Commit Graph

4 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Louis Dionne c2df707666 [libc++] Suppress -Wctad-maybe-unsupported on types w/o deduction guides
There are a handful of standard library types that are intended
to support CTAD but don't need any explicit deduction guides to
do so.

This patch adds a dummy deduction guide to those types to suppress
-Wctad-maybe-unsupported (which gets emitted in user code).

This is a re-application of the original patch by Eric Fiselier in
fcd549a7d8 which had been reverted due to reasons lost at this point.
I also added the macro to a few more types. Reviving this patch was
prompted by the discussion on https://llvm.org/D133425.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D133535
2022-10-03 14:05:08 -04:00
Louis Dionne a7f9895cc1 [runtimes] Rename various libcpp-has-no-XYZ Lit features to just no-XYZ
Since those features are general properties of the environment, it makes
sense to use them from libc++abi too, and so the name libcpp-has-no-xxx
doesn't make sense.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D126482
2022-05-27 15:24:45 -04:00
Arthur O'Dwyer d0eaf75320 [libc++] Remove non-atomic "platform" semaphore implementations.
These can't be made constexpr-constructible (constinit'able),
so they aren't C++20-conforming. Also, the platform versions are
going to be bigger than the atomic/futex version, so we'd have
the awkward situation that `semaphore<42>` could be bigger than
`semaphore<43>`, and that's just silly.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110110
2021-11-04 14:33:34 -04:00
Arthur O'Dwyer c9af0e61fa [libc++] counting_semaphore should not be default-constructible.
Neither the current C++2b draft, nor any revision of [p1135],
nor libstdc++, claims that `counting_semaphore` should be
default-constructible. I think this was just a copy-paste issue
somehow.

Also, `explicit` was missing from the constructor.

Also, `constexpr` remains missing; but that's probably more of a
technical limitation, since apparently there are some platforms
where we don't (can't??) use the atomic implementation and
have to rely on pthreads, which obviously isn't constexpr.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110042
2021-09-21 16:19:31 -04:00