Incorrect CLANG Intellisense Error

[dedvalson]

Hi,

I am seeing a bogus intellisense error in a ESP-IDF 5.0 project. I have been able to reproduce this by taking the “Blink” example project and adding a single c++ file with the following content to the project.

#include <esp_log.h>

void foo() {
ESP_LOGW("foo", "baz");
}

The ESP_LOGW statement has a squiggly red underscore and floating the mouse over it gives the error [Clang Intellisense] Error expected ')'

The code compiles fine. The error is not produced in a c source file, only c++.

I am using:

Visual GDB 5.6R9 Build 4777

ESP32 toolchain 11.2.0/9.2.90/r2

ESP-IDF release/5.0

ESP32 Debug Methods 20230309

Visual Studio 2019 16.6.2

I can supply a zip of the project but it is too large for file uploads. But all I did is add that single c++ file to the standard Blink project.

Thanks,

Don

 

[support]

Hi,

It looks like the error is caused by the differences in the way gcc and clang handle the __VA_OPT__ syntax. ESP-IDF code was never tested with Clang, so it makes sense that it would trigger unexpected errors.

You can work around it by patching the definition of ESP_LOG_LEVEL_LOCAL() in esp_log.h as follows:

#ifdef __SYSPROGS_CODESENSE__
#define ESP_LOG_LEVEL_LOCAL(level, tag, format, ...)
#else
#define ESP_LOG_LEVEL_LOCAL(level, tag, format, ...) do {               \
        if ( LOG_LOCAL_LEVEL >= level ) ESP_LOG_LEVEL(level, tag, format, ##__VA_ARGS__); \
    } while(0)
#endif

The __SYSPROGS_CODESENSE__ macro is only defined by Clang IntelliSense, so it won’t affect the actual build, but will prevent IntelliSense from trying to parse unsupported syntax.

 

[dedvalson]

That was a good suggestions and pointed me in a different direction. If you look at the existing esp_log.h there are 4 places where there is a preprocessor statement as follows:

#if defined(__cplusplus) && (__cplusplus > 201703L)

I just changed them to:

#if defined(__cplusplus) && (__cplusplus > 201703L) && defined(USE_VA_ARGS)

This preserves the clang ability to make sure the arguments match the format statement.

Thanks,

Don

 

[Author]

Posts