This patch adds a large number of missing includes in the libc++ headers
and the test suite. Those were found as part of the effort to move
towards a mostly monolithic top-level std module.
The change increments the size of the lookup table considerably. The
table has an "upper boundary" check. The removal of the code units with
the property Grapheme_Extend=Yes removes the range E0100..E01EF. This
breaks the trailing large continuous section in two parts. This will be
improved in a followup patch.
Implements:
- P2713R1 Escaping improvements in std::format
- LWG3965 Incorrect example in [format.string.escaped] p3 for formatting
of combining characters
```
---------------------------------------------------------
Benchmark Before After
---------------------------------------------------------
BM_ascii_escaped<char> 95696 ns 110704 ns
BM_unicode_escaped<char> 89311 ns 101371 ns
BM_cyrillic_escaped<char> 58633 ns 63329 ns
BM_japanese_escaped<char> 44500 ns 41223 ns
BM_emoji_escaped<char> 99156 ns 111022 ns
BM_ascii_escaped<wchar_t> 92245 ns 112441 ns
BM_unicode_escaped<wchar_t> 80970 ns 102776 ns
BM_cyrillic_escaped<wchar_t> 51253 ns 58977 ns
BM_japanese_escaped<wchar_t> 37252 ns 36885 ns
BM_emoji_escaped<wchar_t> 96226 ns 115885 ns
```
We recently noticed that the unwrap_iter.h file was pushing macros, but
it was pushing them again instead of popping them at the end of the
file. This led to libc++ basically swallowing any custom definition of
these macros in user code:
#define min HELLO
#include <algorithm>
// min is not HELLO anymore, it's not defined
While investigating this issue, I noticed that our push/pop pragmas were
actually entirely wrong too. Indeed, instead of pushing macros like
`move`, we'd push `move(int, int)` in the pragma, which is not a valid
macro name. As a result, we would not actually push macros like `move`
-- instead we'd simply undefine them. This led to the following code not
working:
#define move HELLO
#include <algorithm>
// move is not HELLO anymore
Fixing the pragma push/pop incantations led to a cascade of issues
because we use identifiers like `move` in a large number of places, and
all of these headers would now need to do the push/pop dance.
This patch fixes all these issues. First, it adds a check that we don't
swallow important names like min, max, move or refresh as explained
above. This is done by augmenting the existing
system_reserved_names.gen.py test to also check that the macros are what
we expect after including each header.
Second, it fixes the push/pop pragmas to work properly and adds missing
pragmas to all the files I could detect a failure in via the newly added
test.
rdar://121365472
Also introduce `_LIBCPP_ASSERT_PEDANTIC` for assertions violating which
results in a no-op or other benign behavior, but which may nevertheless
indicate a bug in the invoking code.
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 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
This should reduce the size of the transitive includes for the vector header.
Note the header still quite large so the difference may be small.
Depends on D154122
Reviewed By: ldionne, #libc
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D154286
