All supported compilers have supported deduction guides in C++17 for a
while, so this isn't necessary anymore.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D108213
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
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 should make the builder http://lab.llvm.org:8011/#/builders/101/ happy.
It uses gcc-9 and not Tip-Of-Trunk as its name indicates BTW.
GCC-10 passes all these tests.
Fix gcc warnings: -Wsign-compare, -Wparentheses, -Wpragmas.
Reviewed By: ldionne, #libc, #libc_abi
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D92099
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
By renaming .fail.cpp tests that don't need clang-verify to .compile.fail.cpp,
the new test format will not try to compile these tests with clang-verify,
and the old test format will work just the same. However, this allows
removing a workaround that requires parsing each test looking for
clang-verify markup.
After this change, a .fail.cpp test should always have clang-verify markup.
When clang-verify is not supported by the compiler, we will just check that
these tests fail to compile. When clang-verify is supported, these tests
will be compiled with clang-verify whether they have markup or not (so
they should have markup, or they will fail).
This simplifies the test suite and also ensures that all of our .fail.cpp
tests provide clang-verify markup. If it's impossible for a test to have
clang-verify markup, it can be moved to a .compile.fail.cpp test, which
are unconditionally just checked for compilation failure.
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).
Fixed the inability to properly rebind the testing allocator, by making the
inner alloc_impl type a plain struct and making the operations templates. Before
rebind failed to compile complaining that a alloc_impl<T>* was not convertible
to an alloc_impl<U>*.
This enables the test to pass for MSVC++ once we provide the strong guarantee
for the copy assignment operator.
Reviewed as https://reviews.llvm.org/D60023
llvm-svn: 357545
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:
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
After two failed attempts last week to make this work I am
going back to a known good method of making this test pass on
macOS...adding the current apple-clang version to the
UNSUPPORTED list.
During a previous patch review (https://reviews.llvm.org/D44103)
it was suggested to just XFAIL libcpp-no-deduction-guides
as was done to iter_alloc_deduction.pass.cpp. However
this caused a an unexpected pass on:
http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/libcxx-libcxxabi-x86_64-linux-ubuntu-gcc-tot-latest-std/builds/214
I then attempted to just mark libcpp-no-deduction-guides
as UNSUPPORTED, however this caused an additional bot
failure. So I reverted everything (https://reviews.llvm.org/rCXX327191).
To solve this and get work unblocked I am adding
apple-clang-9 to the original UNSUPPORTED list.
llvm-svn: 327304
Summary: Refactor the previous version method of marking each apple-clang version as UNSUPPORTED and just XFAIL'ing the libcpp-no-deduction-guides instead. This brings this test inline with the same style as iter_alloc_deduction.pass.cpp
Reviewers: EricWF, dexonsmith
Reviewed By: EricWF
Subscribers: EricWF, vsapsai, vsk, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D44103
llvm-svn: 327178
In T_size_size.pass, there is an explicit template argument to std::min to ask
for unsigned, to avoid type deduction errors. However, C1XX' warnings still
hate this use, because a 64 bit value (a size_t) is being passed to a function
accepting an unsigned (a 32 bit value).
Instead, change the tests to pass around std::size_t instances, and explicitly
narrow when constructing the string type under test. This also allows
removal of explicit template arguments to std::min.
llvm-svn: 302473
The clang assertion causing these tests failing with sanitizer is fixed
in r295794. All the bots running libcxx tests should be upgraded and
running the compiler with the fix.
llvm-svn: 296385
Summary:
This patch fixes http://llvm.org/PR31938. The description below is copy/pasted from the bug:
The standard says:
template<class charT, class traits = char_traits<charT>,
class Allocator = allocator<charT>>
class basic_string {
using value_type = typename traits::char_type;
// ...
basic_string(const charT* s, const Allocator& a = Allocator());
};
libc++ actually chooses to declare the constructor as
basic_string(const value_type* s, const Allocator& a = Allocator());
The implicit deduction guides from class template argument deduction make what was previously an implementation detail visible:
std::basic_string s = "foo"; // error, can't deduce charT.
The constructor in question is in the libc++ DSO, but fortunately it looks like fixing this will not result in an ABI break.
@rsmith How does this look? I did more than just the constructors mentioned in the PR, but IDK how far to take it.
Reviewers: mclow.lists, rsmith
Reviewed By: rsmith
Subscribers: cfe-commits, rsmith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29863
llvm-svn: 295393
Guard typedefs and static_asserts with _LIBCPP_VERSION.
test/std/containers/sequences/vector.bool/move_assign_noexcept.pass.cpp
test/std/containers/sequences/vector.bool/move_noexcept.pass.cpp
test/std/containers/sequences/vector.bool/swap_noexcept.pass.cpp
Additionally deal with conditional compilation.
test/std/containers/associative/map/map.cons/move_noexcept.pass.cpp
test/std/containers/associative/multimap/multimap.cons/move_noexcept.pass.cpp
Additionally deal with typedefs used by other typedefs.
Fixes D29135.
llvm-svn: 294154
When support for `basic_string_view` was added to string it also
added new assignment operators from `basic_string_view`. These caused
ambiguity when assigning from a braced initializer. This patch fixes
that regression by making the basic_string_view assignment operator
rank lower in overload resolution by making it a template.
llvm-svn: 292276
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
test/std/containers/sequences/vector.bool/copy.pass.cpp
test/std/containers/sequences/vector.bool/copy_alloc.pass.cpp
test/std/containers/sequences/vector/vector.cons/copy.pass.cpp
test/std/containers/sequences/vector/vector.cons/copy_alloc.pass.cpp
Change "unsigned s = x.size();" to "typename C::size_type s = x.size();"
because that's what it returns.
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/pointer_alloc.pass.cpp
Include <cstddef>, then change "unsigned n = T::length(s);"
to "std::size_t n = T::length(s);" because that's what char_traits returns.
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/substr.pass.cpp
Change unsigned to typename S::size_type because that's what str.size() returns.
test/std/utilities/template.bitset/bitset.cons/ull_ctor.pass.cpp
This was needlessly truncating std::size_t to unsigned.
It's being used to compare and initialize std::size_t.
llvm-svn: 288753
Add static_cast<std::size_t> to more comparisons. (Performed manually, unlike part 8/12.)
Also, include <cstddef> when it wasn't already being included.
llvm-svn: 288746
Louis Dionne