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
This follows the general direction of D118736 that
`_LIBCPP_HAS_NO_INCOMPLETE_RANGES` does *not* guard anything outside
of the `std::ranges::` namespace itself. This means we must permit
`ranges::less` etc. in no-ranges mode; that seems fine to me.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D120139
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 It's very likely that outdated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
This is the first step towards disentangling the debug mode and assertions
in libc++. This patch doesn't make any functional change: it simply moves
_LIBCPP_ASSERT-related stuff to its own file so as to make it clear that
libc++ assertions and the debug mode are different things. Future patches
will make it possible to enable assertions without enabling the debug
mode.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D119769
The changes from the One Ranges Proposal amount to adding:
- a constructor that takes a `default_sentinel_t` and is equivalent to
the default constructor;
- an `operator==` that compares the iterator to `default_sentinel_t`.
The original proposal defined two overloads for `operator==` (different
argument order) as well as `operator!=`. This has been removed by
[P1614](https://wg21.link/p1614).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D119620
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
Per Discord discussion, we're normalizing on a simple `!defined(_LIBCPP_HAS_NO_CONCEPTS)`
so that we can do a big search-and-replace for `!defined(_LIBCPP_HAS_NO_CONCEPTS)`
back into `_LIBCPP_STD_VER > 17` when we're ready to abandon support for concept-syntax-less
compilers.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D118748
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
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
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
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
We were missing a constraint in common_iterator's iterator_traits and
we were eagerly instantiating iter_value_t even when invalid.
Thanks to Casey Carter for finding this bug.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D117449
Fixed in counted_iterator and transform_view::iterator.
The LWG issue also affected elements_view::iterator, but we haven't
implemented that one yet, and whoever does implement it will get
the fix for free if they just follow the working draft's wording.
Drive-by stop calling `.base()` on test iterators in the test,
and improve the transform_view::iterator/sentinel tests.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D117329
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
This essentially reverts e02ed1c255 and puts in a new fix, which makes `path::iterator`
a true C++20 `bidirectional_iterator`, but downgrades it to an `input_iterator` in C++17.
Fixes#37852.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D116489
The NFC part of D116809. We still want to enforce this in CI,
but the mechanism for that is still to-be-determined.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D116809
The reason for those nested namespaces is explained in D115315:
> AIUI, this keeps the CPO's own type from ADL'ing into the `std::ranges`
> namespace; e.g. `foobar(std::ranges::uninitialized_default_construct)`
> should not consider `std::ranges::foobar` a candidate, even if
> `std::ranges::foobar` is not a CPO itself. Also, of course, consistency
> (Chesterton's Fence, the economist's hundred-dollar bill): if it were
> safe to omit the namespace, we'd certainly want to do it everywhere,
> not just here.
This makes these three niebloids more consistent with the other Ranges
niebloids we've already implemented, such as the `ranges::begin` group
and the `ranges::uninitialized_default_construct` group.
FWIW, we still have three different indentation-and-comment styles
among these three groups.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D116569
These headers have stabilized; we don't expect anyone to be
blindly clang-formatting them anymore.
Leave the comments in `__format/*.h` for Mark to remove at his leisure.
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
`__wrap_iter` is currently only constexpr if it's not a debug built, but it isn't used in a constexpr context currently. Making it always constexpr and disabling the debugging utilities at constant evaluation is more usful since it has to be always constexpr to be used in a constexpr context.
Reviewed By: ldionne, #libc
Spies: libcxx-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D114733
This patch implements operator<=> for std::reverse_iterator and
also adds a test that checks that three-way comparison of different
instantiations of std::reverse_iterator works as expected (related to
D113417).
Reviewed By: ldionne, Quuxplusone, #libc
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D113695
The template std::is_assignable<T, U> checks that T is assignable from
U. Hence, the order of operands in the instantiation of
std::is_assignable in the std::reverse_iterator::operator= condition
should be reversed.
This issue remained unnoticed because std::reverse_iterator has an
implicit conversion constructor. This patch adds a test to check that
the assignment operator is used directly, without any implicit
conversions. The patch also adds a similar test for
std::move_iterator.
Reviewed By: Quuxplusone, ldionne, #libc
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D113417
This addresses the usage of `operator&` in `<vector>`.
I now added tests for the current offending cases. I wonder whether it
would be better to add one addressof test per directory and test all
possible violations. Also to guard against possible future errors?
(Note there are still more headers with the same issue.)
Reviewed By: #libc, ldionne
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111961
Instead of overloading `__to_address`, let's specialize `pointer_traits`.
Function overloads need to be in scope at the point where they're called,
whereas template specializations do not. (User code can provide pointer_traits
specializations to be used by already-included library code, so obviously
`__wrap_iter` can do the same.)
`pointer_traits<__wrap_iter<It>>` cannot provide `pointer_to`, because
you generally cannot create a `__wrap_iter` without also knowing the
identity of the container into which you're trying to create an iterator.
I believe this is OK; contiguous iterators are required to provide
`to_address` but *not* necessarily `pointer_to`.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110198
In other places in the code, we use lowercase spelling for things that
are not available in prior standards.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D109435
The `insert_iterator::iter` member is defined as `Container::iterator` but
the standard requires `iter` to be defined in terms of `ranges::iterator_t` as
of C++20. So, if in C++20 or later, define the `iter` member as
`ranges::iterator_t`.
Original patch by Joe Loser!
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D108575
`contiguous_iterator` requires the iterator type passed is either a
pointer type or that the element type of the iterator is a complete
object type. These constraints are not part of the current wording in
defining the `contiguous_iterator` concept - adjust the concept to
reflect this.
Inspired from discussion at https://reviews.llvm.org/D108645.
Reviewed By: #libc, ldionne
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D108855
This must have been meant to be friend-declaring operator!=, but it
turns out that it's not even necessary to make it a friend since it
does not access any private state.
rdar://82568613
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
Feedback requested in D106735 applied in Diff 3 seem to have
reverted in Diff 4. This patch fixes that up.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D106829
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
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
It turns out that D105040 broke `std::rel_ops`; we actually do need
both a one-template-parameter and a two-template-parameter version of
all the comparison operators, because if we have only the heterogeneous
two-parameter version, then `x > x` is ambiguous:
template<class T, class U> int f(S<T>, S<U>) { return 1; }
template<class T> int f(T, T) { return 2; } // rel_ops
S<int> s; f(s,s); // ambiguous between #1 and #2
Adding the one-template-parameter version fixes the ambiguity:
template<class T, class U> int f(S<T>, S<U>) { return 1; }
template<class T> int f(T, T) { return 2; } // rel_ops
template<class T> int f(S<T>, S<T>) { return 3; }
S<int> s; f(s,s); // #3 beats both #1 and #2
We have the same problem with `reverse_iterator` as with `__wrap_iter`.
But so do libstdc++ and Microsoft, so we're not going to worry about it.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105894
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
This has been broken out of D104170 since it should be merged whether or
not we go ahead with the module map changes.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104175
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
Most of our private headers need to be treated as submodules so that
Clang modules can export things correctly. Previous commits that split
monolithic headers into smaller chunks were unaware of this requirement,
and so this is being addressed in one fell swoop. Moving forward, most
new headers will need to have their own submodule (anything that's
conditionally included is exempt from this rule, which means `__support`
headers aren't made into submodules).
This hasn't been marked NFC, since I'm not 100% sure that's the case.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103551
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
Not only do we conscientiously avoid using `__wrap_iter` for non-contiguous
iterators (in vector, string, span...) but also we make the assumption
(in regex) that `__wrap_iter<_Iter>` is contiguous for all `_Iter`.
So `__wrap_iter<reverse_iterator<int*>>` should be considered IFNDR,
and every `__wrap_iter` should correctly advertise contiguity in C++20.
Drive-by simplify some type traits.
Reviewed as part of https://reviews.llvm.org/D102781
This commit alphabetizes all includes in libcxx. This is a NFC.
This can also serve as a pseudo "announcement" for how we should order these headers going forward (note: double underscores go before other headers).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D102941
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
Louis Dionne