not set up an error for C and D. So, at
2311the end of the import we have an entry in ``ImportDeclErrors`` for A,B,E but
2312not for C,D.
2313
2314Now, what happens if there is a cycle in the import path? Let's consider this
2315AST:
2316
2317.. code-block:: text
2318
2319  A->B->C->A
2320     `->E
2321
2322During the visitation, we will have the below import paths and if during the
2323visit of E there is an error then we will set up an error for E,B,A. But what's
2324up with C?
2325
2326.. code-block:: text
2327
2328  A
2329  AB
2330  ABC
2331  ABCA
2332  ABC
2333  AB
2334  ABE // Error! Set an error to E
2335  AB  // Set an error to B
2336  A   // Set an error to A
2337
2338This time we know that both B and C are dependent on A. This means we must set
2339up an error for C too. As the call stack reverses back we get to A and we must
2340set up an error to all nodes which depend on A (this includes C). But C is no
2341longer on the import path, it just had been previously. Such a situation can
2342happen only if during the visitation we had a cycle. If we didn't have any
2343cycle, then the normal way of passing an Error object through the call stack
2344could handle the situation. This is why we must track cycles during the import
2345process for each visited declaration.
2346
2347Lookup Problems
2348^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
2349
2350When we import a declaration from the source context then we check whether we
2351already have a structurally equivalent node with the same name in the "to"
2352context. If the "from" node is a definition and the found one is also a
2353definition, then we do not create a new node, instead, we mark the found node
2354as the imported node. If the found definition and the one we want to import
2355have the same name but they are structurally in-equivalent, then we have an ODR
2356violation in case of C++. If the "from" node is not a definition then we add
2357that to the redeclaration chain of the found node. This behaviour is essential
2358when we merge ASTs from different translation units which include the same
2359header file(s). For example, we want to have only one definition for the class
2360template ``std::vector``, even if we included ``<vector>`` in several
2361translation units.
2362
2363To find a structurally equivalent node we can use the regular C/C++ lookup
2364functions: ``DeclContext::noload_lookup()`` and
2365``DeclContext::localUncachedLookup()``. These functions do respect the C/C++
2366name hiding rules, thus you cannot find certain declarations in a given
2367declaration context. For instance, unnamed declarations (anonymous structs),
2368non-first ``friend`` declarations and template specializations are hidden. This
2369is a problem, because if we use the regular C/C++ lookup then we create
2370redundant AST nodes during the merge! Also, having two instances of the same
2371node could result in false :ref:`structural in-equivalencies <structural-eq>`
2372of other nodes which depend on the duplicated node. Because of these reasons,
2373we created a lookup class which has the sole purpose to register all
2374declarations, so later they can be looked up by subsequent import requests.
2375This is the ``ASTImporterLookupTable`` class. This lookup table should be
2376shared amongst the different ``ASTImporter`` instances if they happen to import
2377to the very same "to" context. This is why we can use the importer specific
2378lookup only via the ``ASTImporterSharedState`` class.
2379
2380ExternalASTSource
2381~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
2382
2383The ``ExternalASTSource`` is an abstract interface associated with the
2384``ASTContext`` class. It provides the ability to read the declarations stored
2385within a declaration context either for iteration or for name lookup. A
2386declaration context with an external AST source may load its declarations
2387on-demand. This means that the list of declarations (represented as a linked
2388list, the head is ``DeclContext::FirstDecl``) could be empty. However, member
2389functions like ``DeclContext::lookup()`` may initiate a load.
2390
2391Usually, external sources are associated with precompiled headers. For example,
2392when we load a class from a PCH then the members are loaded only if we do want
2393to look up something in the class' context.
2394
2395In case of LLDB, an implementation of the ``ExternalASTSource`` interface is
2396attached to the AST context which is related to the parsed expression. This
2397implementation of the ``ExternalASTSource`` interface is realized with the help
2398of the ``ASTImporter`` class. This way, LLDB can reuse Clang's parsing
2399machinery while synthesizing the underlying AST from the debug data (e.g. from
2400DWARF). From the view of the ``ASTImporter`` this means both the "to" and the
2401"from" context may have declaration contexts with external lexical storage. If
2402a ``DeclContext`` in the "to" AST context has external lexical storage then we
2403must take extra attention to work only with the already loaded declarations!
2404Otherwise, we would end up with an uncontrolled import process. For instance,
2405if we used the regular ``DeclContext::lookup()`` to find the existing
2406declarations in the "to" context then the ``lookup()`` call itself would
2407initiate a new import while we are in the middle of importing a declaration!
2408(By the time we initiate the lookup we haven't registered yet that we already
2409started to import the node of the "from" context.) This is why we use
2410``DeclContext::noload_lookup()`` instead.
2411
2412Class Template Instantiations
2413^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
2414
2415Different translation units may have class template instantiations with the
2416same template arguments, but with a different set of instantiated
2417``MethodDecls`` and ``FieldDecls``. Consider the following files:
2418
2419.. code-block:: c++
2420
2421  // x.h
2422  template <typename T>
2423  struct X {
2424      int a{0}; // FieldDecl with InitListExpr
2425      X(char) : a(3) {}     // (1)
2426      X(int) {}             // (2)
2427  };
2428
2429  // foo.cpp
2430  void foo() {
2431      // ClassTemplateSpec with ctor (1): FieldDecl without InitlistExpr
2432      X<char> xc('c');
2433  }
2434
2435  // bar.cpp
2436  void bar() {
2437      // ClassTemplateSpec with ctor (2): FieldDecl WITH InitlistExpr
2438      X<char> xc(1);
2439  }
2440
2441In ``foo.cpp`` we use the constructor with number ``(1)``, which explicitly
2442initializes the member ``a`` to ``3``, thus the ``InitListExpr`` ``{0}`` is not
2443used here and the AST node is not instantiated. However, in the case of
2444``bar.cpp`` we use the constructor with number ``(2)``, which does not
2445explicitly initialize the ``a`` member, so the default ``InitListExpr`` is
2446needed and thus instantiated. When we merge the AST of ``foo.cpp`` and
2447``bar.cpp`` we must create an AST node for the class template instantiation of
2448``X<char>`` which has all the required nodes. Therefore, when we find an
2449existing ``ClassTemplateSpecializationDecl`` then we merge the fields of the
2450``ClassTemplateSpecializationDecl`` in the "from" context in a way that the
2451``InitListExpr`` is copied if not existent yet. The same merge mechanism should
2452be done in the cases of instantiated default arguments and exception
2453specifications of functions.
2454
2455.. _visibility:
2456
2457Visibility of Declarations
2458^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
2459
2460During import of a global variable with external visibility, the lookup will
2461find variables (with the same name) but with static visibility (linkage).
2462Clearly, we cannot put them into the same redeclaration chain. The same is true
2463the in case of functions. Also, we have to take care of other kinds of
2464declarations like enums, classes, etc. if they are in anonymous namespaces.
2465Therefore, we filter the lookup results and consider only those which have the
2466same visibility as the declaration we currently import.
2467
2468We consider two declarations in two anonymous namespaces to have the same
2469visibility only if they are imported from the same AST context.
2470
2471Strategies to Handle Conflicting Names
2472^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
2473
2474During the import we lookup existing declarations with the same name. We filter
2475the lookup results based on their :ref:`visibility <visibility>`. If any of the
2476found declarations are not structurally equivalent then we bumped to a name
2477conflict error (ODR violation in C++). In this case, we return with an
2478``Error`` and we set up the ``Error`` object for the declaration. However, some
2479clients of the ``ASTImporter`` may require a different, perhaps less
2480conservative and more liberal error handling strategy.
2481
2482E.g. static analysis clients may benefit if the node is created even if there
2483is a name conflict. During the CTU analysis of certain projects, we recognized
2484that there are global declarations which collide with declarations from other
2485translation units, but they are not referenced outside from their translation
2486unit. These declarations should be in an unnamed namespace ideally. If we treat
2487these collisions liberally then CTU analysis can find more results. Note, the
2488feature be able to choose between name conflict handling strategies is still an
2489ongoing work.
2490
2491.. _CFG:
2492
2493The ``CFG`` class
2494-----------------
2495
2496The ``CFG`` class is designed to represent a source-level control-flow graph
2497for a single statement (``Stmt*``).  Typically instances of ``CFG`` are
2498constructed for function bodies (usually an instance of ``CompoundStmt``), but
2499can also be instantiated to represent the control-flow of any class that
2500subclasses ``Stmt``, which includes simple expressions.  Control-flow graphs
2501are especially useful for performing `flow- or path-sensitive
2502<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_flow_analysis#Sensitivities>`_ program
2503analyses on a given function.
2504
2505Basic Blocks
2506^^^^^^^^^^^^
2507
2508Concretely, an instance of ``CFG`` is a collection of basic blocks.  Each basic
2509block is an instance of ``CFGBlock``, which simply contains an ordered sequence
2510of ``Stmt*`` (each referring to statements in the AST).  The ordering of
2511statements within a block indicates unconditional flow of control from one
2512statement to the next.  :ref:`Conditional control-flow
2513<ConditionalControlFlow>` is represented using edges between basic blocks.  The
2514statements within a given ``CFGBlock`` can be traversed using the
2515``CFGBlock::*iterator`` interface.
2516
2517A ``CFG`` object owns the instances of ``CFGBlock`` within the control-flow
2518graph it represents.  Each ``CFGBlock`` within a CFG is also uniquely numbered
2519(accessible via ``CFGBlock::getBlockID()``).  Currently the number is based on
2520the ordering the blocks were created, but no assumptions should be made on how
2521``CFGBlocks`` are numbered other than their numbers are unique and that they
2522are numbered from 0..N-1 (where N is the number of basic blocks in the CFG).
2523
2524Entry and Exit Blocks
2525^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
2526
2527Each instance of ``CFG`` contains two special blocks: an *entry* block
2528(accessible via ``CFG::getEntry()``), which has no incoming edges, and an
2529*exit* block (accessible via ``CFG::getExit()``), which has no outgoing edges.
2530Neither block contains any statements, and they serve the role of providing a
2531clear entrance and exit for a body of code such as a function body.  The
2532presence of these empty blocks greatly simplifies the implementation of many
2533analyses built on top of CFGs.
2534
2535.. _ConditionalControlFlow:
2536
2537Conditional Control-Flow
2538^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
2539
2540Conditional control-flow (such as those induced by if-statements and loops) is
2541represented as edges between ``CFGBlocks``.  Because different C language
2542constructs can induce control-flow, each ``CFGBlock`` also records an extra
2543``Stmt*`` that represents the *terminator* of the block.  A terminator is
2544simply the statement that caused the control-flow, and is used to identify the
2545nature of the conditional control-flow between blocks.  For example, in the
2546case of an if-statement, the terminator refers to the ``IfStmt`` object in the
2547AST that represented the given branch.
2548
2549To illustrate, consider the following code example:
2550
2551.. code-block:: c++
2552
2553  int foo(int x) {
2554    x = x + 1;
2555    if (x > 2)
2556      x++;
2557    else {
2558      x += 2;
2559      x *= 2;
2560    }
2561
2562    return x;
2563  }
2564
2565After invoking the parser+semantic analyzer on this code fragment, the AST of
2566the body of ``foo`` is referenced by a single ``Stmt*``.  We can then construct
2567an instance of ``CFG`` representing the control-flow graph of this function
2568body by single call to a static class method:
2569
2570.. code-block:: c++
2571
2572  Stmt *FooBody = ...
2573  std::unique_ptr<CFG> FooCFG = CFG::buildCFG(FooBody);
2574
2575Along with providing an interface to iterate over its ``CFGBlocks``, the
2576``CFG`` class also provides methods that are useful for debugging and
2577visualizing CFGs.  For example, the method ``CFG::dump()`` dumps a
2578pretty-printed version of the CFG to standard error.  This is especially useful
2579when one is using a debugger such as gdb.  For example, here is the output of
2580``FooCFG->dump()``:
2581
2582.. code-block:: text
2583
2584 [ B5 (ENTRY) ]
2585    Predecessors (0):
2586    Successors (1): B4
2587
2588 [ B4 ]
2589    1: x = x + 1
2590    2: (x > 2)
2591    T: if [B4.2]
2592    Predecessors (1): B5
2593    Successors (2): B3 B2
2594
2595 [ B3 ]
2596    1: x++
2597    Predecessors (1): B4
2598    Successors (1): B1
2599
2600 [ B2 ]
2601    1: x += 2
2602    2: x *= 2
2603    Predecessors (1): B4
2604    Successors (1): B1
2605
2606 [ B1 ]
2607    1: return x;
2608    Predecessors (2): B2 B3
2609    Successors (1): B0
2610
2611 [ B0 (EXIT) ]
2612    Predecessors (1): B1
2613    Successors (0):
2614
2615For each block, the pretty-printed output displays for each block the number of
2616*predecessor* blocks (blocks that have outgoing control-flow to the given
2617block) and *successor* blocks (blocks that have control-flow that have incoming
2618control-flow from the given block).  We can also clearly see the special entry
2619and exit blocks at the beginning and end of the pretty-printed output.  For the
2620entry block (block B5), the number of predecessor blocks is 0, while for the
2621exit block (block B0) the number of successor blocks is 0.
2622
2623The most interesting block here is B4, whose outgoing control-flow represents
2624the branching caused by the sole if-statement in ``foo``.  Of particular
2625interest is the second statement in the block, ``(x > 2)``, and the terminator,
2626printed as ``if [B4.2]``.  The second statement represents the evaluation of
2627the condition of the if-statement, which occurs before the actual branching of
2628control-flow.  Within the ``CFGBlock`` for B4, the ``Stmt*`` for the second
2629statement refers to the actual expression in the AST for ``(x > 2)``.  Thus
2630pointers to subclasses of ``Expr`` can appear in the list of statements in a
2631block, and not just subclasses of ``Stmt`` that refer to proper C statements.
2632
2633The terminator of block B4 is a pointer to the ``IfStmt`` object in the AST.
2634The pretty-printer outputs ``if [B4.2]`` because the condition expression of
2635the if-statement has an actual place in the basic block, and thus the
2636terminator is essentially *referring* to the expression that is the second
2637statement of block B4 (i.e., B4.2).  In this manner, conditions for
2638control-flow (which also includes conditions for loops and switch statements)
2639are hoisted into the actual basic block.
2640
2641.. Implicit Control-Flow
2642.. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
2643
2644.. A key design principle of the ``CFG`` class was to not require any
2645.. transformations to the AST in order to represent control-flow.  Thus the
2646.. ``CFG`` does not perform any "lowering" of the statements in an AST: loops
2647.. are not transformed into guarded gotos, short-circuit operations are not
2648.. converted to a set of if-statements, and so on.
2649
2650Constant Folding in the Clang AST
2651---------------------------------
2652
2653There are several places where constants and constant folding matter a lot to
2654the Clang front-end.  First, in general, we prefer the AST to retain the source
2655code as close to how the user wrote it as possible.  This means that if they
2656wrote "``5+4``", we want to keep the addition and two constants in the AST, we
2657don't want to fold to "``9``".  This means that constant folding in various
2658ways turns into a tree walk that needs to handle the various cases.
2659
2660However, there are places in both C and C++ that require constants to be
2661folded.  For example, the C standard defines what an "integer constant
2662expression" (i-c-e) is with very precise and specific requirements.  The
2663language then requires i-c-e's in a lot of places (for example, the size of a
2664bitfield, the value for a case statement, etc).  For these, we have to be able
2665to constant fold the constants, to do semantic checks (e.g., verify bitfield
2666size is non-negative and that case statements aren't duplicated).  We aim for
2667Clang to be very pedantic about this, diagnosing cases when the code does not
2668use an i-c-e where one is required, but accepting the code unless running with
2669``-pedantic-errors``.
2670
2671Things get a little bit more tricky when it comes to compatibility with
2672real-world source code.  Specifically, GCC has historically accepted a huge
2673superset of expressions as i-c-e's, and a lot of real world code depends on
2674this unfortunate accident of history (including, e.g., the glibc system
2675headers).  GCC accepts anything its "fold" optimizer is capable of reducing to
2676an integer constant, which means that the definition of what it accepts changes
2677as its optimizer does.  One example is that GCC accepts things like "``case
2678X-X:``" even when ``X`` is a variable, because it can fold this to 0.
2679
2680Another issue are how constants interact with the extensions we support, such
2681as ``__builtin_constant_p``, ``__builtin_inf``, ``__extension__`` and many
2682others.  C99 obviously does not specify the semantics of any of these
2683extensions, and the definition of i-c-e does not include them.  However, these
2684extensions are often used in real code, and we have to have a way to reason
2685about them.
2686
2687Finally, this is not just a problem for semantic analysis.  The code generator
2688and other clients have to be able to fold constants (e.g., to initialize global
2689variables) and have to handle a superset of what C99 allows.  Further, these
2690clients can benefit from extended information.  For example, we know that
2691"``foo() || 1``" always evaluates to ``true``, but we can't replace the
2692expression with ``true`` because it has side effects.
2693
2694Implementation Approach
2695^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
2696
2697After trying several different approaches, we've finally converged on a design
2698(Note, at the time of this writing, not all of this has been implemented,
2699consider this a design goal!).  Our basic approach is to define a single
2700recursive evaluation method (``Expr::Evaluate``), which is implemented
2701in ``AST/ExprConstant.cpp``.  Given an expression with "scalar" type (integer,
2702fp, complex, or pointer) this method returns the following information:
2703
2704* Whether the expression is an integer constant expression, a general constant
2705  that was folded but has no side effects, a general constant that was folded
2706  but that does have side effects, or an uncomputable/unfoldable value.
2707* If the expression was computable in any way, this method returns the
2708  ``APValue`` for the result of the expression.
2709* If the expression is not evaluatable at all, this method returns information
2710  on one of the problems with the expression.  This includes a
2711  ``SourceLocation`` for where the problem is, and a diagnostic ID that explains
2712  the problem.  The diagnostic should have ``ERROR`` type.
2713* If the expression is not an integer constant expression, this method returns
2714  information on one of the problems with the expression.  This includes a
2715  ``SourceLocation`` for where the problem is, and a diagnostic ID that
2716  explains the problem.  The diagnostic should have ``EXTENSION`` type.
2717
2718This information gives various clients the flexibility that they want, and we
2719will eventually have some helper methods for various extensions.  For example,
2720``Sema`` should have a ``Sema::VerifyIntegerConstantExpression`` method, which
2721calls ``Evaluate`` on the expression.  If the expression is not foldable, the
2722error is emitted, and it would return ``true``.  If the expression is not an
2723i-c-e, the ``EXTENSION`` diagnostic is emitted.  Finally it would return
2724``false`` to indicate that the AST is OK.
2725
2726Other clients can use the information in other ways, for example, codegen can
2727just use expressions that are foldable in any way.
2728
2729Extensions
2730^^^^^^^^^^
2731
2732This section describes how some of the various extensions Clang supports
2733interacts with constant evaluation:
2734
2735* ``__extension__``: The expression form of this extension causes any
2736  evaluatable subexpression to be accepted as an integer constant expression.
2737* ``__builtin_constant_p``: This returns true (as an integer constant
2738  expression) if the operand evaluates to either a numeric value (that is, not
2739  a pointer cast to integral type) of integral, enumeration, floating or
2740  complex type, or if it evaluates to the address of the first character of a
2741  string literal (possibly cast to some other type).  As a special case, if
2742  ``__builtin_constant_p`` is the (potentially parenthesized) condition of a
2743  conditional operator expression ("``?:``"), only the true side of the
2744  conditional operator is considered, and it is evaluated with full constant
2745  folding.
2746* ``__builtin_choose_expr``: The condition is required to be an integer
2747  constant expression, but we accept any constant as an "extension of an
2748  extension".  This only evaluates one operand depending on which way the
2749  condition evaluates.
2750* ``__builtin_classify_type``: This always returns an integer constant
2751  expression.
2752* ``__builtin_inf, nan, ...``: These are treated just like a floating-point
2753  literal.
2754* ``__builtin_abs, copysign, ...``: These are constant folded as general
2755  constant expressions.
2756* ``__builtin_strlen`` and ``strlen``: These are constant folded as integer
2757  constant expressions if the argument is a string literal.
2758
2759.. _Sema:
2760
2761The Sema Library
2762================
2763
2764This library is called by the :ref:`Parser library <Parser>` during parsing to
2765do semantic analysis of the input.  For valid programs, Sema builds an AST for
2766parsed constructs.
2767
2768.. _CodeGen:
2769
2770The CodeGen Library
2771===================
2772
2773CodeGen takes an :ref:`AST <AST>` as input and produces `LLVM IR code
2774<//llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html>`_ from it.
2775
2776How to change Clang
2777===================
2778
2779How to add an attribute
2780-----------------------
2781Attributes are a form of metadata that can be attached to a program construct,
2782allowing the programmer to pass semantic information along to the compiler for
2783various uses. For example, attributes may be used to alter the code generation
2784for a program construct, or to provide extra semantic information for static
2785analysis. This document explains how to add a custom attribute to Clang.
2786Documentation on existing attributes can be found `here
2787<//clang.llvm.org/docs/AttributeReference.html>`_.
2788
2789Attribute Basics
2790^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
2791Attributes in Clang are handled in three stages: parsing into a parsed attribute
2792representation, conversion from a parsed attribute into a semantic attribute,
2793and then the semantic handling of the attribute.
2794
2795Parsing of the attribute is determined by the various syntactic forms attributes
2796can take, such as GNU, C++11, and Microsoft style attributes, as well as other
2797information provided by the table definition of the attribute. Ultimately, the
2798parsed representation of an attribute object is an ``ParsedAttr`` object.
2799These parsed attributes chain together as a list of parsed attributes attached
2800to a declarator or declaration specifier. The parsing of attributes is handled
2801automatically by Clang, except for attributes spelled as keywords. When
2802implementing a keyword attribute, the parsing of the keyword and creation of the
2803``ParsedAttr`` object must be done manually.
2804
2805Eventually, ``Sema::ProcessDeclAttributeList()`` is called with a ``Decl`` and
2806a ``ParsedAttr``, at which point the parsed attribute can be transformed
2807into a semantic attribute. The process by which a parsed attribute is converted
2808into a semantic attribute depends on the attribute definition and semantic
2809requirements of the attribute. The end result, however, is that the semantic
2810attribute object is attached to the ``Decl`` object, and can be obtained by a
2811call to ``Decl::getAttr<T>()``. Similarly, for statement attributes,
2812``Sema::ProcessStmtAttributes()`` is called with a ``Stmt`` a list of
2813``ParsedAttr`` objects to be converted into a semantic attribute.
2814
2815The structure of the semantic attribute is also governed by the attribute
2816definition given in Attr.td. This definition is used to automatically generate
2817functionality used for the implementation of the attribute, such as a class
2818derived from ``clang::Attr``, information for the parser to use, automated
2819semantic checking for some attributes, etc.
2820
2821
2822``include/clang/Basic/Attr.td``
2823^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
2824The first step to adding a new attribute to Clang is to add its definition to
2825`include/clang/Basic/Attr.td
2826<https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/clang/include/clang/Basic/Attr.td>`_.
2827This tablegen definition must derive from the ``Attr`` (tablegen, not
2828semantic) type, or one of its derivatives. Most attributes will derive from the
2829``InheritableAttr`` type, which specifies that the attribute can be inherited by
2830later redeclarations of the ``Decl`` it is associated with.
2831``InheritableParamAttr`` is similar to ``InheritableAttr``, except that the
2832attribute is written on a parameter instead of a declaration. If the attribute
2833applies to statements, it should inherit from ``StmtAttr``. If the attribute is
2834intended to apply to a type instead of a declaration, such an attribute should
2835derive from ``TypeAttr``, and will generally not be given an AST representation.
2836(Note that this document does not cover the creation of type attributes.) An
2837attribute that inherits from ``IgnoredAttr`` is parsed, but will generate an
2838ignored attribute diagnostic when used, which may be useful when an attribute is
2839supported by another vendor but not supported by clang.
2840
2841The definition will specify several key pieces of information, such as the
2842semantic name of the attribute, the spellings the attribute supports, the
2843arguments the attribute expects, and more. Most members of the ``Attr`` tablegen
2844type do not require definitions in the derived definition as the default
2845suffice. However, every attribute must specify at least a spelling list, a
2846subject list, and a documentation list.
2847
2848Spellings
2849~~~~~~~~~
2850All attributes are required to specify a spelling list that denotes the ways in
2851which the attribute can be spelled. For instance, a single semantic attribute
2852may have a keyword spelling, as well as a C++11 spelling and a GNU spelling. An
2853empty spelling list is also permissible and may be useful for attributes which
2854are created implicitly. The following spellings are accepted:
2855
2856  ============  ================================================================
2857  Spelling      Description
2858  ============  ================================================================
2859  ``GNU``       Spelled with a GNU-style ``__attribute__((attr))`` syntax and
2860                placement.
2861  ``CXX11``     Spelled with a C++-style ``[[attr]]`` syntax with an optional
2862                vendor-specific namespace.
2863  ``C2x``       Spelled with a C-style ``[[attr]]`` syntax with an optional
2864                vendor-specific namespace.
2865  ``Declspec``  Spelled with a Microsoft-style ``__declspec(attr)`` syntax.
2866  ``Keyword``   The attribute is spelled as a keyword, and required custom
2867                parsing.
2868  ``GCC``       Specifies two or three spellings: the first is a GNU-style
2869                spelling, the second is a C++-style spelling with the ``gnu``
2870                namespace, and the third is an optional C-style spelling with
2871                the ``gnu`` namespace. Attributes should only specify this
2872                spelling for attributes supported by GCC.
2873  ``Clang``     Specifies two or three spellings: the first is a GNU-style
2874                spelling, the second is a C++-style spelling with the ``clang``
2875                namespace, and the third is an optional C-style spelling with
2876                the ``clang`` namespace. By default, a C-style spelling is
2877                provided.
2878  ``Pragma``    The attribute is spelled as a ``#pragma``, and requires custom
2879                processing within the preprocessor. If the attribute is meant to
2880                be used by Clang, it should set the namespace to ``"clang"``.
2881                Note that this spelling is not used for declaration attributes.
2882  ============  ================================================================
2883
2884Subjects
2885~~~~~~~~
2886Attributes appertain to one or more subjects. If the attribute attempts to
2887attach to a subject that is not in the subject list, a diagnostic is issued
2888automatically. Whether the diagnostic is a warning or an error depends on how
2889the attribute's ``SubjectList`` is defined, but the default behavior is to warn.
2890The diagnostics displayed to the user are automatically determined based on the
2891subjects in the list, but a custom diagnostic parameter can also be specified in
2892the ``SubjectList``. The diagnostics generated for subject list violations are
2893calculated automatically or specified by the subject list itself. If a
2894previously unused Decl node is added to the ``SubjectList``, the logic used to
2895automatically determine the diagnostic parameter in `utils/TableGen/ClangAttrEmitter.cpp
2896<https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/clang/utils/TableGen/ClangAttrEmitter.cpp>`_
2897may need to be updated.
2898
2899By default, all subjects in the SubjectList must either be a Decl node defined
2900in ``DeclNodes.td``, or a statement node defined in ``StmtNodes.td``. However,
2901more complex subjects can be created by creating a ``SubsetSubject`` object.
2902Each such object has a base subject which it appertains to (which must be a
2903Decl or Stmt node, and not a SubsetSubject node), and some custom code which is
2904called when determining whether an attribute appertains to the subject. For
2905instance, a ``NonBitField`` SubsetSubject appertains to a ``FieldDecl``, and
2906tests whether the given FieldDecl is a bit field. When a SubsetSubject is
2907specified in a SubjectList, a custom diagnostic parameter must also be provided.
2908
2909Diagnostic checking for attribute subject lists for declaration and statement
2910attributes is automated except when ``HasCustomParsing`` is set to ``1``.
2911
2912Documentation
2913~~~~~~~~~~~~~
2914All attributes must have some form of documentation associated with them.
2915Documentation is table generated on the public web server by a server-side
2916process that runs daily. Generally, the documentation for an attribute is a
2917stand-alone definition in `include/clang/Basic/AttrDocs.td
2918<https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/clang/include/clang/Basic/AttrDocs.td>`_
2919that is named after the attribute being documented.
2920
2921If the attribute is not for public consumption, or is an implicitly-created
2922attribute that has no visible spelling, the documentation list can specify the
2923``Undocumented`` object. Otherwise, the attribute should have its documentation
2924added to AttrDocs.td.
2925
2926Documentation derives from the ``Documentation`` tablegen type. All derived
2927types must specify a documentation category and the actual documentation itself.
2928Additionally, it can specify a custom heading for the attribute, though a
2929default heading will be chosen when possible.
2930
2931There are four predefined documentation categories: ``DocCatFunction`` for
2932attributes that appertain to function-like subjects, ``DocCatVariable`` for
2933attributes that appertain to variable-like subjects, ``DocCatType`` for type
2934attributes, and ``DocCatStmt`` for statement attributes. A custom documentation
2935category should be used for groups of attributes with similar functionality.
2936Custom categories are good for providing overview information for the attributes
2937grouped under it. For instance, the consumed annotation attributes define a
2938custom category, ``DocCatConsumed``, that explains what consumed annotations are
2939at a high level.
2940
2941Documentation content (whether it is for an attribute or a category) is written
2942using reStructuredText (RST) syntax.
2943
2944After writing the documentation for the attribute, it should be locally tested
2945to ensure that there are no issues generating the documentation on the server.
2946Local testing requires a fresh build of clang-tblgen. To generate the attribute
2947documentation, execute the following command::
2948
2949  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
2950
2951When testing locally, *do not* commit changes to ``AttributeReference.rst``.
2952This file is generated by the server automatically, and any changes made to this
2953file will be overwritten.
2954
2955Arguments
2956~~~~~~~~~
2957Attributes may optionally specify a list of arguments that can be passed to the
2958attribute. Attribute arguments specify both the parsed form and the semantic
2959form of the attribute. For example, if ``Args`` is
2960``[StringArgument<"Arg1">, IntArgument<"Arg2">]`` then
2961``__attribute__((myattribute("Hello", 3)))`` will be a valid use; it requires
2962two arguments while parsing, and the Attr subclass' constructor for the
2963semantic attribute will require a string and integer argument.
2964
2965All arguments have a name and a flag that specifies whether the argument is
2966optional. The associated C++ type of the argument is determined by the argument
2967definition type. If the existing argument types are insufficient, new types can
2968be created, but it requires modifying `utils/TableGen/ClangAttrEmitter.cpp
2969<https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/clang/utils/TableGen/ClangAttrEmitter.cpp>`_
2970to properly support the type.
2971
2972Other Properties
2973~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
2974The ``Attr`` definition has other members which control the behavior of the
2975attribute. Many of them are special-purpose and beyond the scope of this
2976document, however a few deserve mention.
2977
2978If the parsed form of the attribute is more complex, or differs from the
2979semantic form, the ``HasCustomParsing`` bit can be set to ``1`` for the class,
2980and the parsing code in `Parser::ParseGNUAttributeArgs()
2981<https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/clang/lib/Parse/ParseDecl.cpp>`_
2982can be updated for the special case. Note that this only applies to arguments
2983with a GNU spelling -- attributes with a __declspec spelling currently ignore
2984this flag and are handled by ``Parser::ParseMicrosoftDeclSpec``.
2985
2986Note that setting this member to 1 will opt out of common attribute semantic
2987handling, requiring extra implementation efforts to ensure the attribute
2988appertains to the appropriate subject, etc.
2989
2990If the attribute should not be propagated from a template declaration to an
2991instantiation of the template, set the ``Clone`` member to 0. By default, all
2992attributes will be cloned to template instantiations.
2993
2994Attributes that do not require an AST node should set the ``ASTNode`` field to
2995``0`` to avoid polluting the AST. Note that anything inheriting from
2996``TypeAttr`` or ``IgnoredAttr`` automatically do not generate an AST node. All
2997other attributes generate an AST node by default. The AST node is the semantic
2998representation of the attribute.
2999
3000The ``LangOpts`` field specifies a list of language options required by the
3001attribute.  For instance, all of the CUDA-specific attributes specify ``[CUDA]``
3002for the ``LangOpts`` field, and when the CUDA language option is not enabled, an
3003"attribute ignored" warning diagnostic is emitted. Since language options are
3004not table generated nodes, new language options must be created manually and
3005should specify the spelling used by ``LangOptions`` class.
3006
3007Custom accessors can be generated for an attribute based on the spelling list
3008for that attribute. For instance, if an attribute has two different spellings:
3009'Foo' and 'Bar', accessors can be created:
3010``[Accessor<"isFoo", [GNU<"Foo">]>, Accessor<"isBar", [GNU<"Bar">]>]``
3011These accessors will be generated on the semantic form of the attribute,
3012accepting no arguments and returning a ``bool``.
3013
3014Attributes that do not require custom semantic handling should set the
3015``SemaHandler`` field to ``0``. Note that anything inheriting from
3016``IgnoredAttr`` automatically do not get a semantic handler. All other
3017attributes are assumed to use a semantic handler by default. Attributes
3018without a semantic handler are not given a parsed attribute ``Kind`` enumerator.
3019
3020"Simple" attributes, that require no custom semantic processing aside from what
3021is automatically provided, should set the ``SimpleHandler`` field to ``1``.
3022
3023Target-specific attributes may share a spelling with other attributes in
3024different targets. For instance, the ARM and MSP430 targets both have an
3025attribute spelled ``GNU<"interrupt">``, but with different parsing and semantic
3026requirements. To support this feature, an attribute inheriting from
3027``TargetSpecificAttribute`` may specify a ``ParseKind`` field. This field
3028should be the same value between all arguments sharing a spelling, and
3029corresponds to the parsed attribute's ``Kind`` enumerator. This allows
3030attributes to share a parsed attribute kind, but have distinct semantic
3031attribute classes. For instance, ``ParsedAttr`` is the shared
3032parsed attribute kind, but ARMInterruptAttr and MSP430InterruptAttr are the
3033semantic attributes generated.
3034
3035By default, attribute arguments are parsed in an evaluated context. If the
3036arguments for an attribute should be parsed in an unevaluated context (akin to
3037the way the argument to a ``sizeof`` expression is parsed), set
3038``ParseArgumentsAsUnevaluated`` to ``1``.
3039
3040If additional functionality is desired for the semantic form of the attribute,
3041the ``AdditionalMembers`` field specifies code to be copied verbatim into the
3042semantic attribute class object, with ``public`` access.
3043
3044If two or more attributes cannot be used in combination on the same declaration
3045or statement, a ``MutualExclusions`` definition can be supplied to automatically
3046generate diagnostic code. This will disallow the attribute combinations
3047regardless of spellings used. Additionally, it will diagnose combinations within
3048the same attribute list, different attribute list, and redeclarations, as
3049appropriate.
3050
3051Boilerplate
3052^^^^^^^^^^^
3053All semantic processing of declaration attributes happens in `lib/Sema/SemaDeclAttr.cpp
3054<https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/clang/lib/Sema/SemaDeclAttr.cpp>`_,
3055and generally starts in the ``ProcessDeclAttribute()`` function. If the
3056attribute has the ``SimpleHandler`` field set to ``1`` then the function to
3057process the attribute will be automatically generated, and nothing needs to be
3058done here. Otherwise, write a new ``handleYourAttr()`` function, and add that to
3059the switch statement. Please do not implement handling logic directly in the
3060``case`` for the attribute.
3061
3062Unless otherwise specified by the attribute definition, common semantic checking
3063of the parsed attribute is handled automatically. This includes diagnosing
3064parsed attributes that do not appertain to the given ``Decl`` or ``Stmt``,
3065ensuring the correct minimum number of arguments are passed, etc.
3066
3067If the attribute adds additional warnings, define a ``DiagGroup`` in
3068`include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticGroups.td
3069<https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/clang/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticGroups.td>`_
3070named after the attribute's ``Spelling`` with "_"s replaced by "-"s. If there
3071is only a single diagnostic, it is permissible to use ``InGroup<DiagGroup<"your-attribute">>``
3072directly in `DiagnosticSemaKinds.td
3073<https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/clang/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td>`_
3074
3075All semantic diagnostics generated for your attribute, including automatically-
3076generated ones (such as subjects and argument counts), should have a
3077corresponding test case.
3078
3079Semantic handling
3080^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
3081Most attributes are implemented to have some effect on the compiler. For
3082instance, to modify the way code is generated, or to add extra semantic checks
3083for an analysis pass, etc. Having added the attribute definition and conversion
3084to the semantic representation for the attribute, what remains is to implement
3085the custom logic requiring use of the attribute.
3086
3087The ``clang::Decl`` object can be queried for the presence or absence of an
3088attribute using ``hasAttr<T>()``. To obtain a pointer to the semantic
3089representation of the attribute, ``getAttr<T>`` may be used.
3090
3091The ``clang::AttributedStmt`` object can  be queried for the presence or absence
3092of an attribute by calling ``getAttrs()`` and looping over the list of
3093attributes.
3094
3095How to add an expression or statement
3096-------------------------------------
3097
3098Expressions and statements are one of the most fundamental constructs within a
3099compiler, because they interact with many different parts of the AST, semantic
3100analysis, and IR generation.  Therefore, adding a new expression or statement
3101kind into Clang requires some care.  The following list details the various
3102places in Clang where an expression or statement needs to be introduced, along
3103with patterns to follow to ensure that the new expression or statement works
3104well across all of the C languages.  We focus on expressions, but statements
3105are similar.
3106
3107#. Introduce parsing actions into the parser.  Recursive-descent parsing is
3108   mostly self-explanatory, but there are a few things that are worth keeping
3109   in mind:
3110
3111   * Keep as much source location information as possible! You'll want it later
3112     to produce great diagnostics and support Clang's various features that map
3113     between source code and the AST.
3114   * Write tests for all of the "bad" parsing cases, to make sure your recovery
3115     is good.  If you have matched delimiters (e.g., parentheses, square
3116     brackets, etc.), use ``Parser::BalancedDelimiterTracker`` to give nice
3117     diagnostics when things go wrong.
3118
3119#. Introduce semantic analysis actions into ``Sema``.  Semantic analysis should
3120   always involve two functions: an ``ActOnXXX`` function that will be called
3121   directly from the parser, and a ``BuildXXX`` function that performs the
3122   actual semantic analysis and will (eventually!) build the AST node.  It's
3123   fairly common for the ``ActOnCXX`` function to do very little (often just
3124   some minor translation from the parser's representation to ``Sema``'s
3125   representation of the same thing), but the separation is still important:
3126   C++ template instantiation, for example, should always call the ``BuildXXX``
3127   variant.  Several notes on semantic analysis before we get into construction
3128   of the AST:
3129
3130   * Your expression probably involves some types and some subexpressions.
3131     Make sure to fully check that those types, and the types of those
3132     subexpressions, meet your expectations.  Add implicit conversions where
3133     necessary to make sure that all of the types line up exactly the way you
3134     want them.  Write extensive tests to check that you're getting good
3135     diagnostics for mistakes and that you can use various forms of
3136     subexpressions with your expression.
3137   * When type-checking a type or subexpression, make sure to first check
3138     whether the type is "dependent" (``Type::isDependentType()``) or whether a
3139     subexpression is type-dependent (``Expr::isTypeDependent()``).  If any of
3140     these return ``true``, then you're inside a template and you can't do much
3141     type-checking now.  That's normal, and your AST node (when you get there)
3142     will have to deal with this case.  At this point, you can write tests that
3143     use your expression within templates, but don't try to instantiate the
3144     templates.
3145   * For each subexpression, be sure to call ``Sema::CheckPlaceholderExpr()``
3146     to deal with "weird" expressions that don't behave well as subexpressions.
3147     Then, determine whether you need to perform lvalue-to-rvalue conversions
3148     (``Sema::DefaultLvalueConversions``) or the usual unary conversions
3149     (``Sema::UsualUnaryConversions``), for places where the subexpression is
3150     producing a value you intend to use.
3151   * Your ``BuildXXX`` function will probably just return ``ExprError()`` at
3152     this point, since you don't have an AST.  That's perfectly fine, and
3153     shouldn't impact your testing.
3154
3155#. Introduce an AST node for your new expression.  This starts with declaring
3156   the node in ``include/Basic/StmtNodes.td`` and creating a new class for your
3157   expression in the appropriate ``include/AST/Expr*.h`` header.  It's best to
3158   look at the class for a similar expression to get ideas, and there are some
3159   specific things to watch for:
3160
3161   * If you need to allocate memory, use the ``ASTContext`` allocator to
3162     allocate memory.  Never use raw ``malloc`` or ``new``, and never hold any
3163     resources in an AST node, because the destructor of an AST node is never
3164     called.
3165   * Make sure that ``getSourceRange()`` covers the exact source range of your
3166     expression.  This is needed for diagnostics and for IDE support.
3167   * Make sure that ``children()`` visits all of the subexpressions.  This is
3168     important for a number of features (e.g., IDE support, C++ variadic
3169     templates).  If you have sub-types, you'll also need to visit those
3170     sub-types in ``RecursiveASTVisitor``.
3171   * Add printing support (``StmtPrinter.cpp``) for your expression.
3172   * Add profiling support (``StmtProfile.cpp``) for your AST node, noting the
3173     distinguishing (non-source location) characteristics of an instance of
3174     your expression.  Omitting this step will lead to hard-to-diagnose
3175     failures regarding matching of template declarations.
3176   * Add serialization support (``ASTReaderStmt.cpp``, ``ASTWriterStmt.cpp``)
3177     for your AST node.
3178
3179#. Teach semantic analysis to build your AST node.  At this point, you can wire
3180   up your ``Sema::BuildXXX`` function to actually create your AST.  A few
3181   things to check at this point:
3182
3183   * If your expression can construct a new C++ class or return a new
3184     Objective-C object, be sure to update and then call
3185     ``Sema::MaybeBindToTemporary`` for your just-created AST node to be sure
3186     that the object gets properly destructed.  An easy way to test this is to
3187     return a C++ class with a private destructor: semantic analysis should
3188     flag an error here with the attempt to call the destructor.
3189   * Inspect the generated AST by printing it using ``clang -cc1 -ast-print``,
3190     to make sure you're capturing all of the important information about how
3191     the AST was written.
3192   * Inspect the generated AST under ``clang -cc1 -ast-dump`` to verify that
3193     all of the types in the generated AST line up the way you want them.
3194     Remember that clients of the AST should never have to "think" to
3195     understand what's going on.  For example, all implicit conversions should
3196     show up explicitly in the AST.
3197   * Write tests that use your expression as a subexpression of other,
3198     well-known expressions.  Can you call a function using your expression as
3199     an argument?  Can you use the ternary operator?
3200
3201#. Teach code generation to create IR to your AST node.  This step is the first
3202   (and only) that requires knowledge of LLVM IR.  There are several things to
3203   keep in mind:
3204
3205   * Code generation is separated into scalar/aggregate/complex and
3206     lvalue/rvalue paths, depending on what kind of result your expression
3207     produces.  On occasion, this requires some careful factoring of code to
3208     avoid duplication.
3209   * ``CodeGenFunction`` contains functions ``ConvertType`` and
3210     ``ConvertTypeForMem`` that convert Clang's types (``clang::Type*`` or
3211     ``clang::QualType``) to LLVM types.  Use the former for values, and the
3212     latter for memory locations: test with the C++ "``bool``" type to check
3213     this.  If you find that you are having to use LLVM bitcasts to make the
3214     subexpressions of your expression have the type that your expression
3215     expects, STOP!  Go fix semantic analysis and the AST so that you don't
3216     need these bitcasts.
3217   * The ``CodeGenFunction`` class has a number of helper functions to make
3218     certain operations easy, such as generating code to produce an lvalue or
3219     an rvalue, or to initialize a memory location with a given value.  Prefer
3220     to use these functions rather than directly writing loads and stores,
3221     because these functions take care of some of the tricky details for you
3222     (e.g., for exceptions).
3223   * If your expression requires some special behavior in the event of an
3224     exception, look at the ``push*Cleanup`` functions in ``CodeGenFunction``
3225     to introduce a cleanup.  You shouldn't have to deal with
3226     exception-handling directly.
3227   * Testing is extremely important in IR generation.  Use ``clang -cc1
3228     -emit-llvm`` and `FileCheck
3229     <https://llvm.org/docs/CommandGuide/FileCheck.html>`_ to verify that you're
3230     generating the right IR.
3231
3232#. Teach template instantiation how to cope with your AST node, which requires
3233   some fairly simple code:
3234
3235   * Make sure that your expression's constructor properly computes the flags
3236     for type dependence (i.e., the type your expression produces can change
3237     from one instantiation to the next), value dependence (i.e., the constant
3238     value your expression produces can change from one instantiation to the
3239     next), instantiation dependence (i.e., a template parameter occurs
3240     anywhere in your expression), and whether your expression contains a
3241     parameter pack (for variadic templates).  Often, computing these flags
3242     just means combining the results from the various types and
3243     subexpressions.
3244   * Add ``TransformXXX`` and ``RebuildXXX`` functions to the ``TreeTransform``
3245     class template in ``Sema``.  ``TransformXXX`` should (recursively)
3246     transform all of the subexpressions and types within your expression,
3247     using ``getDerived().TransformYYY``.  If all of the subexpressions and
3248     types transform without error, it will then call the ``RebuildXXX``
3249     function, which will in turn call ``getSema().BuildXXX`` to perform
3250     semantic analysis and build your expression.
3251   * To test template instantiation, take those tests you wrote to make sure
3252     that you were type checking with type-dependent expressions and dependent
3253     types (from step #2) and instantiate those templates with various types,
3254     some of which type-check and some that don't, and test the error messages
3255     in each case.
3256
3257#. There are some "extras" that make other features work better.  It's worth
3258   handling these extras to give your expression complete integration into
3259   Clang:
3260
3261   * Add code completion support for your expression in
3262     ``SemaCodeComplete.cpp``.
3263   * If your expression has types in it, or has any "interesting" features
3264     other than subexpressions, extend libclang's ``CursorVisitor`` to provide
3265     proper visitation for your expression, enabling various IDE features such
3266     as syntax highlighting, cross-referencing, and so on.  The
3267     ``c-index-test`` helper program can be used to test these features.
3268
3269