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 avoids having to add `_LIBCPP_ENUM_VIS`, since that is handled through `type_visibility` and GCC always makes the visibility of enums default. It also fixes and missing `_LIBCPP_EXPORTED_FROM_ABI` on classes when using Clang.
Reviewed By: ldionne, #libc
Spies: libcxx-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D153658
In particular, this ensures that it is used for Objective-C and
Objective-C++, since we have a few files that get detected as that.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D153289
These macros are always defined identically, so we can simplify the code a bit by merging them.
Reviewed By: ldionne, #libc
Spies: libcxx-commits, krytarowski, smeenai
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D152652
This checks whether a pointer is within a range, even during constant evaluation. This allows running optimized code paths during constant evaluation, instead of falling back to the general-purpose implementation all the time. This is also a central place for comparing unrelated pointers, which is technically UB.
Reviewed By: ldionne, #libc
Spies: libcxx-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D143327
It was only used in one place, and it seems entirely valid to use
constexpr unconditionally in that location.
Note that a different change was attempted, i.e. using consteval
unconditionally. However, this led to http://llvm.org/PR60709.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D145700
Add a new test based .clang-format file which inherits from the generic
one. This moves some test specific formatting rules to the test
directory.
The main benefit is that headers are sorted, which makes it more likely
to catch these errors before creating a review instead of spotting the
error in the CI clang-tidy step.
Reviewed By: ldionne, philnik, #libc
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D144755
It causes mysterious memory leaks when comparing std::string, see GitHub
Issue #60709 and the code review.
> All supported compilers support `consteval`, so there is no more need for the macro.
>
> Reviewed By: ldionne, Mordante, #libc
>
> Spies: libcxx-commits
>
> Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D143489
This reverts commit aaef3b82f4.
All supported compilers support `consteval`, so there is no more need for the macro.
Reviewed By: ldionne, Mordante, #libc
Spies: libcxx-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D143489
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
After evaluating the new style I noticed inner namespaces are now
indented. I am not fond of that style and I've seen some other review
comment in this regard so I propose we remove this option and use the
LLVM default not to indent it.
Reviewed By: ldionne, philnik, var-const, #libc
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D129441
We decided that we want to use clang-format for libc++ but we haven't decided yet how the code should be formatted. We should probably discuss things on discord. This PR is mostly to show how the clang-format would look like and to commit to one once we decided on it. I'll remove the `<string>` diff when I commit this PR.
Reviewed By: ldionne
Spies: EricWF, dschuff, krytarowski, fedor.sergeev, aheejin, mstorsjo, phosek, abrachet, libcxx-commits, arichardson
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D124789
It's not perfect, but it's a lot better than the status quo.
Reviewed By: ldionne, #libc
Spies: EricWF, aheejin, libcxx-commits, dschuff, krytarowski, fedor.sergeev, mstorsjo, phosek, abrachet
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D127644
We now use clang-format-13 which has the option SpacesInAngles. This
allows us to switch the default language version to C++20, which should
avoid breaking code when formatting due to the adding of whitespace.
For example `u8"foo"` no longer is formatted as `u8 "foo"`.
Reviewed By: #libc, ldionne
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D112728
Changes the style as requested by @ldionne in D103368.
Reviewed By: ldionne, #libc, Quuxplusone
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D109835
Update the configuration to reflect the style more accurately. Pointers
are tied to the left. Braces are split on classes/structs and
functions.
llvm-svn: 290857
Summary: The `max_size()` method of containers should respect both the allocator's reported `max_size` and the range of the `difference_type`. This patch makes all containers choose the smallest of those two values.
Reviewers: mclow.lists, EricWF
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26885
llvm-svn: 287729
Adding a Clang Format file to libc++ and which style it should use has been
discussed a couple of times. This patch finally adds a .clang-format file
which specifies LLVM styles.
Personally I dislike how the LLVM style handles much of the meta-programming
in libc++. However the general consensus was that libc++ should prefer the
LLVM style and make adjustments where needed.
Note that using clang-format on changes is not required, especially for
changes within the headers. However formatting tests should be encouraged.
llvm-svn: 287020
