test/std/strings/string.classes/typedefs.pass.cpp
Actually test what basic_string's typedefs stand for.
test/std/utilities/meta/meta.trans/meta.trans.other/result_of11.pass.cpp
NotDerived and ND were completely unused.
test/std/utilities/utility/pairs/pairs.pair/default.pass.cpp
P2 was mistakenly not being used. Yes, that's
right: -Wunused-local-typedef CAUGHT A MISTAKE! AMAZING!
Fixes D29137.
llvm-svn: 294156
Pending LIT changes are about to remove the REQUIRES-ANY keyword
in place of supporting boolean && and || within "REQUIRES". This
patch prepares libc++ for that change so that when applied
the bots don't lose their mind.
llvm-svn: 292901
test/std/input.output/iostream.format/input.streams/istream.unformatted/get.pass.cpp
Add static_cast<char> because basic_istream::get() returns int_type (N4606 27.7.2.3 [istream.unformatted]/4).
test/std/input.output/iostream.format/output.streams/ostream.formatted/ostream.inserters.arithmetic/minus1.pass.cpp
Add static_cast<char> because toupper() returns int (C11 7.4.2.2/1).
test/std/iterators/stream.iterators/ostream.iterator/ostream.iterator.ops/assign_t.pass.cpp
This test is intentionally writing doubles to ostream_iterator<int>.
It's silencing -Wliteral-conversion for Clang, so I'm adding C4244 silencing for MSVC.
test/std/language.support/support.limits/limits/numeric.limits.members/infinity.pass.cpp
Given `extern float zero;`, the expression `1./zero` has type double, which emits a truncation warning
when being passed to test<float>() taking float. The fix is to say `1.f/zero` which has type float.
test/std/numerics/complex.number/cmplx.over/arg.pass.cpp
test/std/numerics/complex.number/cmplx.over/norm.pass.cpp
These tests were constructing std::complex<double>(x, 0), emitting truncation warnings when x is long long.
Saying static_cast<double>(x) avoids this.
test/std/numerics/rand/rand.eng/rand.eng.lcong/seed_result_type.pass.cpp
This was using `int s` to construct and seed a linear_congruential_engine<T, stuff>, where T is
unsigned short/unsigned int/unsigned long/unsigned long long. That emits a truncation warning in the
unsigned short case. Because the range [0, 20) is tiny and we aren't doing anything else with the index,
we can just iterate with `T s`.
test/std/re/re.traits/value.pass.cpp
regex_traits<wchar_t>::value()'s first parameter is wchar_t (N4606 28.7 [re.traits]/13). This loop is
using int to iterate through ['g', 0xFFFF), emitting a truncation warning from int to wchar_t
(which is 16-bit for some of us). Because the bound is exclusive, we can just iterate with wchar_t.
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/size_char_alloc.pass.cpp
This test is a little strange. It's trying to verify that basic_string's (InIt, InIt) range constructor
isn't confused by "N copies of C" when N and C have the same integral type. To do this, it was
testing (100, 65), but that eventually emits truncation warnings from int to char. There's a simple way
to avoid this - passing (static_cast<char>(100), static_cast<char>(65)) also exercises the disambiguation.
(And 100 is representable even when char has a signed range.)
test/std/strings/string.view/string.view.hash/string_view.pass.cpp
Add static_cast<char_type> because `'0' + i` has type int.
test/std/utilities/function.objects/bind/func.bind/func.bind.bind/nested.pass.cpp
What's more horrible than nested bind()? pow() overloads! This operator()(T a, T b) was assuming that
std::pow(a, b) can be returned as T. (In this case, T is int.) However, N4606 26.9.1 [cmath.syn]/2
says that pow(int, int) returns double, so this was truncating double to int.
Adding static_cast<T> silences this.
test/std/utilities/function.objects/unord.hash/integral.pass.cpp
This was iterating `for (int i = 0; i <= 5; ++i)` and constructing `T t(i);` but that's truncating
when T is short. (And super truncating when T is bool.) Adding static_cast<T> silences this.
test/std/utilities/utility/exchange/exchange.pass.cpp
First, this was exchanging 67.2 into an int, but that's inherently truncating.
Changing this to static_cast<short>(67) avoids the truncation while preserving the
"what if T and U are different" test coverage.
Second, this was exchanging {} with the explicit type float into an int, and that's also
inherently truncating. Specifying short is just as good.
test/std/utilities/utility/pairs/pairs.spec/make_pair.pass.cpp
Add static_cast<short>. Note that this affects template argument deduction for make_pair(),
better fulfilling the test's intent. For example, this was saying
`typedef std::pair<int, short> P1; P1 p1 = std::make_pair(3, 4);` but that was asking
make_pair() to return pair<int, int>, which was then being converted to pair<int, short>.
(pair's converting constructors are tested elsewhere.)
Now, std::make_pair(3, static_cast<short>(4)) actually returns pair<int, short>.
(There's still a conversion from pair<nullptr_t, short> to pair<unique_ptr<int>, short>.)
Fixes D27544.
llvm-svn: 289111
This replaces every occurrence of _LIBCPP_STD_VER in the tests with
TEST_STD_VER. Additionally, for every affected
file, #include "test_macros.h" is being added explicitly if it wasn't
already there.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D26294
llvm-svn: 286007
Summary:
On FreeBSD, for ABI compatibility reasons, the pair trivial copy
constructor is disabled, using the aptly-named
`_LIBCPP_DEPRECATED_ABI_DISABLE_PAIR_TRIVIAL_COPY_CTOR` define.
Disable the related tests when this define is on, so they don't fail
unexpectedly.
Reviewers: emaste, rsmith, theraven, EricWF
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D25449
llvm-svn: 284047
Summary:
`std::move` and `std::forward` were not marked constexpr in C++11. This can be very damaging because it makes otherwise constant expressions non-constant. For example:
```
#include <utility>
template <class T>
struct Foo {
constexpr Foo(T&& tx) : t(std::move(tx)) {}
T t;
};
[[clang::require_constant_initialization]] Foo<int> f(42); // Foo should be constant initialized but C++11 move is not constexpr. As a result `f` is an unsafe global.
```
This patch applies `constexpr` to `move` and `forward` as an extension in C++11. Normally the library is not allowed to add `constexpr` because it may be observable to the user. In particular adding constexpr may cause valid code to stop compiling. However these problems only happen in more complex situations, like making `__invoke(...)` constexpr. `forward` and `move` are simply enough that applying `constexpr` is safe.
Note that libstdc++ has offered this extension since at least 4.8.1.
Most of the changes in this patch are simply test cleanups or additions. The main changes in the tests are:
* Fold all `forward_N.fail.cpp` tests into a single `forward.fail.cpp` test using -verify.
* Delete most `move_only_N.fail.cpp` tests because they weren't actually testing anything.
* Fold `move_copy.pass.cpp` and `move_only.pass.cpp` into a single `move.pass.cpp` test.
* Add return type and noexcept tests for `forward` and `move`.
Reviewers: rsmith, mclow.lists, EricWF
Subscribers: K-ballo, loladiro
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24637
llvm-svn: 282439
This assignment operator was previously broken since the SFINAE always resulted
in substitution failure. This caused assignments to turn into
copy construction + assignment.
This patch was originally committed as r279953 but was reverted due to warnings
in the test-suite. This new patch corrects those warnings.
llvm-svn: 279955
This assignment operator was previously broken since the SFINAE always resulted
in substitution failure. This caused assignments to turn into
copy construction + assignment.
llvm-svn: 279953
This is a breaking change. The SFINAE required is instantiated the second
the class is instantiated, and this can cause hard SFINAE errors
when applied to references to incomplete types. Ex.
struct IncompleteType;
extern IncompleteType it;
std::tuple<IncompleteType&> t(it); // SFINAE will blow up.
llvm-svn: 276598
In C++03 mode evaluating the SFINAE can cause a hard error due to
access control violations. This is a problem because the SFINAE
is evaluated as soon as the class is instantiated, and not later.
llvm-svn: 276594
Quite a few libcxx tests seem to follow the format:
#if _LIBCPP_STD_VER > X
// Do test.
#else
// Empty test.
#endif
We should instead use the UNSUPPORTED lit directive to exclude the test on
earlier C++ standards. This gives us a more accurate number of test passes
for those standards and avoids unnecessary conflicts with other lit
directives on the same tests.
Reviewers: bcraig, ericwf, mclow.lists
Differential revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D20730
llvm-svn: 271108
Summary:
There is no reason to guard `tuple_size`, `tuple_element` and `get<I>(...)` for pair and array inside of `<__tuple>` so that they are only available when we have variadic templates.
This requires there be redundant declarations and definitions. It also makes it easy to get things wrong.
For example the following code should compile (and does in c++11).
```
#define _LIBCPP_HAS_NO_VARIADICS
#include <array>
int main()
{
static_assert((std::tuple_size<std::array<int, 10> volatile>::value == 10), "");
}
```
This patch lifts the non-variadic parts of `tuple_size`, `tuple_types`, and `get<I>(...)` to the top of `<__tuple>` where they don't require variadic templates. This patch also removes `<__tuple_03>` because there is no longer a need for it.
Reviewers: danalbert, K-ballo, mclow.lists
Reviewed By: mclow.lists
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7774
llvm-svn: 232492
Stephan T. Lavavej