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
This commit reverts 5aaefa51 (and also partly 7f285f48e7 and b6d75682f9,
which were related to the original commit). As landed, 5aaefa51 had
unintended consequences on some downstream bots and didn't have proper
coverage upstream due to a few subtle things. Implementing this is
something we should do in libc++, however we'll first need to address
a few issues listed in https://reviews.llvm.org/D106124#3349710.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D120683
libc++ has started splicing standard library headers into much more
fine-grained content for maintainability. It's very likely that outdated
and naive tooling (some of which is outside of LLVM's scope) will
suggest users include things such as <__ranges/access.h> instead of
<ranges>, and Hyrum's law suggests that users will eventually begin to
rely on this without the help of tooling. As such, this commit
intends to protect users from themselves, by making it a hard error for
anyone outside of the standard library to include libc++ detail headers.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D106124
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
Basically a rebase of D104980; most of that patch had already happened
via gradual drive-by changes, but this finishes it up.
Don't touch the inclusions from `<__functional_base>`, `<__hash_table>`,
or `<__locale>`; those could be removed if we propagated the
inclusions up to the includers of those files, but there are lots
of those includers.
`<algorithm>`, `<functional>`, and `<memory>` already include `<utility>`
at the top level. `<iterator>` did not, so I've added it there.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D119020
As discovered in D117817, `std::ranges::input_range<Holder<Incomplete>*[10]>`
hard-errored before this patch. That's because `input_range` requires
`iter_rvalue_reference_t`, which requires `iter_move`, which was
not ADL-proofed.
Add ADL-proofing tests to all the range refinements.
`output_range` and `common_range` shouldn't be affected,
and all the others subsume `input_range` anyway, but we might as
well be thorough.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D118213
The macro that opts out of `std::ranges::` functionality is called
`_LIBCPP_HAS_NO_INCOMPLETE_RANGES`, and is unrelated to this macro
which is specifically about _compiler_ support for the _syntax_.
The only non-mechanical diff here is in `<__config>`.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D118507
We've been forgetting to add those to most of the <ranges> review.
To avoid forgetting in the future, I added an item in the pre-commit
checklist.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D106287
Moves:
* `std::move`, `std::forward`, `std::declval`, and `std::swap` into
`__utility/${FUNCTION_NAME}`.
* `std::swap_ranges` and `std::iter_swap` into
`__algorithm/${FUNCTION_NAME}`
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103734
That was originally committed in 04733181b5 and then reverted in
a9f11cc0d9 because it broke several people.
The problem was a missing include of __iterator/concepts.h, which has now
been fixed.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D100073
Implements parts of:
* P0896R4 The One Ranges Proposal`
Depends on D99873.
Reviewed By: ldionne, #libc
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D100073
Joe Loser