[ASTMatchers] Fix matching CXXOperatorCallExpr of ->
#139994
Open
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang Author: Eric Li (tJener) ChangesThe Instead of trying to determine the equivalent unary or binary operator and then deriving the opcode string, we consult For Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/139994.diff 2 Files Affected:
diff --git a/clang/include/clang/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersInternal.h b/clang/include/clang/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersInternal.h
index 71dfc49b7fcca..4a27a5d099e60 100644
--- a/clang/include/clang/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersInternal.h
+++ b/clang/include/clang/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersInternal.h
@@ -2161,8 +2161,10 @@ inline const Expr *getSubExpr(const NodeType &Node) {
template <>
inline const Expr *
getSubExpr<CXXOperatorCallExpr>(const CXXOperatorCallExpr &Node) {
- if (!internal::equivalentUnaryOperator(Node))
+ if (!internal::equivalentUnaryOperator(Node) &&
+ Node.getOperator() != OO_Arrow) {
return nullptr;
+ }
return Node.getArg(0);
}
@@ -2223,14 +2225,9 @@ inline StringRef getOpName(const CXXRewrittenBinaryOperator &Node) {
return Node.getOpcodeStr();
}
inline std::optional<StringRef> getOpName(const CXXOperatorCallExpr &Node) {
- auto optBinaryOpcode = equivalentBinaryOperator(Node);
- if (!optBinaryOpcode) {
- auto optUnaryOpcode = equivalentUnaryOperator(Node);
- if (!optUnaryOpcode)
- return std::nullopt;
- return UnaryOperator::getOpcodeStr(*optUnaryOpcode);
- }
- return BinaryOperator::getOpcodeStr(*optBinaryOpcode);
+ if (const char *Str = getOperatorSpelling(Node.getOperator()))
+ return Str;
+ return std::nullopt;
}
inline StringRef getOpName(const CXXFoldExpr &Node) {
return BinaryOperator::getOpcodeStr(Node.getOperator());
@@ -2271,14 +2268,9 @@ class HasAnyOperatorNameMatcher : public SingleNodeMatcherInterface<T> {
return Node.getOpcodeStr();
}
static std::optional<StringRef> getOpName(const CXXOperatorCallExpr &Node) {
- auto optBinaryOpcode = equivalentBinaryOperator(Node);
- if (!optBinaryOpcode) {
- auto optUnaryOpcode = equivalentUnaryOperator(Node);
- if (!optUnaryOpcode)
- return std::nullopt;
- return UnaryOperator::getOpcodeStr(*optUnaryOpcode);
- }
- return BinaryOperator::getOpcodeStr(*optBinaryOpcode);
+ if (const char *Str = getOperatorSpelling(Node.getOperator()))
+ return Str;
+ return std::nullopt;
}
std::vector<std::string> Names;
diff --git a/clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersTraversalTest.cpp b/clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersTraversalTest.cpp
index 8759811092b6f..8ddae4e47004b 100644
--- a/clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersTraversalTest.cpp
+++ b/clang/unittests/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersTraversalTest.cpp
@@ -2025,14 +2025,24 @@ void plusIntOperator()
hasOperatorName("+"), hasUnaryOperand(expr())))));
Code = R"cpp(
-struct HasOpArrow
+struct S {
+ void foo(int);
+};
+struct HasOpStar
{
int& operator*();
};
-void foo()
+struct HasOpArrow
{
- HasOpArrow s1;
- *s1;
+ S* operator->();
+};
+void hasOpStarMem(HasOpStar s)
+{
+ *s;
+}
+void hasOpArrowMem(HasOpArrow a)
+{
+ a->foo(42);
}
)cpp";
@@ -2040,6 +2050,11 @@ void foo()
matches(Code, traverse(TK_IgnoreUnlessSpelledInSource,
cxxOperatorCallExpr(hasOperatorName("*"),
hasUnaryOperand(expr())))));
+ EXPECT_TRUE(matches(
+ Code, traverse(TK_IgnoreUnlessSpelledInSource,
+ cxxOperatorCallExpr(hasOperatorName("->"),
+ hasUnaryOperand(declRefExpr(
+ to(varDecl(hasName("a")))))))));
}
TEST(Matcher, UnaryOperatorTypes) {
|
The `->` operator does not have a corresponding `UnaryOperatorKind`, and so was unsupported by the `hasOperatorName` and `hasUnaryOperand` matchers. Instead of trying to determine the equivalent unary or binary operator and then deriving the opcode string, we consult `OperatorKinds.def` directly (through `getOperatorSpelling`). For `hasUnaryOperand` support, we special case the arrow operator specifically.
c081799 to
fdaba64
Compare
->CXXOperatorCallExpr of ->
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The
->operator does not have a correspondingUnaryOperatorKind, and so was unsupported by thehasOperatorNameandhasUnaryOperandmatchers.Instead of trying to determine the equivalent unary or binary operator and then deriving the opcode string, we consult
OperatorKinds.defdirectly (throughgetOperatorSpelling).For
hasUnaryOperandsupport, we special case the arrow operator specifically.