Make sure that the detached thread has started up before exiting
the process.
This is exactly the same fix as D105592, with the same pattern
being present in a different test case.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105736
The unit tests test some implementation details. As @Quuxplusone pointed
out in D96664 this should only be tested when the tests use libc++. This
addresses the issue for code already in main.
Reviewed By: #libc, ldionne
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105568
Make sure that the detached thread has started up before exiting
the process.
If the detached thread hasn't started up at all, and the main thread
exits, global data structures in the process are torn down, which
then can cause crashes when the thread starts up late after required
mutexes have been destroyed. (In particular, the mutex used internally
in _Init_thread_header, which is used in the initialization of
__thread_local_data()::__p, can cause crashes if the main thread already
has finished and progressed far with destruction.)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105592
Now that Lit supports regular expressions inside XFAIL & friends, it is
much easier to write Lit annotations based on the triple.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104747
While we can debate on the value of passing by const value, there is no
arguing that it's confusing to do so in some circumstances, such as when
marking a pointer parameter as being const (did you mean a pointer-to-const?).
This commit fixes a few issues along those lines.
This patch is to fix 2 libcxx test cases, test cases assumed 'a' > 'A' which is not case in z/OS platform on ebcdic mode, modified test cases to compare between upper letters or lower letters, or digits so ordering will be true for all platform.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104748
With the STL containers, I didn't enable move operations in C++03 mode
because that would change the overload resolution for things that today
are copy operations. With iostreams, though, the copy operations aren't
present at all, and so I see no problem with enabling move operations
even in (Clang's greatly extended) C++03 mode.
Clang's C++03 mode does not support delegating constructors.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104310
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
C++03 didn't support `explicit` conversion operators;
but Clang's C++03 mode does, as an extension, so we can use it.
This lets us make the conversion explicit in `std::function` (even in '03),
and remove some silly metaprogramming in `std::basic_ios`.
Drive-by improvements to the tests for these operators, in addition
to making sure all these tests also run in `c++03` mode.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104682
This is a fairly mechanical change, it just moves each algorithm into
its own header. This is intended to be a NFC.
This commit re-applies 7ed7d4ccb8, which was reverted in 692d7166f7
because the Modules build got broken. The modules build has now been
fixed, so we're re-committing this.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103583
Attribution note
----------------
I'm only committing this. This commit is a mix of D103583, D103330 and
D104171 authored by:
Co-authored-by: Christopher Di Bella <cjdb@google.com>
Co-authored-by: zoecarver <z.zoelec2@gmail.com>
P1518 does the following in C++23 but we'll just do it in C++17 as well:
- Stop requiring `Alloc` to be an allocator on some container-adaptor deduction guides
- Stop deducing from `Allocator` on some sequence container constructors
- Stop deducing from `Allocator` on some other container constructors (libc++ already did this)
The affected constructors are the "allocator-extended" versions of
constructors where the non-allocator arguments are already sufficient
to deduce the allocator type. For example,
std::pmr::vector<int> v1;
std::vector v2(v1, std::pmr::new_delete_resource());
std::stack s2(v1, std::pmr::new_delete_resource());
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D97742
While the std::allocator<void> specialization was deprecated by
https://wg21.link/p0174#2.2, the *use* of std::allocator<void> by users
was not. The intent was that std::allocator<void> could still be used
in C++17 and C++20, but starting with C++20 (with the removal of the
specialization), std::allocator<void> would use the primary template.
That intent was called out in wg21.link/p0619r4#3.9.
As a result of this patch, _LIBCPP_ENABLE_CXX20_REMOVED_ALLOCATOR_MEMBERS
will also not control whether the explicit specialization is provided or
not. It shouldn't matter, since in C++20, one can simply use the primary
template.
Fixes http://llvm.org/PR50299
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104323
Also, fix the last issue that prevented GCC 11 from passing the test
suite. Thanks to everyone else who fixed issues.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104315
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
https://eel.is/c++draft/atomics.types.operations#23 says: ... the value of failure is order except that a value of `memory_order::acq_rel` shall be replaced by the value `memory_order::acquire` and a value of `memory_order::release` shall be replaced by the value `memory_order::relaxed`.
This failure mapping is only handled for `_LIBCPP_HAS_GCC_ATOMIC_IMP`. We are seeing bad code generation for `compare_exchange_strong(cmp, 1, std::memory_order_acq_rel)` when using libc++ in place of libstdc++: https://godbolt.org/z/v3onrrq4G.
This was caught by tsan tests after D99434, `[TSAN] Honor failure memory orders in AtomicCAS`, but appears to be an issue in non-tsan code.
Reviewed By: ldionne, dvyukov
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103846
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
The synchronization library was marked as disabled on Apple platforms
up to now because we were not 100% sure that it was going to be ABI
stable. However, it's been some time since we shipped it in upstream
libc++ now and there's been no changes so far. This patch enables the
synchronization library on Apple platforms, and hence commits the ABI
stability as far as that vendor is concerned.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D96790
Makes the following operations constexpr:
* `std::swap(optional, optional)`
* `optional(optional<U> const&)`
* `optional(optional<U>&&)`
* `~optional()`
* `operator=(nullopt_t)`
* `operator=(U&&)`
* `operator=(optional<U> const&)`
* `operator=(optional<U>&&)`
* `emplace(Args&&...)`
* `emplace(initializer_list<U>, Args&&...)`
* `swap(optional&)`
* `reset()`
P2231 has been accepted by plenary, with the committee recommending
implementers retroactively apply to C++20. It's necessary for us to
implement _`semiregular-box`_ and _`non-propagating-cache`_, both of
which are required for ranges (otherwise we'll need to reimplement
`std::optional` with these members `constexpr`ified).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D102119
The post-conditions for the self move assignment of `std::unique_ptr`
were changed. This requires no implementation changes. A test was added
to validate the new post-conditions.
Addresses
- LWG-3455: Incorrect Postconditions on `unique_ptr` move assignment
Reviewed By: #libc, ldionne
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103764
The `operator[]` of `_UnaryOp` and `_BinaryOp` returns the result of
calling `__op_`, so its return type should be `__result_type`, not
e.g. `_A0::value_type`. However, `_UnaryOp::value_type` also should
never have been `_A0::value_type`; it needs to be the correct type
for the result of the unary op, e.g. `bool` when the op is `logical_not`.
This turns out to matter when multiple operators are nested, e.g.
`+(v == v)` needs to have a `value_type` of `bool`, not `int`,
even when `v` is of type `valarray<int>`.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103416
Martin Storsjö