Looks like we again are going to have problems with libcxx tests that
are overly specific in their dependency on clang's diagnostics.
This reverts commit 6542cb55a3eb115b1c3592514590a19987ffc498.
This patch is basically the rewording of the static assert statement's
output(error) on screen after failing. Failing a _Static_assert in C
should not report that static_assert failed. It’d probably be better to
reword the diagnostic to be more like GCC and say “static assertion”
failed in both C and C++.
consider a c file having code
_Static_assert(0, "oh no!");
In clang the output is like:
<source>:1:1: error: static_assert failed: oh no!
_Static_assert(0, "oh no!");
^ ~
1 error generated.
Compiler returned: 1
Thus here the "static_assert" is not much good, it will be better to
reword it to the "static assertion failed" to more generic. as the gcc
prints as:
<source>:1:1: error: static assertion failed: "oh no!"
1 | _Static_assert(0, "oh no!");
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Compiler returned: 1
The above can also be seen here. This patch is about rewording
the static_assert to static assertion.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D129048
- create the headers (but not include them from `<algorithm>`);
- define the niebloid and its member functions with the right signatures
(as no-ops);
- make sure all the right headers are included that are required by each
algorithm's signature;
- update `CMakeLists.txt` and the module map;
- create the test files with the appropriate synopses.
The synopsis in `<algorithm>` is deliberately not updated because that
could be taken as a readiness signal. The new headers aren't included
from `<algorithm>` for the same reason.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D129549
It is meant to be used in ranges algorithm tests.
It is much simplified version of C++23's tuple + zip_view.
Using std::swap would cause compilation failure and using `std::move` would not create the correct rvalue proxy which would result in copies.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D129099
Display 'static_assert failed: message' instead of
'static_assert failed "message"' to be consistent
with other implementations and be slightly more
readable.
Reviewed By: #libc, aaron.ballman, philnik, Mordante
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D128844
This patch also adds a new optimization to `std::move`. It unwraps three `reverse_iterator`s if the wrapped iterator is a `contiguous_iterator` and the iterated type is trivially_movable. This allows us to simplify `ranges::move_backward` to a forward to `std::move` without any pessimization.
Reviewed By: var-const, #libc
Spies: libcxx-commits, mgorny
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D126616
This reverts commit 3583826bb52a7f129b55df043e29860aeab9906d.
Instead of marking the test unsupported for AIX, the choice is to bump the
timeout for CI as done in 76c7e1f2a8820b057de1a241422294bf25fdea2d and
222bd83d505728fca2bbe16cef8b93c321dd8c13
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D127242
The `ranges.transform.pass.cpp` often times out on CI for AIX (32-bit and 64-bit)
only. Mark the test as `UNSUPPORTED` for `AIX` for now. It should be looked into in
the future.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D127051
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
Change the tests to use the base friend function instead of members.
Also changed some types to have a base friends instead of members.
Reviewed By: #libc, ldionne, Quuxplusone
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D120742
The renames the output_iterator to cpp17_output_iterator. These
iterators are still used in C++20 so it's not possible to change the
current type to the new C++20 requirements. This is done in a similar
fashion as the cpp17_input_iterator.
Reviewed By: #libc, Quuxplusone, ldionne
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D117950
... it's easier to suppress warnings internally, where we can detect the compiler.
* Rename `TEST_COMPILER_C1XX` to `TEST_COMPILER_MSVC`
* Rename all `TEST_WORKAROUND_C1XX_<meow>` to `TEST_WORKAROUND_MSVC_<meow>`
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D117422
The function `std::fill` requires a ForwardIterator, but `std::fill_n`
only requires an OutputIterator. Adds a test to validate `std::fill_n`
works with an OutputIterator.
Noticed this while working on LWG3539
format_to must not copy models of output_iterator<const charT&>
Reviewed By: #libc, Quuxplusone, ldionne
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D117395
Since we officially don't support several older compilers now, we can
drop a lot of the markup in the test suite. This helps keep the test
suite simple and makes sure that UNSUPPORTED annotations don't rot.
This is the first patch of a series that will remove annotations for
compilers that are now unsupported.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D107787
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
C++20 revised the definition of what it means to be an iterator. While
all _Cpp17InputIterators_ satisfy `std::input_iterator`, the reverse
isn't true. D100271 introduces a new test adaptor to accommodate this
new definition (`cpp20_input_iterator`).
In order to help readers immediately distinguish which input iterator
adaptor is _Cpp17InputIterator_, the current `input_iterator` adaptor
has been prefixed with `cpp17_`.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D101242
- Quality-of-implementation: Avoid calling __unwrap_iter in constexpr contexts.
The user might conceivably write a contiguous iterator where normal iterator
arithmetic is constexpr-friendly but `std::to_address(it)` isn't.
- Bugfix: When you pass contiguous iterators to `std::copy`, you should get
back your contiguous iterator type, not a raw pointer. That means that
libc++ can't `__unwrap_iter` unless it also does `__rewrap_iter`.
Fortunately, this is implementable.
- Improve test coverage of the new `contiguous_iterator` test iterator.
This catches the bug described above.
- Tests: Stop testing that we can `std::copy` //into// an `input_iterator`.
Our test iterators may currently support that, but it seems nonsensical to me.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D95983
- Implement C++20's changes to `reverse_iterator`, so that it won't be
accidentally counted as a contiguous iterator in C++20 mode.
- Implement C++20's changes to `move_iterator` as well.
- `move_iterator` should not be contiguous. This fixes a bug where
we optimized `std::copy`-of-move-iterators in an observable way.
Add a regression test for that bugfix.
- Add libcxx tests for `__is_cpp17_contiguous_iterator` of all relevant
standard iterator types. Particularly check that vector::iterator
is still considered contiguous in all C++ modes, even C++03.
After this patch, there continues to be no supported way to write your
own iterator type in C++17-and-earlier such that libc++ will consider it
"contiguous"; however, we now fully support the C++20 approach (in C++20
mode only). If you want user-defined contiguous iterators in C++17-and-earlier,
libc++'s position is "please upgrade to C++20."
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D94807
After this patch, the only parts of P0879 that remain missing will be
std::nth_element, std::sort, and the heap/partial_sort algorithms.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D93443
Zoe Carver says: "We decided that libc++ only supports C++20 constexpr algorithms
when `is_constant_evaluated` is also supported. Here's a link to the discussion."
https://reviews.llvm.org/D65721#inline-735682
Remove _LIBCPP_HAS_NO_BUILTIN_IS_CONSTANT_EVALUATED from tests, too.
See Louis's 5911e6a8857f146fb5a8f23af1d768aba25e7c3e if needed to fix bots.
I've applied `UNSUPPORTED: clang-8` preemptively to the altered tests;
I don't know for sure that this was needed, because no clang-8 buildbots
are triggered on pull requests.
This patch makes `std::rotate` a constexpr. In doing so, this patch also
updates the internal `__move` and `__move_backward` funtions to be
constexpr.
This patch was previously reverted in ed653184ac63 because it was missing
some UNSUPPORTED markup for older compilers. This commit adds it.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D65721
cppreference lists the support for this paper as partial.
I found 4 functions which the paper marks as `constexpr`,
but did not use the appropriate macro.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D84275
This patch makes `std::rotate` a constexpr. In doing so, this patch also
updates the internal `__move` and `__move_backward` funtions to be
constexpr.
Reviewed By: ldionne
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D65721
There used to be a workaround where we'd pretend that GCC 5 didn't support
C++14 because it doesn't implement it properly. Since that workaround has
been removed (in 1eb211ada17a), we need to mark a few individual tests as
failing with GCC 5.
C++98 and C++03 are effectively aliases as far as Clang is concerned.
As such, allowing both std=c++98 and std=c++03 as Lit parameters is
just slightly confusing, but provides no value. It's similar to allowing
both std=c++17 and std=c++1z, which we don't do.
This was discovered because we had an internal bot that ran the test
suite under both c++98 AND c++03 -- one of which is redundant.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D80926
