It turns out that I un-XFAILed too many tests in r353210: some tests
actually fail whether exceptions are enabled or not because they use
types that are marked as unavailable even when exceptions are disabled.
llvm-svn: 353215
Some tests are marked as failing on platforms where the dylib does not
provide the required exception classes. However, when testing with
exceptions disabled, those tests shouldn't be marked as failing.
llvm-svn: 353210
When the whole test only works starting at some version of the Standard,
use UNSUPPORTED lit markup instead of #ifdef TEST_STD_VER. This provides
more visibility into the test suite.
Reviewed as https://reviews.llvm.org/D57704.
Thanks to Andrey Maksimov for the patch.
llvm-svn: 353206
This patch removes some vendor-specific availability XFAILs from the
test suite. In the future, when a new feature is introduced in the
dylib, an availability macro should be created and a matching lit
feature should be created. That way, the test suite can XFAIL whenever
the implementation lacks the necessary feature instead of being
cluttered by vendor-specific annotations.
Right now, those vendor-specific annotations are still somewhat cluttering
the test suite by being in `config.py`, but at least they are localized.
In the future, we could design a way to define those less intrusively or
even automatically based on the availability macros that already exist
in <__config>.
llvm-svn: 353201
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
The meta-programming that attempted to form the invoke call expression
was not in a SFINAE context. This made it a hard error to provide
non-referencable types like 'void' or 'void (...) const'.
This patch fixes the error by checking the validity of the call
expression within a SFINAE context.
llvm-svn: 352522
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
Summary:
Starting in Clang 8.0 and GCC 8.0, `alignof` and `__alignof` return different values in same cases. Specifically `alignof` and `_Alignof` return the minimum alignment for a type, where as `__alignof` returns the preferred alignment. libc++ currently uses `__alignof` but means to use `alignof`. See llvm.org/PR39713
This patch introduces the macro `_LIBCPP_ALIGNOF` so we can control which spelling gets used.
This patch does not introduce any ABI guard to provide the old behavior with newer compilers. However, if we decide that is needed, this patch makes it trivial to implement.
I think we should commit this change immediately, and decide what we want to do about the ABI afterwards.
Reviewers: ldionne, EricWF
Reviewed By: ldionne, EricWF
Subscribers: jyknight, christof, libcxx-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D54814
llvm-svn: 351289
Summary:
P0602R4 makes the special member functions of optional and variant
conditionally trivial based on the types in the optional/variant.
We already implemented that, but the tests were organized as if this
were a non-standard extension. This patch reorganizes the tests in a
way that makes more sense since this is not an extension anymore.
Reviewers: EricWF, mpark, mclow.lists
Subscribers: christof, jkorous, dexonsmith, libcxx-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D54772
llvm-svn: 350884
There were 3 tests with 'int main(void)', and 6 with the return type on a different line. I'm about to send a patch for main in tests, and this NFC change is unrelated.
llvm-svn: 350770
Makes libc++ behavior consistent between C++03 and C++11.
Can use `decltype` in C++03 because `include/__config` defines a macro when
`decltype` is not available.
Reviewers: mclow.lists, EricWF, erik.pilkington, ldionne
Reviewed By: ldionne
Subscribers: dexonsmith, cfe-commits, howard.hinnant, ldionne, christof, jkorous, Quuxplusone
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D48753
llvm-svn: 349676
Explicitly disable the -Wformat-zero-length diagnostic when running
ctime tests, since one of the test cases passes zero-length format
string to strftime(). When strftime() is appropriately decorated
with __attribute__(format, ...), this caused the test to fail because
of this warning (e.g. on NetBSD).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55661
llvm-svn: 349294
Summary:
std::tuple marks its constructors as noexcept when the corresponding
memberwise constructors are noexcept too -- this commit improves std::pair
so that it behaves the same.
This is a re-application of r348824, which broke the build in C++03 mode
because a test was marked as supported in C++03 when it shouldn't be.
Note:
I did not add support in the explicit and non-explicit `pair(_Tuple&& __p)`
constructors because those are non-standard extensions, and supporting them
properly is tedious (we have to copy the rvalue-referenceness of the deduced
_Tuple&& onto the result of tuple_element).
<rdar://problem/29537079>
Reviewers: mclow.lists, EricWF
Subscribers: christof, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D48669
llvm-svn: 348847
Summary:
std::tuple marks its constructors as noexcept when the corresponding
memberwise constructors are noexcept too -- this commit improves std::pair
so that it behaves the same.
Note:
I did not add support in the explicit and non-explicit `pair(_Tuple&& __p)`
constructors because those are non-standard extensions, and supporting them
properly is tedious (we have to copy the rvalue-referenceness of the deduced
_Tuple&& onto the result of tuple_element).
<rdar://problem/29537079>
Reviewers: mclow.lists, EricWF
Subscribers: christof, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D48669
llvm-svn: 348824
The tests were marked to fail based on the 'availability' LIT feature.
However, those tests should really only be failing when we run them
against the dylibs that were deployed on macosx10.7 and macosx10.8,
which the deployment target has nothing to do with.
This caused the tests to unexpectedly pass when running the tests
with deployment target macosx10.{7,8} but running with a recent dylib.
llvm-svn: 348520
Summary:
This was voted into C++20 in San Diego. Note that there was a revision
D0318R2 which did include unwrap_reference_t, but we mistakingly voted
P0318R1 into the C++20 Working Draft (which does not include
unwrap_reference_t). This patch implements D0318R2, which is what
we'll end up with in the Working Draft once this mistake has been
fixed.
Reviewers: EricWF, mclow.lists
Subscribers: christof, dexonsmith, libcxx-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D54485
llvm-svn: 348138
This reverts commit 087f065cb0c7463f521a62599884493aaee2ea12.
The tests were failing on 32 bit builds, and I don't have time
to clean them up right now. I'll recommit tomorrow with fixed tests.
llvm-svn: 347816
Summary:
Starting in Clang 8.0 and GCC 8.0, `alignof` and `__alignof` return different values in same cases. Specifically `alignof` and `_Alignof` return the minimum alignment for a type, where as `__alignof` returns the preferred alignment. libc++ currently uses `__alignof` but means to use `alignof`. See llvm.org/PR39713
This patch introduces the macro `_LIBCPP_ALIGNOF` so we can control which spelling gets used.
This patch does not introduce any ABI guard to provide the old behavior with newer compilers. However, if we decide that is needed, this patch makes it trivial to implement.
I think we should commit this change immediately, and decide what we want to do about the ABI afterwards.
Reviewers: ldionne, EricWF
Reviewed By: EricWF
Subscribers: christof, libcxx-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D54814
llvm-svn: 347787
Summary:
In PR39232, we noticed that some variant tests started failing in C++2a mode
with recent Clangs, because the rules for literal types changed in C++2a. As
a result, a temporary fix was checked in (enabling the test only in C++17).
This commit is what I believe should be the long term fix: I removed the
tests that checked constexpr default-constructibility with a weird type
from the tests for index() and valueless_by_exception(), and instead I
added tests for those using an obviously literal type in the test for the
default constructor.
Reviewers: EricWF, mclow.lists
Subscribers: christof, jkorous, dexonsmith, arphaman, libcxx-commits, rsmith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D54767
llvm-svn: 347568
The XFAIL started passing since we're only testing for trivial-copyability of
reference_wrapper in C++14 and above. This commit constrains the XFAIL to
gcc-4.9 with C++14 (it would also fail on C++17 and above, but those standards
are not available with GCC 4.9).
llvm-svn: 347264
Some tests use type std::max_align_t, but don't include <cstddef> header
directly. As a result, these tests won't compile against some conformant
libraries.
Reviewed as https://reviews.llvm.org/D54645.
Thanks to Andrey Maksimov for the patch.
llvm-svn: 347232
Summary:
P1006 adds support for constexpr in the specialization of pointer_traits
for raw pointers. This is necessary in order to use pointer_traits in
the upcoming constexpr containers. We expect P1006 to be voted into the
working draft for C++20 at the San Diego meeting.
Reviewers: mclow.lists, EricWF
Subscribers: christof, dexonsmith, libcxx-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D53867
llvm-svn: 346764
Summary:
Some tests (mainly the new C++20 calendar library) fail when libc++ is
tested with '--param=std=c++98'. The failures happen because the tests
actually don't support C++98, but don't mention C++98 in the
'UNSUPPORTED:' line.
This change fixes the issue.
Reviewers: mclow.lists, ldionne
Reviewed By: ldionne
Subscribers: arphaman, michaelplatings, libcxx-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D53640
llvm-svn: 345148
Louis Dionne