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
First batch of changes to get some of these XFAILs working in the
no-exceptions libc++ variant.
Changed some XFAILs to UNSUPPORTED where the test is all about exception
handling. In other cases, used the test macros TEST_THROW and
TEST_HAS_NO_EXCEPTIONS to conditionally exclude those parts of the test
that concerns exception handling behaviour.
Reviewers: EricWF, mclow.lists
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24562
llvm-svn: 283441
Fixes a small omission in libcxx that prevents libcxx being built when
-DLIBCXX_ENABLE_EXCEPTIONS=0 is specified.
This patch adds XFAILS to all those tests that are currently failing
on the new -fno-exceptions library variant. Follow-up patches will
update the tests (progressively) to cope with the new library variant.
Change-Id: I4b801bd8d8e4fe7193df9e55f39f1f393a8ba81a
llvm-svn: 252598
Summary:
This patch marks *most* tests for `std::promise`, `std::future` and `std::shared_future` as unsupported in C++03. These tests fail in C++03 mode because they attempt to copy a `std::future` even though it is a `MoveOnly` type. AFAIK the missing move-semantics in `std::future` is the only reason these tests fail but without move semantics these classes are useless. For example even though `std::promise::set_value` and `std::promise::set_exception(...)` work in C++03 `std::promise` is still useless because we cannot call `std::promise::get_future(...)`.
It might be possible to hack `std::move(...)` like we do for `std::unique_ptr` to make the move semantics work but I don't think it is worth the effort. Instead I think we should leave the `<future>` header as-is and mark the failing tests as `UNSUPPORTED`. I don't believe there are any users of `std::future` or `std::promise` in C++03 because they are so unusable. Therefore I am not concerned about losing test coverage and possibly breaking users. However because there are still parts of `<future>` that work in C++03 it would be wrong to `#ifdef` out the entire header.
@mclow.lists Should we take further steps to prevent the use of `std::promise`, `std::future` and `std::shared_future` in C++03?
Note: This patch also cleans up the tests and converts them to use `support/test_allocator.h` instead of a duplicate class in `test/std/futures/test_allocator.h`.
Reviewers: mclow.lists
Subscribers: vsk, mclow.lists, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12135
llvm-svn: 246271
Chandler Carruth