It is meant to be used in ranges algorithm tests.
It is much simplified version of C++23's tuple + zip_view.
Using std::swap would cause compilation failure and using `std::move` would not create the correct rvalue proxy which would result in copies.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D129099
All supported compilers that support C++20 now support concepts. So, remove
`_LIB_LIBCPP_HAS_NO_CONCEPTS` in favor of `_LIBCPP_STD_VER > 17`. Similarly in
the tests, remove `// UNSUPPORTED: libcpp-no-concepts`.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D121528
Fixup tests that believe them to be so. Most notably including some heavy refactoring in `std/iterators/iterator.primitives/iterator.traits/cxx20_iterator_traits.compile.pass.cpp`, which now detects pointers and validates that `iterator_concept` is present only for pointers.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D117368
The logic here is that we are disabling *only* things in `std::ranges::`.
Everything in `std::` is permitted, including `default_sentinel`, `contiguous_iterator`,
`common_iterator`, `projected`, `swappable`, and so on. Then, we include
anything from `std::ranges::` that is required in order to make those things
work: `ranges::swap`, `ranges::swap_ranges`, `input_range`, `ranges::begin`,
`ranges::iter_move`, and so on. But then that's all. Everything else (including
notably all of the "views" and the `std::views` namespace itself) is still
locked up behind `_LIBCPP_HAS_NO_INCOMPLETE_RANGES`.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D118736
The renames the output_iterator to cpp17_output_iterator. These
iterators are still used in C++20 so it's not possible to change the
current type to the new C++20 requirements. This is done in a similar
fashion as the cpp17_input_iterator.
Reviewed By: #libc, Quuxplusone, ldionne
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D117950
This includes an experimental workaround for
LWG3664 "LWG3392 broke std::ranges::distance(a, a+3)",
but the workaround may be incomplete, I'm not sure.
This should be re-audited when LWG3664 is actually adopted,
to see if we need to change anything about our implementation.
See also https://github.com/microsoft/STL/pull/2500
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D117940
In `ranges::advance(iter, n, bound)`, we'd incorrectly handle the case
where bound < iter and n is 0:
int a[10];
int *p = a+5;
int *bound = a+3;
std::ranges::advance(p, 0, bound);
assert(p - a == 5); // we'd return 3 before this patch
This was caused by an incorrect handling of 0 inside __magnitude_geq.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D117240
As prefigured in the comments on D115315.
This gives us one unified style for all niebloids,
and also simplifies the modulemap.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D116570
Instead of storing the wrapped iterator inside the stride_counting_iterator,
store its base so we can have e.g. a stride_counting_iterator of an
input_iterator (which was previously impossible because input_iterators
are not copyable). Also a few other simplifications in stride_counting_iterator.
As a fly-by fix, remove the member base() functions, which are super
confusing.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D116613
This makes all the tests consistent and improves code coverage. This also
uncovers a bug with negative indices in advance() (which also impacts
prev()) -- I'll fix that in a subsequent patch.
I chose to only count operations in the tests for ranges::advance because
doing so in prev() and next() too was reaching diminishing returns, and
didn't meaningfully improve our test coverage.
In the test files, replace the old-style tests with a simple static_assert,
matching the current style as depicted in e.g.
`ranges_uninitialized_default_construct.pass.cpp`.
Preserve `is_function_like` (but renamed to `is_niebloid`) at
ldionne's request. The removal of this test helper will happen
in D116570 if at all.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D116384
AFAICT, Cpp17InputIterators are not required to be default constructible,
since that requirement is added in Cpp17ForwardIterator. Hence, our
archetype for Cpp17InputIterator should not be default constructible.
Removing that constructor has a ripple effect on a couple of tests that
were making incorrect assumptions. Notably:
- Some tests were using cpp17_input_iterator as a sentinel for itself.
That is not valid, because a cpp17_input_iterator is not semiregular
anymore after the change (and hence it doesn't satisfy sentinel_for).
- Some tests were using a stride-counted cpp17_input_iterator as the
sentinel for a range. This doesn't work anymore because of the problem
above, so these tests were changed not to check stride counts for
input iterators.
- Some tests were default constructing cpp17_input_iterator when a simple
alternative was available -- those have been changed to use that alternative.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D115806
Defined in [`specialized.algorithms`](wg21.link/specialized.algorithms).
Also:
- refactor the existing non-range implementation so that most of it
can be shared between the range-based and non-range-based algorithms;
- remove an existing test for the non-range version of
`uninitialized_default_construct{,_n}` that likely triggered undefined
behavior (it read the values of built-ins after default-initializing
them, essentially reading uninitialized memory).
Reviewed By: #libc, Quuxplusone, ldionne
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D115315
In 1fa27f2a10, we made <filesystem>'s iterator types model concepts
from <ranges>, but we forgot to add the appropriate availability
annotations. This broke back-deployment to platforms that don't have
<filesystem> for which we have availability annotations.
For some reason, this wasn't caught by our back-deployment CI.
I believe this is due to the fact that we use a slightly older
compiler in the CI, and perhaps that compiler does not honour
our `#pragma clang attribute push` properly.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D114456
Since we officially don't support several older compilers now, we can
drop a lot of the markup in the test suite. This helps keep the test
suite simple and makes sure that UNSUPPORTED annotations don't rot.
This is the first patch of a series that will remove annotations for
compilers that are now unsupported.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D107787
See LWG reflector thread of 2021-07-23 titled
'Question on ranges::advance and "past-the-sentinel iterators"'.
Test case heavily based on one graciously provided by Casey Carter.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D106735
This started as fixing a typo in a ADDITIONAL_COMPILE_FLAGS directive
which turned out to uncover a few places where we warned about signedness
changes.
As a fly-by fix, this updates the various __advance overloads
for style consistency.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D106372
`__function_like` wasn't being exported, so certain properties of the
`ranges` functions weren't being propagated in modules land.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105078
This started as an attempt to fix a GCC 11 warning of misplaced parentheses.
I then noticed that trying to fix the parentheses warning actually triggered
errors in the tests, showing that we were incorrectly assuming that the
implementation of ranges::advance was using operator+= or operator-=.
This commit fixes that issue and makes the tests easier to follow by
localizing the assertions it makes.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103272
Make sure we provide the correct It::difference_type member and update
the tests and synopses to be accurate.
Supersedes D102657 and D103101 (thanks to the original authors).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103273
C++17 deprecated std::iterator and removed it as a base class for all
iterator adaptors. We implement that change, but we still provide a way
to inherit from std::iterator in the few cases where doing otherwise
would be an ABI break.
Supersedes D101729 and the std::iterator base parts of D103101 and D102657.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103171
Implements part of P0896 'The One Ranges Proposal'.
Implements [range.iter.op.prev].
Depends on D102563.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D102564
Implements part of P0896 'The One Ranges Proposal'.
Implements [range.iter.op.next].
Depends on D101922.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D102563
cxx20_iterator_traits.compile.pass.cpp actually depends on
implementation details of libc++, which is not great;
but I just left a comment and moved on.
C++20 revised the definition of what it means to be an iterator. While
all _Cpp17InputIterators_ satisfy `std::input_iterator`, the reverse
isn't true. D100271 introduces a new test adaptor to accommodate this
new definition (`cpp20_input_iterator`).
In order to help readers immediately distinguish which input iterator
adaptor is _Cpp17InputIterator_, the current `input_iterator` adaptor
has been prefixed with `cpp17_`.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D101242
This reverts a224bf8ec4 and fixes the
underlying issue.
The underlying issue is simply that MSVC headers contains a define
like "#define __in", where __in is one macro in the MSVC Source
Code Annotation Language, defined in sal.h
Just use a different variable name than "__in"
__indirectly_readable_impl, and add "__in" to nasty_macros.h just
like the existing __out. (Also adding a couple more potentially
conflicting ones.)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D101613
To run llvm-lit manually from the command line:
./bin/llvm-lit -sv --param std=c++2b --param cxx_under_test=`pwd`/bin/clang \
--param debug_level=1 ../libcxx/test/
Tests that currently fail with `debug_level=1` are marked `LIBCXX-DEBUG-FIXME`,
but my intent is to deal with all of them and leave no such annotations in
the codebase within the next couple weeks. (I have patches for all of them
in my local checkout.)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D100866
* adds `iterator_traits` specialisation that supports all expected
member aliases except for `pointer`
* adds `iterator_traits` specialisations for iterators that meet the
legacy iterator requirements but might lack multiple member aliases
* makes pointer `iterator_traits` specialisation require objects
Depends on D99854.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D99855
The `iterator_traits` patch became too large for a concise review, so
the "bloat" —as it were— was moved into this patch. Also tests most
C++[98,17] iterator types to confirm backwards compatibility is
successful (regex iterators are intentionally not present, but directory
iterators are due to a peculiar error encountered while patching
`iterator_traits`).
Depends on D99461.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D99854
The interesting change here is that we no longer consider `__convert_to_integral`
an ADL customization point for the user's types. I think the new behavior
is defensible. The old behavior had come from D7449, where Marshall explicitly
said "people can't define their own [`__convert_to_integral` overloads]."
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D92814
The 5f12f4ff90 commit suppress printing of
inline namespace names in diagnostics by default that breaks the libc++
iterator test, which expects __1 in the namespace.
This patch fixes the test by supporting a test case without __1 in the
namespace.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D92142
The Standard documents the signature of std::advance as
template <class Iter, class Distance>
constexpr void advance(Iter& i, Distance n);
Furthermore, it does not appear to put any restriction on what the type
of Distance should be. While it is understood that it should usually
be std::iterator_traits::difference_type, I couldn't find any wording
that mandates that. Similarly, I couldn't find wording that forces the
distance to be a signed type.
This patch changes std::advance to accept any type in the second argument,
which appears to be what the Standard mandates. We then coerce it to the
iterator's difference type, but that's an implementation detail.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81425
C++98 and C++03 are effectively aliases as far as Clang is concerned.
As such, allowing both std=c++98 and std=c++03 as Lit parameters is
just slightly confusing, but provides no value. It's similar to allowing
both std=c++17 and std=c++1z, which we don't do.
This was discovered because we had an internal bot that ran the test
suite under both c++98 AND c++03 -- one of which is redundant.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D80926
Hui Xie