Commit Graph

11 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Chandler Carruth 57b08b0944 Update more file headers across all of the LLVM projects in the monorepo
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
2019-01-19 10:56:40 +00:00
Eric Fiselier 4f73dbf403 Clean up more usages of _LIBCPP_HAS_NO_RVALUE_REFERENCES
llvm-svn: 296854
2017-03-03 03:43:25 +00:00
Stephan T. Lavavej 0d6482f3bb [libcxx] [test] Fix Clang -Wpessimizing-move "moving a temporary object prevents copy elision".
N4618 30.6.6 [futures.unique_future]/12 declares "shared_future<R> share() noexcept;".

Fixes D29139.

llvm-svn: 294158
2017-02-05 22:48:07 +00:00
Marshall Clow 3cd9e94241 Implement LWG2556: Wide contract for future::share()
llvm-svn: 292992
2017-01-24 23:28:25 +00:00
Roger Ferrer Ibanez e8623b90ae Mark tests as unsupported under libcpp-no-exceptions
The destructor of std::promise needs to construct a std::future_error
exception so it calls std::make_exception_ptr. But under
libcpp-no-exceptions this will trigger an abort.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27614

llvm-svn: 291550
2017-01-10 08:48:48 +00:00
Asiri Rathnayake 08eb2148ff [libcxx] Recover no-exceptions XFAILs - I
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
2016-10-06 11:15:41 +00:00
Richard Barton 3c0bc9697a Guard a number of tests relying on threads support when built in
single-threaded mode.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D14731

llvm-svn: 264191
2016-03-23 21:04:11 +00:00
Asiri Rathnayake f520c1445f Make it possible to build a no-exceptions variant of libcxx.
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
2015-11-10 11:41:22 +00:00
Eric Fiselier cb38f75e29 [libcxx] Mark most test/std/future tests as UNSUPPORTED in C++03
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
2015-08-28 05:06:04 +00:00
Eric Fiselier bb185a0a9e libc++ tests: wait_until.pass test sporadically fails (bug 21998)
Summary:
Hello Howard,

While running the libc++ tests on our ARM boards, we encounter sporadic failures of the two tests:
test/std/thread/futures/futures.shared_future/wait_until.pass.cpp
test/std/thread/futures/futures.unique_future/wait_until.pass.cpp

The worker thread might not finish yet when the main thread checks its result.
I filed the bug 21998 for this case: http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=21998

Would you be able to review this please?
Thank you.
Oleg

Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists, danalbert, jroelofs, EricWF

Reviewed By: jroelofs, EricWF

Subscribers: EricWF, mclow.lists, aemerson, llvm-commits

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6750

llvm-svn: 228783
2015-02-11 01:25:57 +00:00
Eric Fiselier 5a83710e37 Move test into test/std subdirectory.
llvm-svn: 224658
2014-12-20 01:40:03 +00:00