Lines Matching defs:have
17 You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
104 /* The functions in vbase for which we have already provided vcall
294 couldn't give the diagnostic then since we might have been calling
368 template (even in instantiate_non_dependent_expr), we don't have vtables
378 /* If we're in an NSDMI, we don't have the full constructor context yet
394 We have to avoid generating a COMPONENT_REF for a base class
440 vtable being set up. We have to indirect via the
564 also check the field offset; we can have two base fields
582 Even though we've dealt with the type above, we still have
696 creating extra tree nodes when we don't have to. */
772 should have external or internal linkage at the object file
827 might be able to arrange to have the "vtable static member"
879 /* We have already created a vtable for this base, so there's
986 of the BINFO_VIRTUALS list. Now, we have to find the
1055 error ("Java class %qT cannot have a destructor", type);
1057 error ("Java class %qT cannot have an implicit non-trivial "
1067 /* See if we already have an entry with this name. */
1116 them, but not all, have a ref-qualifier.
1215 methods have inline definitions. In particular, we
1221 /* A class should never have more than one destructor. */
1427 if (warning (OPT_Wabi_tag, "%qT does not have the %E ABI tag "
1434 if (warning (OPT_Wabi_tag, "%qT does not have the %E ABI tag "
1663 if it were virtual, we would have created it by now. */
1716 /* If the base class doesn't have copy constructors or
1718 derived class cannot have such a member automatically
1823 that have had a nearly-empty virtual primary base stolen by some
1854 /* Determine if we have a virtual primary base, and mark it so.
1870 /* A virtual binfo might have been copied from within
1934 /* A virtual binfo might have been copied from within
1984 definition, and we need to fix up any variants that have already been
2028 Similarly for a class whose base classes do not have vtables.
2029 When neither of these is true, we might have removed abstract
2072 /* We will have warned when the template was declared; there's
2153 /* Warn about classes that have private constructors and no friends. */
2169 complete non-template or fully instantiated classes have this
2181 you already have one. But, for now at least, we're
2249 /* Resort TYPE_METHOD_VEC because pointers have been reordered. */
2262 /* The type conversion ops have to live at the front of the vec, so we
2307 /* The type conversion ops have to live at the front of the vec, so we
2319 /* Make BINFO's vtable have N entries, including RTTI entries,
2332 /* We may have to grow the vtable. */
2343 have the same signature. */
2604 also be converting to the return type of FN, we have to
2636 the binfos, which have been chained in inheritance graph
2637 order. Of course it is lame that we have to repeat the
2644 when the covariancy is invalid (which we will have
2883 /* Get the base virtual function declarations in T that have the
2930 /* In [temp.mem] we have:
2989 have the same name. Figure out what name that is. */
3067 "only have non-static data members", elt);
3071 "only have non-static data members", elt);
3181 /* If this is a primary base, then we have already looked at the
3280 the class cannot have a default constructor, copy constructor
3608 This class cannot have an implicitly generated copy constructor
3612 This class cannot have an implicitly generated assignment
3637 /* Assume none of the members of this class have default
3685 error ("in C++98 %q+D may not have reference type %qT "
3871 /* Core issue 80: A nonstatic data member is required to have a
4089 /* We still have to walk the primary base, if it is
4256 /* Try to place the field. It may take more than one try if we have
4267 /* We have to check to see whether or not there is already
4277 as the S we already allocated. So, we have to skip ahead.
4279 empty class, have nonzero size, any overlap can happen only
4290 at the first place we could have put the field with
4329 /* Indirect virtual bases may have a nonzero BINFO_OFFSET at
4455 have a hard time placing the field without putting two
4482 an empty class placed at offset zero might itself have an
4548 will have already been added). */
4797 have had an in class declaration, from whence clones were
4880 /* If for some reason we don't have a CLASSTYPE_METHOD_VEC, we bail
4905 12.4/3: A declaration of a destructor that does not have an
4906 exception-specification is implicitly considered to have the
4912 /* If for some reason we don't have a CLASSTYPE_METHOD_VEC, we bail
4957 int found, have;
4967 have = tm_attr_to_mask (tm_attr);
4974 if (have == TM_ATTR_PURE)
5005 if (found <= TM_ATTR_CALLABLE && have > found)
5043 /* If the class doesn't have an attribute, nothing more to do. */
5048 /* Any method that does not yet have a tm attribute inherits
5182 /* Does the type itself have a user-provided move assignment operator? */
5267 /* The caller should have stripped an enclosing array. */
5391 or because it doesn't have a default constructor (so we need to give an
5478 array whose elements have the indicated class TYPE. */
5490 element, we'll have to know how many elements there are. */
5495 argument is of type `size_t', then we have to pass the size of
5522 /* Otherwise, if we have a two-argument function and the second
5535 At this point, we have already processed base classes and
5596 inform (0, " %q+T is not an aggregate, does not have a trivial "
5701 check_field_decls until we have called check_bases check_methods,
5752 polymorphic. Although a polymorphic base will have a already
5774 /* If the class has no user-declared constructor, but does have
5812 /* Check defaulted declarations here so we have cant_have_const_ctor
5862 accordingly. If a new vfield was created (because T doesn't have a
5899 base classes to have a different type than the vtable pointer
5904 the derived class vtable pointer, since they have different
6007 hierarchy, so we have to add space for it. */
6026 allocate some space for it. It cannot have virtual bases, so
6150 /* The size should have been rounded to a whole byte. */
6274 field. We have to back up by one to find the largest
6286 /* In a union, the padding field must have the full width
6331 and yet it starts in the middle of a byte, we have failed to
6352 Because C++ does not have integer types of arbitrary width,
6712 /* Make the rtl for any new vtables we have created, and unmark
6720 cannot have destructors. */
6753 error ("type transparent %q#T does not have any fields", t);
7175 have to search the whole inheritance matrix to find all the
7410 enumerators) have to be visible. This recursive function calls
7530 reference to the overloaded function name is required to have the
7620 to proceed to the template functions. But, if we don't have a
7702 /* Now we should have exactly one function in MATCHES. */
7871 /* If we are in a template, and have a NON_DEPENDENT_EXPR, we cannot
7880 /* There only a few kinds of expressions that may have a type
7888 what sort of a pointer to function we have. For now, any
7957 this may have to look back through base types to find the
8093 /* If there's already a binding for this NAME, then we don't have
8627 /* data.inits might have grown as we added secondary virtual pointers.
8654 /* We don't care about bases that don't have vtables. */
8715 /* This might be a primary base, so have no vtable in this
8797 graph of T. Both BINFO and ORIG_BINFO will have the same BINFO_TYPE,
8814 /* If it doesn't have a vptr, we don't do anything. */
8904 /* Just set our BINFO_VTABLE to point to LAST, as we may not have
9224 /* If we have reached a virtual base, then it must be a primary
9226 have called build_vcall_and_vbase_vtbl_entries for it. But it
9320 A, which will adjust the A* to a B2* to call f. We have no way of
9348 primary virtual base will have already had its offsets generated