This commit deprecates <experimental/memory_resource> since we now ship the non-experimental
version of it. Per the libc++ policy [1], we are deprecating the experimental feature in
upcoming LLVM 16 and will remove it entirely in LLVM 18.
[1]: https://libcxx.llvm.org/DesignDocs/ExperimentalFeatures.html#id4
Reviewed By: ldionne, #libc
Spies: EricWF, libcxx-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D136245
This caused build failures when building Clang and libc++ together on Mac:
fatal error: 'experimental/memory_resource' file not found
See the code review for details. Reverting until the problem and how to
solve it is better understood.
(Updates to some test files were not reverted, since they seemed
unrelated and were later updated by 340b48b267b96.)
> This is the first part of a plan to ship experimental features
> by default while guarding them behind a compiler flag to avoid
> users accidentally depending on them. Subsequent patches will
> also encompass incomplete features (such as <format> and <ranges>)
> in that categorization. Basically, the idea is that we always
> build and ship the c++experimental library, however users can't
> use what's in it unless they pass the `-funstable` flag to Clang.
>
> Note that this patch intentionally does not start guarding
> existing <experimental/FOO> content behind the flag, because
> that would merely break users that might be relying on such
> content being in the headers unconditionally. Instead, we
> should start guarding new TSes behind the flag, and get rid
> of the existing TSes we have by shipping their Standard
> counterpart.
>
> Also, this patch must jump through a few hoops like defining
> _LIBCPP_ENABLE_EXPERIMENTAL because we still support compilers
> that do not implement -funstable yet.
>
> Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D128927
This reverts commit bb939931a1.
This is the first part of a plan to ship experimental features
by default while guarding them behind a compiler flag to avoid
users accidentally depending on them. Subsequent patches will
also encompass incomplete features (such as <format> and <ranges>)
in that categorization. Basically, the idea is that we always
build and ship the c++experimental library, however users can't
use what's in it unless they pass the `-funstable` flag to Clang.
Note that this patch intentionally does not start guarding
existing <experimental/FOO> content behind the flag, because
that would merely break users that might be relying on such
content being in the headers unconditionally. Instead, we
should start guarding new TSes behind the flag, and get rid
of the existing TSes we have by shipping their Standard
counterpart.
Also, this patch must jump through a few hoops like defining
_LIBCPP_ENABLE_EXPERIMENTAL because we still support compilers
that do not implement -funstable yet.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D128927
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
Currently the member functions std::allocator<T>::allocate,
std::experimental::pmr::polymorphic_allocator::allocate and
std::resource_adaptor<T>::do_allocate throw an exception of type
std::length_error when the requested size exceeds the maximum size.
According to the C++ standard ([allocator.members]/4,
[mem.poly.allocator.mem]/1), std::allocator<T>::allocate and
std::pmr::polymorphic_allocator::allocate must throw a
std::bad_array_new_length exception in this case.
The patch fixes the issue with std::allocator<T>::allocate and changes
the type the exception thrown by
std::experimental::pmr::resource_adaptor<T>::do_allocate to
std::bad_array_new_length as well for consistency.
The patch resolves LWG 3237, LWG 3038 and LWG 3190.
Reviewed By: ldionne, #libc, Quuxplusone
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110846
Some embedded platforms do not wish to support the C library functionality
for handling wchar_t because they have no use for it. It makes sense for
libc++ to work properly on those platforms, so this commit adds a carve-out
of functionality for wchar_t.
Unfortunately, unlike some other carve-outs (e.g. random device), this
patch touches several parts of the library. However, despite the wide
impact of this patch, I still think it is important to support this
configuration since it makes it much simpler to port libc++ to some
embedded platforms.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111265
Even if these comments have a benefit in .h files (for editors that
care about language but can't be configured to treat .h as C++ code),
they certainly have no benefit for files with the .cpp extension.
Discussed in D110794.
When building in MSVC mode (in release mode), the assert(false) don't
make the end of the function unreachable, so add return statements to
silence compiler warnings (treated as errors).
Also change 'virtual' into 'override', which was requested in review,
as these files require C++11.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D99214
Fixes LWG issue 2724: "The protected virtual member functions of memory_resource should be private."
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66615
When porting libc++ to embedded systems, it can be useful to drop support
for localization, which these systems don't implement or care about.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D90072
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
The libc++ test suite has a lot of old Lit features used to XFAIL tests
and mark them as UNSUPPORTED. Many of them are to workaround problems on
old compilers or old platforms. As time goes by, it is good to go and
clean those up to simplify the configuration of the test suite, and also
to reflect the testing reality. It's not useful to have markup that gives
the impression that e.g. clang-3.3 is supported, when we don't really
test on it anymore (and hence several new tests probably don't have the
necessary markup on them).
The testing script used to test libc++ historically did not like directories
without any testing files, so these tests had been added. Since this is
not necessary anymore, we can now remove these files. This has the benefit
that the total number of tests reflects the real number of tests more
closely, and we also skip some unnecessary work (especially relevant when
running tests over SSH).
However, some nothing_to_do.pass.cpp tests actually serve the purpose of
documenting that an area of the Standard doesn't need to be tested, or is
tested elsewhere. These files are not removed by this commit.
Removal done with:
import os
import itertools
for (dirpath, dirnames, filenames) in itertools.chain(os.walk('./libcxx/test'),
os.walk('./libcxxabi/test')):
if len(filenames + dirnames) > 1 and \
any(p == 'nothing_to_do.pass.cpp' for p in filenames):
os.remove(os.path.join(dirpath, 'nothing_to_do.pass.cpp'))
Those tests fail when linking against a new dylib but running against
macosx10.7. I believe this is caused by a duplicate definition of the
RTTI for exception classes in libc++.dylib and libc++abi.dylib, but
this matter still needs some investigation.
This issue was not caught previously because all the tests always linked
against the same dylib used for running (because LIT made it impossible
to do otherwise before r349171).
rdar://problem/46809586
llvm-svn: 354940
Summary:
Previously, we'd run some experimental tests even when enable_experimental=False
was used with lit.
Reviewers: EricWF
Subscribers: christof, jkorous, dexonsmith, libcxx-commits, mclow.lists
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55834
llvm-svn: 354725
Summary:
Freestanding is *weird*. The standard allows it to differ in a bunch of odd
manners from regular C++, and the committee would like to improve that
situation. I'd like to make libc++ behave better with what freestanding should
be, so that it can be a tool we use in improving the standard. To do that we
need to try stuff out, both with "freestanding the language mode" and
"freestanding the library subset".
Let's start with the super basic: run the libc++ tests in freestanding, using
clang as the compiler, and see what works. The easiest hack to do this:
In utils/libcxx/test/config.py add:
self.cxx.compile_flags += ['-ffreestanding']
Run the tests and they all fail.
Why? Because in freestanding `main` isn't special. This "not special" property
has two effects: main doesn't get mangled, and main isn't allowed to omit its
`return` statement. The first means main gets mangled and the linker can't
create a valid executable for us to test. The second means we spew out warnings
(ew) and the compiler doesn't insert the `return` we omitted, and main just
falls of the end and does whatever undefined behavior (if you're luck, ud2
leading to non-zero return code).
Let's start my work with the basics. This patch changes all libc++ tests to
declare `main` as `int main(int, char**` so it mangles consistently (enabling us
to declare another `extern "C"` main for freestanding which calls the mangled
one), and adds `return 0;` to all places where it was missing. This touches 6124
files, and I apologize.
The former was done with The Magic Of Sed.
The later was done with a (not quite correct but decent) clang tool:
https://gist.github.com/jfbastien/793819ff360baa845483dde81170feed
This works for most tests, though I did have to adjust a few places when e.g.
the test runs with `-x c`, macros are used for main (such as for the filesystem
tests), etc.
Once this is in we can create a freestanding bot which will prevent further
regressions. After that, we can start the real work of supporting C++
freestanding fairly well in libc++.
<rdar://problem/47754795>
Reviewers: ldionne, mclow.lists, EricWF
Subscribers: christof, jkorous, dexonsmith, arphaman, miyuki, libcxx-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57624
llvm-svn: 353086
to reflect the new license. These used slightly different spellings that
defeated my regular expressions.
We understand that people may be surprised that we're moving the header
entirely to discuss the new license. We checked this carefully with the
Foundation's lawyer and we believe this is the correct approach.
Essentially, all code in the project is now made available by the LLVM
project under our new license, so you will see that the license headers
include that license only. Some of our contributors have contributed
code under our old license, and accordingly, we have retained a copy of
our old license notice in the top-level files in each project and
repository.
llvm-svn: 351648
When built against the old libc++ version the test was causing linker error
Undefined symbols for architecture x86_64:
"std::experimental::fundamentals_v1::pmr::new_delete_resource()", referenced from:
void test_evil<WidgetV0, WidgetV0>() in construct_piecewise_pair_evil.pass.cpp.o
void test_evil<WidgetV0, WidgetV1>() in construct_piecewise_pair_evil.pass.cpp.o
void test_evil<WidgetV0, WidgetV2>() in construct_piecewise_pair_evil.pass.cpp.o
void test_evil<WidgetV0, WidgetV3>() in construct_piecewise_pair_evil.pass.cpp.o
void test_evil<WidgetV1, WidgetV0>() in construct_piecewise_pair_evil.pass.cpp.o
void test_evil<WidgetV1, WidgetV1>() in construct_piecewise_pair_evil.pass.cpp.o
void test_evil<WidgetV1, WidgetV2>() in construct_piecewise_pair_evil.pass.cpp.o
...
llvm-svn: 334431
Patch from Arthur O'Dwyer.
In the TS, `uses_allocator` construction for `pair` tried to use an allocator
type of `memory_resource*`, which is incorrect because `memory_resource*` is
not an allocator type. LWG 2969 fixed it to use `polymorphic_allocator` as the
allocator type instead.
https://wg21.link/lwg2969
(D47090 included this in `<memory_resource>`; at Eric's request, I've split
this out into its own patch applied to the existing
`<experimental/memory_resource>` instead.)
Reviewed as https://reviews.llvm.org/D47109
llvm-svn: 333384
Summary:
I haven't added it to all the tests, just those that fail without it
(those that aren't header only).
Reviewers: EricWF, mclow.lists
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D21247
llvm-svn: 272443
Nikolas Klauser