Our best guess is that the two syntaxes should have exactly equivalent
effects, so, let's be consistent with what we do in libcxx/include/.
I've left `#include "include/x.h"` and `#include "../y.h"` alone
because I'm less sure that they're interchangeable, and they aren't
inconsistent with libcxx/include/ because libcxx/include/ never
does that kind of thing.
Also, use the `_LIBCPP_PUSH_MACROS/POP_MACROS` dance for `<__undef_macros>`,
even though it's technically unnecessary in a standalone .cpp file,
just so we have consistently one way to do it.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D119561
We've stopped doing it in libc++ for a while now because these names
would end up rotting as we move things around and copy/paste stuff.
This cleans up all the existing files so as to stop the spreading
as people copy-paste headers around.
The implementations of __libcpp_mutex_destroy and __libcpp_condvar_destroy
are already NOPs, so this optimization is safe to perform.
See r365273 and PR27658 for more information.
llvm-svn: 365281
