As pointed out by @Zingam the paper was implemented in libc++ as an
extension. This patch does the bookkeeping. The inital release version
is based on historical release dates.
Completes:
- Add a conditional noexcept specification to std::apply
This patch runs clang-format on all of libcxx/include and libcxx/src, in
accordance with the RFC discussed at [1]. Follow-up patches will format
the benchmarks, the test suite and remaining parts of the code. I'm
splitting this one into its own patch so the diff is a bit easier to
review.
This patch was generated with:
find libcxx/include libcxx/src -type f \
| grep -v 'module.modulemap.in' \
| grep -v 'CMakeLists.txt' \
| grep -v 'README.txt' \
| grep -v 'libcxx.imp' \
| grep -v '__config_site.in' \
| xargs clang-format -i
A Git merge driver is available in libcxx/utils/clang-format-merge-driver.sh
to help resolve merge and rebase issues across these formatting changes.
[1]: https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-clang-formatting-all-of-libc-once-and-for-all
This is in preparation for clang-formatting the whole code base. These
annotations are required either to avoid clang-format bugs or because
the manually formatted code is significantly more readable than the
clang-formatted alternative. All in all, it seems like very few
annotations are required, which means that clang-format is doing a very
good job in most cases.
In preparation for running clang-format on the whole code base, we are
also removing mentions of the legacy _LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY macro in
favor of the newer _LIBCPP_HIDE_FROM_ABI.
We're still leaving the definition of _LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY to avoid
creating needless breakage in case some older patches are checked-in
with mentions of the old macro. After we branch for LLVM 18, we can do
another pass to clean up remaining uses of the macro that might have
gotten introduced by mistake (if any) and remove the macro itself at the
same time. This is just a minor convenience to smooth out the transition
as much as possible.
See
https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-clang-formatting-all-of-libc-once-and-for-all
for the clang-format proposal.
This reduces the number of instantiations and also avoid blowing up
past the fold-expression limit of Clang.
This is NOT a general statement that we should strive to stay within
Clang's (sometimes way too small) limits, however in this case the
change will reduce the number of template instantiations while at the
same time doing that, which is good.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D132509
This brings most of the enable_ifs in libc++ to the same style. It also has the nice side-effect of reducing the size of names of these symbols, since the depedent return type is shorter.
Reviewed By: #libc, ldionne
Spies: ldionne, libcxx-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D157787
__has_keyword is almost not used anymore. There are only two cases. One can be replaced by __has_builtin and the other seems entirely redundant, so we can remove the definition.
Reviewed By: #libc, Mordante
Spies: Mordante, libcxx-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D158215
A few __fwd includes are missing from public modules that will become noticeable when the private submodules are split into their own top level modules (D144322). Add the missing includes.
Reviewed By: ldionne, philnik, #libc
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D153216
POSIX allows certain macros to exist with generic names (i.e. refresh(), move(), and erase()) to exist in `curses.h` which conflict with functions found in std::filesystem, among others. This patch undefs the macros in question and adds them to LIBCPP_PUSH_MACROS and LIBCPP_POP_MACROS.
Reviewed By: #libc, philnik, ldionne
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D147356
Several headers are missing includes for things they use.
type_traits.is_enum needs to export type_traits.integral_constant so that clients can access its `value` member without explicitly including __type_traits/integral_constant.h themselves.
Make `subrange_fwd` a peer submodule to `subrange` rather than a submodule of it, and have `subrange` export `subrange_fwd`. That will make it easier to programmatically generate modules for the private detail headers, and it will accomplish the same effect that __ranges/subrange.h will make subrange_kind visible.
Reviewed By: Mordante, #libc
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D150055
We already have a clang-tidy check for making sure that `_LIBCPP_HIDE_FROM_ABI` is on free functions. This patch extends this to class members. The places where we don't check for `_LIBCPP_HIDE_FROM_ABI` are classes for which we have an instantiation in the library.
Reviewed By: ldionne, Mordante, #libc
Spies: jplehr, mikhail.ramalho, sstefan1, libcxx-commits, krytarowski, miyuki, smeenai
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D142332
This change is almost fully mechanical. The only interesting change is in `generate_feature_test_macro_components.py` to generate `_LIBCPP_STD_VER >=` instead. To avoid churn in the git-blame this commit should be added to the `.git-blame-ignore-revs` once committed.
Reviewed By: ldionne, var-const, #libc
Spies: jloser, libcxx-commits, arichardson, arphaman, wenlei
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D143962
`subrange` is also a `tuple-like`. To avoid the add entire `subrange` dependencies to `tuple-like`, we need forward declaration of `subrange`. However, the class template constraints of `subrange` currently requires `__iterator/concepts.h`, which requires `<concepts>`. The problem is that currently `tuple-like` is used in several different places, including libc++ extension for pair constructors. we don't want to add `<concepts>` to pair and other stuff. So this change also created several small headers that `subrange`'s declaration needed inside `__iterator/concepts/`
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D136268
This defines a new policy for removal of transitive includes.
The goal of the policy it to make it relatively easy to remove
headers when needed, but avoid breaking developers using and
vendors shipping libc++.
The method used is to guard transitive includes based on the
C++ language version. For the upcoming C++23 we can remove
headers when we want, but for other language versions we try
to keep it to a minimum.
In this code the transitive include of `<chrono>` is removed
since D128577 introduces a header cycle between `<format>`
and `<chrono>`. This cycle is indirectly required by the
Standard. Our cycle dependency tool basically is a grep based
tool, so it needs some hints to ignore cycles. With the input
of our transitive include tests we can create a better tool.
However that's out of the scope of this patch.
Note the flag `_LIBCPP_REMOVE_TRANSITIVE_INCLUDES` remains
unchanged. So users can still opt-out of transitives includes
entirely.
Reviewed By: #libc, ldionne, philnik
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D132284
This was discussed on Discord with the consensus that we should rename the macros.
Reviewed By: ldionne, Mordante, var-const, avogelsgesang, jloser, #libc
Spies: libcxx-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D131498
This commit re-adds transitive includes that had been removed by
4cd04d1687f1, c36870c8e79c, a83f4b9cda57, 1458458b558d, 2e2f3158c604,
and 489637e66dd3. This should cover almost all the includes that had
been removed since LLVM 14 and that would contribute to breaking user
code when releasing LLVM 15.
It is possible to disable the inclusion of these headers by defining
_LIBCPP_REMOVE_TRANSITIVE_INCLUDES. The intent is that vendors will
enable that macro and start fixing downstream issues immediately. We
can then remove the macro (and the transitive includes) by default in
a future release. That way, we will break users only once by removing
transitive includes in bulk instead of doing it bit by bit a every
release, which is more disruptive for users.
Note 1: The set of headers to re-add was found by re-generating the
transitive include test on a checkout of release/14.x, which
provided the list of all transitive includes we used to provide.
Note 2: Several includes of <vector>, <optional>, <array> and <unordered_map>
have been added in this commit. These transitive inclusions were
added when we implemented boyer_moore_searcher in <functional>.
Note 3: This is a best effort patch to try and resolve downstream breakage
caused since branching LLVM 14. I wasn't able to perfectly mirror
transitive includes in LLVM 14 for a few headers, so I added a
release note explaining it. To summarize, adding boyer_moore_searcher
created a bunch of circular dependencies, so we have to break
backwards compatibility in a few cases.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D128661
1. for constructors that takes cvref variation of tuple<UTypes...>, there
used to be two SFINAE helper _EnableCopyFromOtherTuple,
_EnableMoveFromOtherTuple. And the implementations of these two helpers
seem to slightly differ from the spec. But now, we need 4 variations.
Instead of adding another two, this change refactored it to a single one
_EnableCtrFromUTypesTuple, which directly maps to the spec without
changing the C++11 behaviour. However, we need the helper __copy_cvref_t
to get the type of std::get<i>(cvref tuple<Utypes...>) for different
cvref, so I made __copy_cvref_t to be available in C++11.
2. for constructors that takes variations of std::pair, there used to be
four helpers _EnableExplicitCopyFromPair, _EnableImplicitCopyFromPair,
_EnableImplicitMoveFromPair, _EnableExplicitMoveFromPair. Instead of
adding another four, this change refactored into two helper
_EnableCtrFromPair and _BothImplicitlyConvertible. This also removes the
need to use _nat
3. for const member assignment operator, since the requirement is very
simple, I haven't refactored the old code but instead directly adding
the new c++23 code.
4. for const swap, I pretty much copy pasted the non-const version to make
these overloads look consistent
5. while doing these change, I found two of the old constructors wasn't
marked constexpr for C++20 but they should. fixed them and added unit
tests
Reviewed By: #libc, ldionne
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D116621
When merging the changes of <type_traits> header with the commits on
this header over the last month, several conflicts were mistaken
resolved and the wrong branch was picked while resolving conflicts,
which leads to CI failure. In order to resolve the conflicts properly
with qualification CI job, this change is reverted.
This reverts commit 95733a55b986e73f4d8f5314e0d4557d8ae0b226.
1. for constructors that takes cvref variation of tuple<UTypes...>, there
used to be two SFINAE helper _EnableCopyFromOtherTuple,
_EnableMoveFromOtherTuple. And the implementations of these two helpers
seem to slightly differ from the spec. But now, we need 4 variations.
Instead of adding another two, this change refactored it to a single one
_EnableCtrFromUTypesTuple, which directly maps to the spec without
changing the C++11 behaviour. However, we need the helper __copy_cvref_t
to get the type of std::get<i>(cvref tuple<Utypes...>) for different
cvref, so I made __copy_cvref_t to be available in C++11.
2. for constructors that takes variations of std::pair, there used to be
four helpers _EnableExplicitCopyFromPair, _EnableImplicitCopyFromPair,
_EnableImplicitMoveFromPair, _EnableExplicitMoveFromPair. Instead of
adding another four, this change refactored into two helper
_EnableCtrFromPair and _BothImplicitlyConvertible. This also removes the
need to use _nat
3. for const member assignment operator, since the requirement is very
simple, I haven't refactored the old code but instead directly adding
the new c++23 code.
4. for const swap, I pretty much copy pasted the non-const version to make
these overloads look consistent
5. while doing these change, I found two of the old constructors wasn't
marked constexpr for C++20 but they should. fixed them and added unit
tests
Reviewed By: #libc, ldionne
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D116621
This removes all "TODO: remove these headers" comments from our headers.
Note there seem to be more headers that can be removed, that will be
done in separate commits.
Reviewed By: #libc, ldionne
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D127592
There are `constexpr` versions for the different `__invoke` functions, which seem to be identical other than begin `constexpr` since C++11 instead of being `constexpr` since C++20.
Reviewed By: ldionne, #libc
Spies: libcxx-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D123003
This patch changes the requirement for getting the declaration of the
assertion handler from including <__assert> to including any public
C++ header of the library. Note that C compatibility headers are
excluded because we don't implement all the C headers ourselves --
some of them are taken straight from the C library, like assert.h.
It also adds a generated test to check it. Furthermore, this new
generated test is designed in a way that will make it possible to
replace almost all the existing test-generation scripts with this
system in upcoming patches.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D122506
This should make CI consistent on all the compilers we support. Most of
this patch is working around various warnings emitted by GCC in our code
base, which are now being shown when we compile the tests.
After this patch, the whole test suite should be warning free on all
compilers we support and test, except for a few warnings on GCC that
we silence explicitly until we figure out the proper fix for them.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D120684
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
Per Discord discussion, we're normalizing on a simple `!defined(_LIBCPP_HAS_NO_CONCEPTS)`
so that we can do a big search-and-replace for `!defined(_LIBCPP_HAS_NO_CONCEPTS)`
back into `_LIBCPP_STD_VER > 17` when we're ready to abandon support for concept-syntax-less
compilers.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D118748
