[Clang][Sema] Fix crash in CheckUsingDeclQualifier due to diagnostic missing an argument

[shafik]

Crash report came in and it was pretty obvious the diagnostic line was just missing an argument. I supplied the argument and added a test.

Fixes: #161072

[llvmbot]

@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang

Author: Shafik Yaghmour (shafik)

Changes

Crash report came in and it was pretty obvious the diagnostic line was just missing an argument. I supplied the argument and added a test.

Fixes: #161072

---

Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/161277.diff

2 Files Affected:

• (modified) clang/lib/Sema/SemaDeclCXX.cpp (+1-1)
• (modified) clang/test/SemaCXX/cxx98-compat.cpp (+4)

diff --git a/clang/lib/Sema/SemaDeclCXX.cpp b/clang/lib/Sema/SemaDeclCXX.cpp
index 63ce87b9b0607..7fa411fd817ae 100644
--- a/clang/lib/Sema/SemaDeclCXX.cpp
+++ b/clang/lib/Sema/SemaDeclCXX.cpp
@@ -13643,7 +13643,7 @@ bool Sema::CheckUsingDeclQualifier(SourceLocation UsingLoc, bool HasTypename,
 
     if (Cxx20Enumerator) {
       Diag(NameLoc, diag::warn_cxx17_compat_using_decl_non_member_enumerator)
-          << SS.getRange();
+          << SS.getScopeRep() << SS.getRange();
       return false;
     }
 
diff --git a/clang/test/SemaCXX/cxx98-compat.cpp b/clang/test/SemaCXX/cxx98-compat.cpp
index 8e7acf73923e5..5651eee5a5c41 100644
--- a/clang/test/SemaCXX/cxx98-compat.cpp
+++ b/clang/test/SemaCXX/cxx98-compat.cpp
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
 // RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -std=c++11 -Wc++98-compat -verify %s
 // RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -std=c++14 -Wc++98-compat -verify %s -DCXX14COMPAT
 // RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -std=c++17 -Wc++98-compat -verify %s -DCXX14COMPAT -DCXX17COMPAT
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -std=c++20 -Wc++98-compat -verify %s -DCXX14COMPAT -DCXX17COMPAT -DCXX20COMPAT
 
 namespace std {
   struct type_info;
@@ -225,9 +226,12 @@ void TrivialButNonPODThroughEllipsis() {
   Ellipsis(1, TrivialButNonPOD()); // expected-warning {{passing object of trivial but non-POD type 'TrivialButNonPOD' through variadic function is incompatible with C++98}}
 }
 
+// FIXME I think we generate this diagnostic in C++20
+#ifndef CXX20COMPAT
 struct HasExplicitConversion {
   explicit operator bool(); // expected-warning {{explicit conversion functions are incompatible with C++98}}
 };
+#endif
 
 struct Struct {};
 enum Enum { enum_val = 0 };

[erichkeane]

Did you forget the test? Ingeneral I don't mind this, but the only test changes are a weird C++98 compat one.

[shafik]

Did you forget the test? Ingeneral I don't mind this, but the only test changes are a weird C++98 compat one.

Oppss, yeah I did.