There are a handful of standard library types that are intended
to support CTAD but don't need any explicit deduction guides to
do so.
This patch adds a dummy deduction guide to those types to suppress
-Wctad-maybe-unsupported (which gets emitted in user code).
This is a re-application of the original patch by Eric Fiselier in
fcd549a7d8 which had been reverted due to reasons lost at this point.
I also added the macro to a few more types. Reviving this patch was
prompted by the discussion on https://llvm.org/D133425.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D133535
- P1252 ("Ranges Design Cleanup") -- deprecate
`move_iterator::operator->` starting from C++20; add range comparisons
to the `<functional>` synopsis. This restores
`move_iterator::operator->` that was incorrectly deleted in D117656;
it's still defined in the latest draft, see
http://eel.is/c++draft/depr.move.iter.elem. Note that changes to
`*_result` types from 6.1 in the paper are no longer relevant now that
these types are aliases;
- P2106 ("Alternative wording for GB315 and GB316") -- add a few
`*_result` types to the synopsis in `<algorithm>` (some algorithms are
not implemented yet and thus some of the proposal still cannot be
marked as done);
Also mark already done issues as done (or as nothing to do):
- P2091 ("Fixing Issues With Range Access CPOs") was already implemented
(this patch adds tests for some ill-formed cases);
- LWG 3247 ("`ranges::iter_move` should perform ADL-only lookup of
`iter_move`") was already implemented;
- LWG 3300 ("Non-array ssize overload is underconstrained") doesn't
affect the implementation;
- LWG 3335 ("Resolve C++20 NB comments US 273 and GB 274") was already
implemented;
- LWG 3355 ("The memory algorithms should support move-only input
iterators introduced by P1207") was already implemented (except for
testing).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D126053
We require move semantics in C++03 anyways, so let's enable them for the containers.
Reviewed By: ldionne, #libc
Spies: libcxx-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D123802
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
Since their nested reference types are defined in terms of `iter_reference_t<T>`, which examines `decltype(*declval<T>())`.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D117371
AFAICT, Cpp17InputIterators are not required to be default constructible,
since that requirement is added in Cpp17ForwardIterator. Hence, our
archetype for Cpp17InputIterator should not be default constructible.
Removing that constructor has a ripple effect on a couple of tests that
were making incorrect assumptions. Notably:
- Some tests were using cpp17_input_iterator as a sentinel for itself.
That is not valid, because a cpp17_input_iterator is not semiregular
anymore after the change (and hence it doesn't satisfy sentinel_for).
- Some tests were using a stride-counted cpp17_input_iterator as the
sentinel for a range. This doesn't work anymore because of the problem
above, so these tests were changed not to check stride counts for
input iterators.
- Some tests were default constructing cpp17_input_iterator when a simple
alternative was available -- those have been changed to use that alternative.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D115806
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
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 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
Implements parts of:
* P0896R4 The One Ranges Proposal`
Depends on D100073.
Reviewed By: ldionne, zoecarver, #libc
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D100080
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
- Implement C++20's changes to `reverse_iterator`, so that it won't be
accidentally counted as a contiguous iterator in C++20 mode.
- Implement C++20's changes to `move_iterator` as well.
- `move_iterator` should not be contiguous. This fixes a bug where
we optimized `std::copy`-of-move-iterators in an observable way.
Add a regression test for that bugfix.
- Add libcxx tests for `__is_cpp17_contiguous_iterator` of all relevant
standard iterator types. Particularly check that vector::iterator
is still considered contiguous in all C++ modes, even C++03.
After this patch, there continues to be no supported way to write your
own iterator type in C++17-and-earlier such that libc++ will consider it
"contiguous"; however, we now fully support the C++20 approach (in C++20
mode only). If you want user-defined contiguous iterators in C++17-and-earlier,
libc++'s position is "please upgrade to C++20."
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D94807
There used to be a workaround where we'd pretend that GCC 5 didn't support
C++14 because it doesn't implement it properly. Since that workaround has
been removed (in 1eb211ada1), we need to mark a few individual tests as
failing with GCC 5.
These tests fail due to a couple of changes to `move_iterator` for C++20:
* `move_iterator<I>::operator++(int)` returns `void` in C++20 if `I` doesn't model `forward_iterator`.
* `move_iterator<I>::reference` is calculated in C++20, so `I` must actually have an `operator*() const`.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79343
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.
We had a workaround because GCC 5 does not evaluate static assertions
that are dependent on template parameters. This commit removes the
workaround and marks the corresponding tests as unsupported with GCC 5.
This has the benefit of bringing the new and the old test formats closer
without having to carry a workaround for an old compiler in the new
test format.
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'))
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
Louis Dionne