This simplifies the usage of `__less` by making the class not depend on the types compared, but instead the `operator()`. We can't remove the template completely because we explicitly instantiate `std::__sort` with `__less<T>`.
Reviewed By: ldionne, #libc
Spies: arichardson, EricWF, libcxx-commits, mgrang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D145285
This reverts commit a6e1080b87db8fbe0e1afadd96af5a3c0bd5e279.
Fix the conditions when the `memmove` optimization can be applied and refactor them out into a reusable type trait, fix and significantly expand the tests.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D139235
Instead of using `reverse_iterator`, share the optimization between the 4 algorithms. The key observation here that `memmove` applies to both `copy` and `move` identically, and to their `_backward` versions very similarly. All algorithms now follow the same pattern along the lines of:
```
if constexpr (can_memmove<InIter, OutIter>) {
memmove(first, last, out);
} else {
naive_implementation(first, last, out);
}
```
A follow-up will delete `unconstrained_reverse_iterator`.
This patch removes duplication and divergence between `std::copy`, `std::move` and `std::move_backward`. It also improves testing:
- the test for whether the optimization is used only applied to `std::copy` and, more importantly, was essentially a no-op because it would still pass if the optimization was not used;
- there were no tests to make sure the optimization is not used when the effect would be visible.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D130695
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 reverts 5aaefa51 (and also partly 7f285f48e77 and b6d75682f9,
which were related to the original commit). As landed, 5aaefa51 had
unintended consequences on some downstream bots and didn't have proper
coverage upstream due to a few subtle things. Implementing this is
something we should do in libc++, however we'll first need to address
a few issues listed in https://reviews.llvm.org/D106124#3349710.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D120683
libc++ has started splicing standard library headers into much more
fine-grained content for maintainability. It's very likely that outdated
and naive tooling (some of which is outside of LLVM's scope) will
suggest users include things such as <__ranges/access.h> instead of
<ranges>, and Hyrum's law suggests that users will eventually begin to
rely on this without the help of tooling. As such, this commit
intends to protect users from themselves, by making it a hard error for
anyone outside of the standard library to include libc++ detail headers.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D106124
The NFC part of D116809. We still want to enforce this in CI,
but the mechanism for that is still to-be-determined.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D116809
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 7ed7d4ccb899, which was reverted in 692d7166f771
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>
This is a fairly mechanical change, it just moves each algorithm into its own header. This is a NFC.
Note: during this change, I burned down all the includes, so this follows "include only and exactly what you use."
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103583
