llvm-project/libcxx/include/__tree

2693 lines
97 KiB
Plaintext
Raw Normal View History

2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
// -*- C++ -*-
//===----------------------------------------------------------------------===//
//
// The LLVM Compiler Infrastructure
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
//
2010-11-17 06:09:02 +08:00
// This file is dual licensed under the MIT and the University of Illinois Open
// Source Licenses. See LICENSE.TXT for details.
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
//
//===----------------------------------------------------------------------===//
#ifndef _LIBCPP___TREE
#define _LIBCPP___TREE
#include <__config>
#include <iterator>
#include <memory>
#include <stdexcept>
#include <algorithm>
#if !defined(_LIBCPP_HAS_NO_PRAGMA_SYSTEM_HEADER)
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
#pragma GCC system_header
#endif
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
_LIBCPP_PUSH_MACROS
#include <__undef_macros>
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
_LIBCPP_BEGIN_NAMESPACE_STD
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator> class __tree;
template <class _Tp, class _NodePtr, class _DiffType>
class _LIBCPP_TEMPLATE_VIS __tree_iterator;
template <class _Tp, class _ConstNodePtr, class _DiffType>
class _LIBCPP_TEMPLATE_VIS __tree_const_iterator;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
template <class _Pointer> class __tree_end_node;
template <class _VoidPtr> class __tree_node_base;
template <class _Tp, class _VoidPtr> class __tree_node;
#ifndef _LIBCPP_CXX03_LANG
template <class _Key, class _Value>
union __value_type;
#else
template <class _Key, class _Value>
struct __value_type;
#endif
template <class _Key, class _CP, class _Compare,
bool = is_empty<_Compare>::value && !__libcpp_is_final<_Compare>::value>
class __map_value_compare;
template <class _Allocator> class __map_node_destructor;
template <class _TreeIterator> class _LIBCPP_TEMPLATE_VIS __map_iterator;
template <class _TreeIterator> class _LIBCPP_TEMPLATE_VIS __map_const_iterator;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
/*
_NodePtr algorithms
The algorithms taking _NodePtr are red black tree algorithms. Those
algorithms taking a parameter named __root should assume that __root
points to a proper red black tree (unless otherwise specified).
Each algorithm herein assumes that __root->__parent_ points to a non-null
structure which has a member __left_ which points back to __root. No other
member is read or written to at __root->__parent_.
__root->__parent_ will be referred to below (in comments only) as end_node.
end_node->__left_ is an externably accessible lvalue for __root, and can be
changed by node insertion and removal (without explicit reference to end_node).
All nodes (with the exception of end_node), even the node referred to as
__root, have a non-null __parent_ field.
*/
// Returns: true if __x is a left child of its parent, else false
// Precondition: __x != nullptr.
template <class _NodePtr>
inline _LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
bool
__tree_is_left_child(_NodePtr __x) _NOEXCEPT
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
return __x == __x->__parent_->__left_;
}
// Determintes if the subtree rooted at __x is a proper red black subtree. If
// __x is a proper subtree, returns the black height (null counts as 1). If
// __x is an improper subtree, returns 0.
template <class _NodePtr>
unsigned
__tree_sub_invariant(_NodePtr __x)
{
if (__x == nullptr)
return 1;
// parent consistency checked by caller
// check __x->__left_ consistency
if (__x->__left_ != nullptr && __x->__left_->__parent_ != __x)
return 0;
// check __x->__right_ consistency
if (__x->__right_ != nullptr && __x->__right_->__parent_ != __x)
return 0;
// check __x->__left_ != __x->__right_ unless both are nullptr
if (__x->__left_ == __x->__right_ && __x->__left_ != nullptr)
return 0;
// If this is red, neither child can be red
if (!__x->__is_black_)
{
if (__x->__left_ && !__x->__left_->__is_black_)
return 0;
if (__x->__right_ && !__x->__right_->__is_black_)
return 0;
}
unsigned __h = __tree_sub_invariant(__x->__left_);
if (__h == 0)
return 0; // invalid left subtree
if (__h != __tree_sub_invariant(__x->__right_))
return 0; // invalid or different height right subtree
return __h + __x->__is_black_; // return black height of this node
}
// Determintes if the red black tree rooted at __root is a proper red black tree.
// __root == nullptr is a proper tree. Returns true is __root is a proper
// red black tree, else returns false.
template <class _NodePtr>
bool
__tree_invariant(_NodePtr __root)
{
if (__root == nullptr)
return true;
// check __x->__parent_ consistency
if (__root->__parent_ == nullptr)
return false;
if (!__tree_is_left_child(__root))
return false;
// root must be black
if (!__root->__is_black_)
return false;
// do normal node checks
return __tree_sub_invariant(__root) != 0;
}
// Returns: pointer to the left-most node under __x.
// Precondition: __x != nullptr.
template <class _NodePtr>
inline _LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
_NodePtr
__tree_min(_NodePtr __x) _NOEXCEPT
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
while (__x->__left_ != nullptr)
__x = __x->__left_;
return __x;
}
// Returns: pointer to the right-most node under __x.
// Precondition: __x != nullptr.
template <class _NodePtr>
inline _LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
_NodePtr
__tree_max(_NodePtr __x) _NOEXCEPT
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
while (__x->__right_ != nullptr)
__x = __x->__right_;
return __x;
}
// Returns: pointer to the next in-order node after __x.
// Precondition: __x != nullptr.
template <class _NodePtr>
_NodePtr
__tree_next(_NodePtr __x) _NOEXCEPT
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
if (__x->__right_ != nullptr)
return __tree_min(__x->__right_);
while (!__tree_is_left_child(__x))
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__x = __x->__parent_unsafe();
return __x->__parent_unsafe();
}
template <class _EndNodePtr, class _NodePtr>
inline _LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
_EndNodePtr
__tree_next_iter(_NodePtr __x) _NOEXCEPT
{
if (__x->__right_ != nullptr)
return static_cast<_EndNodePtr>(__tree_min(__x->__right_));
while (!__tree_is_left_child(__x))
__x = __x->__parent_unsafe();
return static_cast<_EndNodePtr>(__x->__parent_);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
// Returns: pointer to the previous in-order node before __x.
// Precondition: __x != nullptr.
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
// Note: __x may be the end node.
template <class _NodePtr, class _EndNodePtr>
inline _LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
_NodePtr
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__tree_prev_iter(_EndNodePtr __x) _NOEXCEPT
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
if (__x->__left_ != nullptr)
return __tree_max(__x->__left_);
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
_NodePtr __xx = static_cast<_NodePtr>(__x);
while (__tree_is_left_child(__xx))
__xx = __xx->__parent_unsafe();
return __xx->__parent_unsafe();
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
// Returns: pointer to a node which has no children
// Precondition: __x != nullptr.
template <class _NodePtr>
_NodePtr
__tree_leaf(_NodePtr __x) _NOEXCEPT
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
while (true)
{
if (__x->__left_ != nullptr)
{
__x = __x->__left_;
continue;
}
if (__x->__right_ != nullptr)
{
__x = __x->__right_;
continue;
}
break;
}
return __x;
}
// Effects: Makes __x->__right_ the subtree root with __x as its left child
// while preserving in-order order.
// Precondition: __x->__right_ != nullptr
template <class _NodePtr>
void
__tree_left_rotate(_NodePtr __x) _NOEXCEPT
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
_NodePtr __y = __x->__right_;
__x->__right_ = __y->__left_;
if (__x->__right_ != nullptr)
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__x->__right_->__set_parent(__x);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__y->__parent_ = __x->__parent_;
if (__tree_is_left_child(__x))
__x->__parent_->__left_ = __y;
else
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__x->__parent_unsafe()->__right_ = __y;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__y->__left_ = __x;
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__x->__set_parent(__y);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
// Effects: Makes __x->__left_ the subtree root with __x as its right child
// while preserving in-order order.
// Precondition: __x->__left_ != nullptr
template <class _NodePtr>
void
__tree_right_rotate(_NodePtr __x) _NOEXCEPT
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
_NodePtr __y = __x->__left_;
__x->__left_ = __y->__right_;
if (__x->__left_ != nullptr)
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__x->__left_->__set_parent(__x);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__y->__parent_ = __x->__parent_;
if (__tree_is_left_child(__x))
__x->__parent_->__left_ = __y;
else
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__x->__parent_unsafe()->__right_ = __y;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__y->__right_ = __x;
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__x->__set_parent(__y);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
// Effects: Rebalances __root after attaching __x to a leaf.
// Precondition: __root != nulptr && __x != nullptr.
// __x has no children.
// __x == __root or == a direct or indirect child of __root.
// If __x were to be unlinked from __root (setting __root to
// nullptr if __root == __x), __tree_invariant(__root) == true.
// Postcondition: __tree_invariant(end_node->__left_) == true. end_node->__left_
// may be different than the value passed in as __root.
template <class _NodePtr>
void
__tree_balance_after_insert(_NodePtr __root, _NodePtr __x) _NOEXCEPT
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
__x->__is_black_ = __x == __root;
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
while (__x != __root && !__x->__parent_unsafe()->__is_black_)
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
// __x->__parent_ != __root because __x->__parent_->__is_black == false
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
if (__tree_is_left_child(__x->__parent_unsafe()))
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
_NodePtr __y = __x->__parent_unsafe()->__parent_unsafe()->__right_;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
if (__y != nullptr && !__y->__is_black_)
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__x = __x->__parent_unsafe();
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__x->__is_black_ = true;
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__x = __x->__parent_unsafe();
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__x->__is_black_ = __x == __root;
__y->__is_black_ = true;
}
else
{
if (!__tree_is_left_child(__x))
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__x = __x->__parent_unsafe();
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__tree_left_rotate(__x);
}
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__x = __x->__parent_unsafe();
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__x->__is_black_ = true;
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__x = __x->__parent_unsafe();
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__x->__is_black_ = false;
__tree_right_rotate(__x);
break;
}
}
else
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
_NodePtr __y = __x->__parent_unsafe()->__parent_->__left_;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
if (__y != nullptr && !__y->__is_black_)
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__x = __x->__parent_unsafe();
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__x->__is_black_ = true;
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__x = __x->__parent_unsafe();
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__x->__is_black_ = __x == __root;
__y->__is_black_ = true;
}
else
{
if (__tree_is_left_child(__x))
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__x = __x->__parent_unsafe();
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__tree_right_rotate(__x);
}
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__x = __x->__parent_unsafe();
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__x->__is_black_ = true;
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__x = __x->__parent_unsafe();
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__x->__is_black_ = false;
__tree_left_rotate(__x);
break;
}
}
}
}
// Precondition: __root != nullptr && __z != nullptr.
// __tree_invariant(__root) == true.
// __z == __root or == a direct or indirect child of __root.
// Effects: unlinks __z from the tree rooted at __root, rebalancing as needed.
// Postcondition: __tree_invariant(end_node->__left_) == true && end_node->__left_
// nor any of its children refer to __z. end_node->__left_
// may be different than the value passed in as __root.
template <class _NodePtr>
void
__tree_remove(_NodePtr __root, _NodePtr __z) _NOEXCEPT
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
// __z will be removed from the tree. Client still needs to destruct/deallocate it
// __y is either __z, or if __z has two children, __tree_next(__z).
// __y will have at most one child.
// __y will be the initial hole in the tree (make the hole at a leaf)
_NodePtr __y = (__z->__left_ == nullptr || __z->__right_ == nullptr) ?
__z : __tree_next(__z);
// __x is __y's possibly null single child
_NodePtr __x = __y->__left_ != nullptr ? __y->__left_ : __y->__right_;
// __w is __x's possibly null uncle (will become __x's sibling)
_NodePtr __w = nullptr;
// link __x to __y's parent, and find __w
if (__x != nullptr)
__x->__parent_ = __y->__parent_;
if (__tree_is_left_child(__y))
{
__y->__parent_->__left_ = __x;
if (__y != __root)
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__w = __y->__parent_unsafe()->__right_;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
else
__root = __x; // __w == nullptr
}
else
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__y->__parent_unsafe()->__right_ = __x;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
// __y can't be root if it is a right child
__w = __y->__parent_->__left_;
}
bool __removed_black = __y->__is_black_;
// If we didn't remove __z, do so now by splicing in __y for __z,
// but copy __z's color. This does not impact __x or __w.
if (__y != __z)
{
// __z->__left_ != nulptr but __z->__right_ might == __x == nullptr
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__y->__parent_ = __z->__parent_;
if (__tree_is_left_child(__z))
__y->__parent_->__left_ = __y;
else
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__y->__parent_unsafe()->__right_ = __y;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__y->__left_ = __z->__left_;
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__y->__left_->__set_parent(__y);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__y->__right_ = __z->__right_;
if (__y->__right_ != nullptr)
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__y->__right_->__set_parent(__y);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__y->__is_black_ = __z->__is_black_;
if (__root == __z)
__root = __y;
}
// There is no need to rebalance if we removed a red, or if we removed
// the last node.
if (__removed_black && __root != nullptr)
{
// Rebalance:
// __x has an implicit black color (transferred from the removed __y)
// associated with it, no matter what its color is.
// If __x is __root (in which case it can't be null), it is supposed
// to be black anyway, and if it is doubly black, then the double
// can just be ignored.
// If __x is red (in which case it can't be null), then it can absorb
// the implicit black just by setting its color to black.
// Since __y was black and only had one child (which __x points to), __x
// is either red with no children, else null, otherwise __y would have
// different black heights under left and right pointers.
// if (__x == __root || __x != nullptr && !__x->__is_black_)
if (__x != nullptr)
__x->__is_black_ = true;
else
{
// Else __x isn't root, and is "doubly black", even though it may
// be null. __w can not be null here, else the parent would
// see a black height >= 2 on the __x side and a black height
// of 1 on the __w side (__w must be a non-null black or a red
// with a non-null black child).
while (true)
{
if (!__tree_is_left_child(__w)) // if x is left child
{
if (!__w->__is_black_)
{
__w->__is_black_ = true;
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__w->__parent_unsafe()->__is_black_ = false;
__tree_left_rotate(__w->__parent_unsafe());
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
// __x is still valid
// reset __root only if necessary
if (__root == __w->__left_)
__root = __w;
// reset sibling, and it still can't be null
__w = __w->__left_->__right_;
}
// __w->__is_black_ is now true, __w may have null children
if ((__w->__left_ == nullptr || __w->__left_->__is_black_) &&
(__w->__right_ == nullptr || __w->__right_->__is_black_))
{
__w->__is_black_ = false;
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__x = __w->__parent_unsafe();
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
// __x can no longer be null
if (__x == __root || !__x->__is_black_)
{
__x->__is_black_ = true;
break;
}
// reset sibling, and it still can't be null
__w = __tree_is_left_child(__x) ?
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__x->__parent_unsafe()->__right_ :
__x->__parent_->__left_;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
// continue;
}
else // __w has a red child
{
if (__w->__right_ == nullptr || __w->__right_->__is_black_)
{
// __w left child is non-null and red
__w->__left_->__is_black_ = true;
__w->__is_black_ = false;
__tree_right_rotate(__w);
// __w is known not to be root, so root hasn't changed
// reset sibling, and it still can't be null
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__w = __w->__parent_unsafe();
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
// __w has a right red child, left child may be null
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__w->__is_black_ = __w->__parent_unsafe()->__is_black_;
__w->__parent_unsafe()->__is_black_ = true;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__w->__right_->__is_black_ = true;
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__tree_left_rotate(__w->__parent_unsafe());
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
break;
}
}
else
{
if (!__w->__is_black_)
{
__w->__is_black_ = true;
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__w->__parent_unsafe()->__is_black_ = false;
__tree_right_rotate(__w->__parent_unsafe());
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
// __x is still valid
// reset __root only if necessary
if (__root == __w->__right_)
__root = __w;
// reset sibling, and it still can't be null
__w = __w->__right_->__left_;
}
// __w->__is_black_ is now true, __w may have null children
if ((__w->__left_ == nullptr || __w->__left_->__is_black_) &&
(__w->__right_ == nullptr || __w->__right_->__is_black_))
{
__w->__is_black_ = false;
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__x = __w->__parent_unsafe();
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
// __x can no longer be null
if (!__x->__is_black_ || __x == __root)
{
__x->__is_black_ = true;
break;
}
// reset sibling, and it still can't be null
__w = __tree_is_left_child(__x) ?
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__x->__parent_unsafe()->__right_ :
__x->__parent_->__left_;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
// continue;
}
else // __w has a red child
{
if (__w->__left_ == nullptr || __w->__left_->__is_black_)
{
// __w right child is non-null and red
__w->__right_->__is_black_ = true;
__w->__is_black_ = false;
__tree_left_rotate(__w);
// __w is known not to be root, so root hasn't changed
// reset sibling, and it still can't be null
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__w = __w->__parent_unsafe();
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
// __w has a left red child, right child may be null
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__w->__is_black_ = __w->__parent_unsafe()->__is_black_;
__w->__parent_unsafe()->__is_black_ = true;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__w->__left_->__is_black_ = true;
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__tree_right_rotate(__w->__parent_unsafe());
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
break;
}
}
}
}
}
}
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
// node traits
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
#ifndef _LIBCPP_CXX03_LANG
template <class _Tp>
struct __is_tree_value_type_imp : false_type {};
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
template <class _Key, class _Value>
struct __is_tree_value_type_imp<__value_type<_Key, _Value>> : true_type {};
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
template <class ..._Args>
struct __is_tree_value_type : false_type {};
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
template <class _One>
struct __is_tree_value_type<_One> : __is_tree_value_type_imp<typename __uncvref<_One>::type> {};
#endif
template <class _Tp>
struct __tree_key_value_types {
typedef _Tp key_type;
typedef _Tp __node_value_type;
typedef _Tp __container_value_type;
static const bool __is_map = false;
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
static key_type const& __get_key(_Tp const& __v) {
return __v;
}
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
static __container_value_type const& __get_value(__node_value_type const& __v) {
return __v;
}
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
static __container_value_type* __get_ptr(__node_value_type& __n) {
return _VSTD::addressof(__n);
}
#ifndef _LIBCPP_CXX03_LANG
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
static __container_value_type&& __move(__node_value_type& __v) {
return _VSTD::move(__v);
}
#endif
};
template <class _Key, class _Tp>
struct __tree_key_value_types<__value_type<_Key, _Tp> > {
typedef _Key key_type;
typedef _Tp mapped_type;
typedef __value_type<_Key, _Tp> __node_value_type;
typedef pair<const _Key, _Tp> __container_value_type;
typedef pair<_Key, _Tp> __nc_value_type;
typedef __container_value_type __map_value_type;
static const bool __is_map = true;
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
static key_type const&
__get_key(__node_value_type const& __t) {
return __t.__cc.first;
}
template <class _Up>
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
static typename enable_if<__is_same_uncvref<_Up, __container_value_type>::value,
key_type const&>::type
__get_key(_Up& __t) {
return __t.first;
}
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
static __container_value_type const&
__get_value(__node_value_type const& __t) {
return __t.__cc;
}
template <class _Up>
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
static typename enable_if<__is_same_uncvref<_Up, __container_value_type>::value,
__container_value_type const&>::type
__get_value(_Up& __t) {
return __t;
}
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
static __container_value_type* __get_ptr(__node_value_type& __n) {
return _VSTD::addressof(__n.__cc);
}
#ifndef _LIBCPP_CXX03_LANG
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
static __nc_value_type&& __move(__node_value_type& __v) {
return _VSTD::move(__v.__nc);
}
#endif
};
template <class _VoidPtr>
struct __tree_node_base_types {
typedef _VoidPtr __void_pointer;
typedef __tree_node_base<__void_pointer> __node_base_type;
typedef typename __rebind_pointer<_VoidPtr, __node_base_type>::type
__node_base_pointer;
typedef __tree_end_node<__node_base_pointer> __end_node_type;
typedef typename __rebind_pointer<_VoidPtr, __end_node_type>::type
__end_node_pointer;
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
#if defined(_LIBCPP_ABI_TREE_REMOVE_NODE_POINTER_UB)
typedef __end_node_pointer __parent_pointer;
#else
typedef typename conditional<
is_pointer<__end_node_pointer>::value,
__end_node_pointer,
__node_base_pointer>::type __parent_pointer;
#endif
private:
static_assert((is_same<typename pointer_traits<_VoidPtr>::element_type, void>::value),
"_VoidPtr does not point to unqualified void type");
};
template <class _Tp, class _AllocPtr, class _KVTypes = __tree_key_value_types<_Tp>,
bool = _KVTypes::__is_map>
struct __tree_map_pointer_types {};
template <class _Tp, class _AllocPtr, class _KVTypes>
struct __tree_map_pointer_types<_Tp, _AllocPtr, _KVTypes, true> {
typedef typename _KVTypes::__map_value_type _Mv;
typedef typename __rebind_pointer<_AllocPtr, _Mv>::type
__map_value_type_pointer;
typedef typename __rebind_pointer<_AllocPtr, const _Mv>::type
__const_map_value_type_pointer;
};
template <class _NodePtr, class _NodeT = typename pointer_traits<_NodePtr>::element_type>
struct __tree_node_types;
template <class _NodePtr, class _Tp, class _VoidPtr>
struct __tree_node_types<_NodePtr, __tree_node<_Tp, _VoidPtr> >
: public __tree_node_base_types<_VoidPtr>,
__tree_key_value_types<_Tp>,
__tree_map_pointer_types<_Tp, _VoidPtr>
{
typedef __tree_node_base_types<_VoidPtr> __base;
typedef __tree_key_value_types<_Tp> __key_base;
typedef __tree_map_pointer_types<_Tp, _VoidPtr> __map_pointer_base;
public:
typedef typename pointer_traits<_NodePtr>::element_type __node_type;
typedef _NodePtr __node_pointer;
typedef _Tp __node_value_type;
typedef typename __rebind_pointer<_VoidPtr, __node_value_type>::type
__node_value_type_pointer;
typedef typename __rebind_pointer<_VoidPtr, const __node_value_type>::type
__const_node_value_type_pointer;
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
#if defined(_LIBCPP_ABI_TREE_REMOVE_NODE_POINTER_UB)
typedef typename __base::__end_node_pointer __iter_pointer;
#else
typedef typename conditional<
is_pointer<__node_pointer>::value,
typename __base::__end_node_pointer,
__node_pointer>::type __iter_pointer;
#endif
private:
static_assert(!is_const<__node_type>::value,
"_NodePtr should never be a pointer to const");
static_assert((is_same<typename __rebind_pointer<_VoidPtr, __node_type>::type,
_NodePtr>::value), "_VoidPtr does not rebind to _NodePtr.");
};
template <class _ValueTp, class _VoidPtr>
struct __make_tree_node_types {
typedef typename __rebind_pointer<_VoidPtr, __tree_node<_ValueTp, _VoidPtr> >::type
_NodePtr;
typedef __tree_node_types<_NodePtr> type;
};
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
// node
template <class _Pointer>
class __tree_end_node
{
public:
typedef _Pointer pointer;
pointer __left_;
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
__tree_end_node() _NOEXCEPT : __left_() {}
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
};
template <class _VoidPtr>
class __tree_node_base
: public __tree_node_base_types<_VoidPtr>::__end_node_type
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
typedef __tree_node_base_types<_VoidPtr> _NodeBaseTypes;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
public:
typedef typename _NodeBaseTypes::__node_base_pointer pointer;
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
typedef typename _NodeBaseTypes::__parent_pointer __parent_pointer;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
pointer __right_;
__parent_pointer __parent_;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
bool __is_black_;
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
pointer __parent_unsafe() const { return static_cast<pointer>(__parent_);}
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
void __set_parent(pointer __p) {
__parent_ = static_cast<__parent_pointer>(__p);
}
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
private:
~__tree_node_base() _LIBCPP_EQUAL_DELETE;
__tree_node_base(__tree_node_base const&) _LIBCPP_EQUAL_DELETE;
__tree_node_base& operator=(__tree_node_base const&) _LIBCPP_EQUAL_DELETE;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
};
template <class _Tp, class _VoidPtr>
class __tree_node
: public __tree_node_base<_VoidPtr>
{
public:
typedef _Tp __node_value_type;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__node_value_type __value_;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
private:
~__tree_node() _LIBCPP_EQUAL_DELETE;
__tree_node(__tree_node const&) _LIBCPP_EQUAL_DELETE;
__tree_node& operator=(__tree_node const&) _LIBCPP_EQUAL_DELETE;
};
template <class _Allocator>
class __tree_node_destructor
{
typedef _Allocator allocator_type;
typedef allocator_traits<allocator_type> __alloc_traits;
public:
typedef typename __alloc_traits::pointer pointer;
private:
typedef __tree_node_types<pointer> _NodeTypes;
allocator_type& __na_;
__tree_node_destructor& operator=(const __tree_node_destructor&);
public:
bool __value_constructed;
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
explicit __tree_node_destructor(allocator_type& __na, bool __val = false) _NOEXCEPT
: __na_(__na),
__value_constructed(__val)
{}
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
void operator()(pointer __p) _NOEXCEPT
{
if (__value_constructed)
__alloc_traits::destroy(__na_, _NodeTypes::__get_ptr(__p->__value_));
if (__p)
__alloc_traits::deallocate(__na_, __p, 1);
}
template <class> friend class __map_node_destructor;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
};
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
template <class _Tp, class _NodePtr, class _DiffType>
class _LIBCPP_TEMPLATE_VIS __tree_iterator
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
typedef __tree_node_types<_NodePtr> _NodeTypes;
typedef _NodePtr __node_pointer;
typedef typename _NodeTypes::__node_base_pointer __node_base_pointer;
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
typedef typename _NodeTypes::__end_node_pointer __end_node_pointer;
typedef typename _NodeTypes::__iter_pointer __iter_pointer;
typedef pointer_traits<__node_pointer> __pointer_traits;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__iter_pointer __ptr_;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
public:
typedef bidirectional_iterator_tag iterator_category;
typedef _Tp value_type;
typedef _DiffType difference_type;
typedef value_type& reference;
typedef typename _NodeTypes::__node_value_type_pointer pointer;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY __tree_iterator() _NOEXCEPT
#if _LIBCPP_STD_VER > 11
: __ptr_(nullptr)
#endif
{}
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY reference operator*() const
{return __get_np()->__value_;}
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY pointer operator->() const
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
{return pointer_traits<pointer>::pointer_to(__get_np()->__value_);}
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
__tree_iterator& operator++() {
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__ptr_ = static_cast<__iter_pointer>(
__tree_next_iter<__end_node_pointer>(static_cast<__node_base_pointer>(__ptr_)));
return *this;
}
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__tree_iterator operator++(int)
{__tree_iterator __t(*this); ++(*this); return __t;}
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
__tree_iterator& operator--() {
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__ptr_ = static_cast<__iter_pointer>(__tree_prev_iter<__node_base_pointer>(
static_cast<__end_node_pointer>(__ptr_)));
return *this;
}
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__tree_iterator operator--(int)
{__tree_iterator __t(*this); --(*this); return __t;}
friend _LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
bool operator==(const __tree_iterator& __x, const __tree_iterator& __y)
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{return __x.__ptr_ == __y.__ptr_;}
friend _LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
bool operator!=(const __tree_iterator& __x, const __tree_iterator& __y)
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{return !(__x == __y);}
private:
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
2011-06-04 22:31:57 +08:00
explicit __tree_iterator(__node_pointer __p) _NOEXCEPT : __ptr_(__p) {}
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
explicit __tree_iterator(__end_node_pointer __p) _NOEXCEPT : __ptr_(__p) {}
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
__node_pointer __get_np() const { return static_cast<__node_pointer>(__ptr_); }
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
template <class, class, class> friend class __tree;
template <class, class, class> friend class _LIBCPP_TEMPLATE_VIS __tree_const_iterator;
template <class> friend class _LIBCPP_TEMPLATE_VIS __map_iterator;
template <class, class, class, class> friend class _LIBCPP_TEMPLATE_VIS map;
template <class, class, class, class> friend class _LIBCPP_TEMPLATE_VIS multimap;
template <class, class, class> friend class _LIBCPP_TEMPLATE_VIS set;
template <class, class, class> friend class _LIBCPP_TEMPLATE_VIS multiset;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
};
template <class _Tp, class _NodePtr, class _DiffType>
class _LIBCPP_TEMPLATE_VIS __tree_const_iterator
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
typedef __tree_node_types<_NodePtr> _NodeTypes;
typedef typename _NodeTypes::__node_pointer __node_pointer;
typedef typename _NodeTypes::__node_base_pointer __node_base_pointer;
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
typedef typename _NodeTypes::__end_node_pointer __end_node_pointer;
typedef typename _NodeTypes::__iter_pointer __iter_pointer;
typedef pointer_traits<__node_pointer> __pointer_traits;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__iter_pointer __ptr_;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
public:
typedef bidirectional_iterator_tag iterator_category;
typedef _Tp value_type;
typedef _DiffType difference_type;
typedef const value_type& reference;
typedef typename _NodeTypes::__const_node_value_type_pointer pointer;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY __tree_const_iterator() _NOEXCEPT
#if _LIBCPP_STD_VER > 11
: __ptr_(nullptr)
#endif
{}
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
private:
typedef __tree_iterator<value_type, __node_pointer, difference_type>
__non_const_iterator;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
public:
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
2011-06-04 22:31:57 +08:00
__tree_const_iterator(__non_const_iterator __p) _NOEXCEPT
: __ptr_(__p.__ptr_) {}
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY reference operator*() const
{return __get_np()->__value_;}
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY pointer operator->() const
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
{return pointer_traits<pointer>::pointer_to(__get_np()->__value_);}
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
__tree_const_iterator& operator++() {
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__ptr_ = static_cast<__iter_pointer>(
__tree_next_iter<__end_node_pointer>(static_cast<__node_base_pointer>(__ptr_)));
return *this;
}
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__tree_const_iterator operator++(int)
{__tree_const_iterator __t(*this); ++(*this); return __t;}
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
__tree_const_iterator& operator--() {
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__ptr_ = static_cast<__iter_pointer>(__tree_prev_iter<__node_base_pointer>(
static_cast<__end_node_pointer>(__ptr_)));
return *this;
}
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__tree_const_iterator operator--(int)
{__tree_const_iterator __t(*this); --(*this); return __t;}
friend _LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
bool operator==(const __tree_const_iterator& __x, const __tree_const_iterator& __y)
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{return __x.__ptr_ == __y.__ptr_;}
friend _LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
bool operator!=(const __tree_const_iterator& __x, const __tree_const_iterator& __y)
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{return !(__x == __y);}
private:
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
2011-06-04 22:31:57 +08:00
explicit __tree_const_iterator(__node_pointer __p) _NOEXCEPT
: __ptr_(__p) {}
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
explicit __tree_const_iterator(__end_node_pointer __p) _NOEXCEPT
: __ptr_(__p) {}
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
__node_pointer __get_np() const { return static_cast<__node_pointer>(__ptr_); }
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
template <class, class, class> friend class __tree;
template <class, class, class, class> friend class _LIBCPP_TEMPLATE_VIS map;
template <class, class, class, class> friend class _LIBCPP_TEMPLATE_VIS multimap;
template <class, class, class> friend class _LIBCPP_TEMPLATE_VIS set;
template <class, class, class> friend class _LIBCPP_TEMPLATE_VIS multiset;
template <class> friend class _LIBCPP_TEMPLATE_VIS __map_const_iterator;
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
};
#ifndef _LIBCPP_CXX03_LANG
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
struct __diagnose_tree_helper {
static constexpr bool __trigger_diagnostics()
_LIBCPP_DIAGNOSE_WARNING(!__invokable<_Compare const&, _Tp const&, _Tp const&>::value,
"the specified comparator type does not provide a const call operator")
{ return true; }
};
template <class _Key, class _Value, class _KeyComp, class _Alloc>
struct __diagnose_tree_helper<
__value_type<_Key, _Value>,
__map_value_compare<_Key, __value_type<_Key, _Value>, _KeyComp>,
_Alloc
> : __diagnose_tree_helper<_Key, _KeyComp, _Alloc>
{
};
#endif // !_LIBCPP_CXX03_LANG
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
class __tree
{
public:
typedef _Tp value_type;
typedef _Compare value_compare;
typedef _Allocator allocator_type;
private:
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
typedef allocator_traits<allocator_type> __alloc_traits;
typedef typename __make_tree_node_types<value_type,
typename __alloc_traits::void_pointer>::type
_NodeTypes;
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
typedef typename _NodeTypes::key_type key_type;
public:
typedef typename _NodeTypes::__node_value_type __node_value_type;
typedef typename _NodeTypes::__container_value_type __container_value_type;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
typedef typename __alloc_traits::pointer pointer;
typedef typename __alloc_traits::const_pointer const_pointer;
typedef typename __alloc_traits::size_type size_type;
typedef typename __alloc_traits::difference_type difference_type;
public:
typedef typename _NodeTypes::__void_pointer __void_pointer;
typedef typename _NodeTypes::__node_type __node;
typedef typename _NodeTypes::__node_pointer __node_pointer;
typedef typename _NodeTypes::__node_base_type __node_base;
typedef typename _NodeTypes::__node_base_pointer __node_base_pointer;
typedef typename _NodeTypes::__end_node_type __end_node_t;
typedef typename _NodeTypes::__end_node_pointer __end_node_ptr;
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
typedef typename _NodeTypes::__parent_pointer __parent_pointer;
typedef typename _NodeTypes::__iter_pointer __iter_pointer;
typedef typename __rebind_alloc_helper<__alloc_traits, __node>::type __node_allocator;
typedef allocator_traits<__node_allocator> __node_traits;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
private:
// check for sane allocator pointer rebinding semantics. Rebinding the
// allocator for a new pointer type should be exactly the same as rebinding
// the pointer using 'pointer_traits'.
static_assert((is_same<__node_pointer, typename __node_traits::pointer>::value),
"Allocator does not rebind pointers in a sane manner.");
typedef typename __rebind_alloc_helper<__node_traits, __node_base>::type
__node_base_allocator;
typedef allocator_traits<__node_base_allocator> __node_base_traits;
static_assert((is_same<__node_base_pointer, typename __node_base_traits::pointer>::value),
"Allocator does not rebind pointers in a sane manner.");
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
private:
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__iter_pointer __begin_node_;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__compressed_pair<__end_node_t, __node_allocator> __pair1_;
__compressed_pair<size_type, value_compare> __pair3_;
public:
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__iter_pointer __end_node() _NOEXCEPT
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
return static_cast<__iter_pointer>(
pointer_traits<__end_node_ptr>::pointer_to(__pair1_.first())
);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__iter_pointer __end_node() const _NOEXCEPT
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
return static_cast<__iter_pointer>(
pointer_traits<__end_node_ptr>::pointer_to(
const_cast<__end_node_t&>(__pair1_.first())
)
);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
2011-06-04 22:31:57 +08:00
__node_allocator& __node_alloc() _NOEXCEPT {return __pair1_.second();}
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
private:
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
2011-06-04 22:31:57 +08:00
const __node_allocator& __node_alloc() const _NOEXCEPT
{return __pair1_.second();}
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__iter_pointer& __begin_node() _NOEXCEPT {return __begin_node_;}
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
const __iter_pointer& __begin_node() const _NOEXCEPT {return __begin_node_;}
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
public:
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
2011-06-04 22:31:57 +08:00
allocator_type __alloc() const _NOEXCEPT
{return allocator_type(__node_alloc());}
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
private:
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
2011-06-04 22:31:57 +08:00
size_type& size() _NOEXCEPT {return __pair3_.first();}
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
public:
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
2011-06-04 22:31:57 +08:00
const size_type& size() const _NOEXCEPT {return __pair3_.first();}
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
2011-06-04 22:31:57 +08:00
value_compare& value_comp() _NOEXCEPT {return __pair3_.second();}
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
2011-06-04 22:31:57 +08:00
const value_compare& value_comp() const _NOEXCEPT
{return __pair3_.second();}
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
public:
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
__node_pointer __root() const _NOEXCEPT
{return static_cast<__node_pointer>(__end_node()->__left_);}
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__node_base_pointer* __root_ptr() const _NOEXCEPT {
return _VSTD::addressof(__end_node()->__left_);
}
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
typedef __tree_iterator<value_type, __node_pointer, difference_type> iterator;
typedef __tree_const_iterator<value_type, __node_pointer, difference_type> const_iterator;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
2011-06-04 22:31:57 +08:00
explicit __tree(const value_compare& __comp)
_NOEXCEPT_(
is_nothrow_default_constructible<__node_allocator>::value &&
is_nothrow_copy_constructible<value_compare>::value);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
explicit __tree(const allocator_type& __a);
__tree(const value_compare& __comp, const allocator_type& __a);
__tree(const __tree& __t);
__tree& operator=(const __tree& __t);
template <class _InputIterator>
void __assign_unique(_InputIterator __first, _InputIterator __last);
template <class _InputIterator>
void __assign_multi(_InputIterator __first, _InputIterator __last);
#ifndef _LIBCPP_CXX03_LANG
2011-06-04 22:31:57 +08:00
__tree(__tree&& __t)
_NOEXCEPT_(
is_nothrow_move_constructible<__node_allocator>::value &&
is_nothrow_move_constructible<value_compare>::value);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__tree(__tree&& __t, const allocator_type& __a);
2011-06-04 22:31:57 +08:00
__tree& operator=(__tree&& __t)
_NOEXCEPT_(
__node_traits::propagate_on_container_move_assignment::value &&
is_nothrow_move_assignable<value_compare>::value &&
is_nothrow_move_assignable<__node_allocator>::value);
#endif // _LIBCPP_CXX03_LANG
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
~__tree();
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
2011-06-04 22:31:57 +08:00
iterator begin() _NOEXCEPT {return iterator(__begin_node());}
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
2011-06-04 22:31:57 +08:00
const_iterator begin() const _NOEXCEPT {return const_iterator(__begin_node());}
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
2011-06-04 22:31:57 +08:00
iterator end() _NOEXCEPT {return iterator(__end_node());}
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
2011-06-04 22:31:57 +08:00
const_iterator end() const _NOEXCEPT {return const_iterator(__end_node());}
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
2011-06-04 22:31:57 +08:00
size_type max_size() const _NOEXCEPT
{return std::min<size_type>(
__node_traits::max_size(__node_alloc()),
numeric_limits<difference_type >::max());}
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
2011-06-04 22:31:57 +08:00
void clear() _NOEXCEPT;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
2011-06-04 22:31:57 +08:00
void swap(__tree& __t)
#if _LIBCPP_STD_VER <= 11
2011-06-04 22:31:57 +08:00
_NOEXCEPT_(
__is_nothrow_swappable<value_compare>::value
&& (!__node_traits::propagate_on_container_swap::value ||
__is_nothrow_swappable<__node_allocator>::value)
);
#else
_NOEXCEPT_(__is_nothrow_swappable<value_compare>::value);
#endif
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
#ifndef _LIBCPP_CXX03_LANG
template <class _Key, class ..._Args>
pair<iterator, bool>
__emplace_unique_key_args(_Key const&, _Args&&... __args);
template <class _Key, class ..._Args>
iterator
__emplace_hint_unique_key_args(const_iterator, _Key const&, _Args&&...);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
template <class... _Args>
pair<iterator, bool> __emplace_unique_impl(_Args&&... __args);
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
template <class... _Args>
iterator __emplace_hint_unique_impl(const_iterator __p, _Args&&... __args);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
template <class... _Args>
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
iterator __emplace_multi(_Args&&... __args);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
template <class... _Args>
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
iterator __emplace_hint_multi(const_iterator __p, _Args&&... __args);
template <class _Pp>
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
pair<iterator, bool> __emplace_unique(_Pp&& __x) {
return __emplace_unique_extract_key(_VSTD::forward<_Pp>(__x),
__can_extract_key<_Pp, key_type>());
}
template <class _First, class _Second>
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
typename enable_if<
__can_extract_map_key<_First, key_type, __container_value_type>::value,
pair<iterator, bool>
>::type __emplace_unique(_First&& __f, _Second&& __s) {
return __emplace_unique_key_args(__f, _VSTD::forward<_First>(__f),
_VSTD::forward<_Second>(__s));
}
template <class... _Args>
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
pair<iterator, bool> __emplace_unique(_Args&&... __args) {
return __emplace_unique_impl(_VSTD::forward<_Args>(__args)...);
}
template <class _Pp>
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
pair<iterator, bool>
__emplace_unique_extract_key(_Pp&& __x, __extract_key_fail_tag) {
return __emplace_unique_impl(_VSTD::forward<_Pp>(__x));
}
template <class _Pp>
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
pair<iterator, bool>
__emplace_unique_extract_key(_Pp&& __x, __extract_key_self_tag) {
return __emplace_unique_key_args(__x, _VSTD::forward<_Pp>(__x));
}
template <class _Pp>
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
pair<iterator, bool>
__emplace_unique_extract_key(_Pp&& __x, __extract_key_first_tag) {
return __emplace_unique_key_args(__x.first, _VSTD::forward<_Pp>(__x));
}
template <class _Pp>
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
iterator __emplace_hint_unique(const_iterator __p, _Pp&& __x) {
return __emplace_hint_unique_extract_key(__p, _VSTD::forward<_Pp>(__x),
__can_extract_key<_Pp, key_type>());
}
template <class _First, class _Second>
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
typename enable_if<
__can_extract_map_key<_First, key_type, __container_value_type>::value,
iterator
>::type __emplace_hint_unique(const_iterator __p, _First&& __f, _Second&& __s) {
return __emplace_hint_unique_key_args(__p, __f,
_VSTD::forward<_First>(__f),
_VSTD::forward<_Second>(__s));
}
template <class... _Args>
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
iterator __emplace_hint_unique(const_iterator __p, _Args&&... __args) {
return __emplace_hint_unique_impl(__p, _VSTD::forward<_Args>(__args)...);
}
template <class _Pp>
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
iterator
__emplace_hint_unique_extract_key(const_iterator __p, _Pp&& __x, __extract_key_fail_tag) {
return __emplace_hint_unique_impl(__p, _VSTD::forward<_Pp>(__x));
}
template <class _Pp>
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
iterator
__emplace_hint_unique_extract_key(const_iterator __p, _Pp&& __x, __extract_key_self_tag) {
return __emplace_hint_unique_key_args(__p, __x, _VSTD::forward<_Pp>(__x));
}
template <class _Pp>
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
iterator
__emplace_hint_unique_extract_key(const_iterator __p, _Pp&& __x, __extract_key_first_tag) {
return __emplace_hint_unique_key_args(__p, __x.first, _VSTD::forward<_Pp>(__x));
}
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
#else
template <class _Key, class _Args>
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
pair<iterator, bool> __emplace_unique_key_args(_Key const&, _Args& __args);
template <class _Key, class _Args>
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
iterator __emplace_hint_unique_key_args(const_iterator, _Key const&, _Args&);
#endif
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
pair<iterator, bool> __insert_unique(const __container_value_type& __v) {
return __emplace_unique_key_args(_NodeTypes::__get_key(__v), __v);
}
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
iterator __insert_unique(const_iterator __p, const __container_value_type& __v) {
return __emplace_hint_unique_key_args(__p, _NodeTypes::__get_key(__v), __v);
}
#ifdef _LIBCPP_CXX03_LANG
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
iterator __insert_multi(const __container_value_type& __v);
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
iterator __insert_multi(const_iterator __p, const __container_value_type& __v);
#else
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
pair<iterator, bool> __insert_unique(__container_value_type&& __v) {
return __emplace_unique_key_args(_NodeTypes::__get_key(__v), _VSTD::move(__v));
}
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
iterator __insert_unique(const_iterator __p, __container_value_type&& __v) {
return __emplace_hint_unique_key_args(__p, _NodeTypes::__get_key(__v), _VSTD::move(__v));
}
template <class _Vp, class = typename enable_if<
!is_same<typename __unconstref<_Vp>::type,
__container_value_type
>::value
>::type>
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
pair<iterator, bool> __insert_unique(_Vp&& __v) {
return __emplace_unique(_VSTD::forward<_Vp>(__v));
}
template <class _Vp, class = typename enable_if<
!is_same<typename __unconstref<_Vp>::type,
__container_value_type
>::value
>::type>
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
iterator __insert_unique(const_iterator __p, _Vp&& __v) {
return __emplace_hint_unique(__p, _VSTD::forward<_Vp>(__v));
}
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
iterator __insert_multi(__container_value_type&& __v) {
return __emplace_multi(_VSTD::move(__v));
}
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
iterator __insert_multi(const_iterator __p, __container_value_type&& __v) {
return __emplace_hint_multi(__p, _VSTD::move(__v));
}
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
template <class _Vp>
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
iterator __insert_multi(_Vp&& __v) {
return __emplace_multi(_VSTD::forward<_Vp>(__v));
}
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
template <class _Vp>
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
iterator __insert_multi(const_iterator __p, _Vp&& __v) {
return __emplace_hint_multi(__p, _VSTD::forward<_Vp>(__v));
}
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
#endif // !_LIBCPP_CXX03_LANG
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
pair<iterator, bool> __node_insert_unique(__node_pointer __nd);
iterator __node_insert_unique(const_iterator __p,
__node_pointer __nd);
iterator __node_insert_multi(__node_pointer __nd);
iterator __node_insert_multi(const_iterator __p, __node_pointer __nd);
iterator erase(const_iterator __p);
iterator erase(const_iterator __f, const_iterator __l);
template <class _Key>
size_type __erase_unique(const _Key& __k);
template <class _Key>
size_type __erase_multi(const _Key& __k);
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
void __insert_node_at(__parent_pointer __parent,
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__node_base_pointer& __child,
__node_base_pointer __new_node);
template <class _Key>
iterator find(const _Key& __v);
template <class _Key>
const_iterator find(const _Key& __v) const;
template <class _Key>
size_type __count_unique(const _Key& __k) const;
template <class _Key>
size_type __count_multi(const _Key& __k) const;
template <class _Key>
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
iterator lower_bound(const _Key& __v)
{return __lower_bound(__v, __root(), __end_node());}
template <class _Key>
iterator __lower_bound(const _Key& __v,
__node_pointer __root,
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__iter_pointer __result);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
template <class _Key>
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
const_iterator lower_bound(const _Key& __v) const
{return __lower_bound(__v, __root(), __end_node());}
template <class _Key>
const_iterator __lower_bound(const _Key& __v,
__node_pointer __root,
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__iter_pointer __result) const;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
template <class _Key>
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
iterator upper_bound(const _Key& __v)
{return __upper_bound(__v, __root(), __end_node());}
template <class _Key>
iterator __upper_bound(const _Key& __v,
__node_pointer __root,
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__iter_pointer __result);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
template <class _Key>
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
const_iterator upper_bound(const _Key& __v) const
{return __upper_bound(__v, __root(), __end_node());}
template <class _Key>
const_iterator __upper_bound(const _Key& __v,
__node_pointer __root,
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__iter_pointer __result) const;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
template <class _Key>
pair<iterator, iterator>
__equal_range_unique(const _Key& __k);
template <class _Key>
pair<const_iterator, const_iterator>
__equal_range_unique(const _Key& __k) const;
template <class _Key>
pair<iterator, iterator>
__equal_range_multi(const _Key& __k);
template <class _Key>
pair<const_iterator, const_iterator>
__equal_range_multi(const _Key& __k) const;
typedef __tree_node_destructor<__node_allocator> _Dp;
typedef unique_ptr<__node, _Dp> __node_holder;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__node_holder remove(const_iterator __p) _NOEXCEPT;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
private:
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__node_base_pointer&
__find_leaf_low(__parent_pointer& __parent, const key_type& __v);
__node_base_pointer&
__find_leaf_high(__parent_pointer& __parent, const key_type& __v);
__node_base_pointer&
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__find_leaf(const_iterator __hint,
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__parent_pointer& __parent, const key_type& __v);
// FIXME: Make this function const qualified. Unfortunetly doing so
// breaks existing code which uses non-const callable comparators.
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
template <class _Key>
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__node_base_pointer&
__find_equal(__parent_pointer& __parent, const _Key& __v);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
template <class _Key>
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY __node_base_pointer&
__find_equal(__parent_pointer& __parent, const _Key& __v) const {
return const_cast<__tree*>(this)->__find_equal(__parent, __v);
}
template <class _Key>
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__node_base_pointer&
__find_equal(const_iterator __hint, __parent_pointer& __parent,
__node_base_pointer& __dummy,
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
const _Key& __v);
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
#ifndef _LIBCPP_CXX03_LANG
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
template <class ..._Args>
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
__node_holder __construct_node(_Args&& ...__args);
#else
__node_holder __construct_node(const __container_value_type& __v);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
#endif
2011-06-04 22:31:57 +08:00
void destroy(__node_pointer __nd) _NOEXCEPT;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
void __copy_assign_alloc(const __tree& __t)
{__copy_assign_alloc(__t, integral_constant<bool,
__node_traits::propagate_on_container_copy_assignment::value>());}
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
void __copy_assign_alloc(const __tree& __t, true_type)
{
if (__node_alloc() != __t.__node_alloc())
clear();
__node_alloc() = __t.__node_alloc();
}
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
void __copy_assign_alloc(const __tree&, false_type) {}
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
void __move_assign(__tree& __t, false_type);
2011-06-04 22:31:57 +08:00
void __move_assign(__tree& __t, true_type)
_NOEXCEPT_(is_nothrow_move_assignable<value_compare>::value &&
is_nothrow_move_assignable<__node_allocator>::value);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
void __move_assign_alloc(__tree& __t)
2011-06-04 22:31:57 +08:00
_NOEXCEPT_(
!__node_traits::propagate_on_container_move_assignment::value ||
is_nothrow_move_assignable<__node_allocator>::value)
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{__move_assign_alloc(__t, integral_constant<bool,
__node_traits::propagate_on_container_move_assignment::value>());}
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
void __move_assign_alloc(__tree& __t, true_type)
2011-06-04 22:31:57 +08:00
_NOEXCEPT_(is_nothrow_move_assignable<__node_allocator>::value)
{__node_alloc() = _VSTD::move(__t.__node_alloc());}
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
void __move_assign_alloc(__tree&, false_type) _NOEXCEPT {}
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__node_pointer __detach();
static __node_pointer __detach(__node_pointer);
template <class, class, class, class> friend class _LIBCPP_TEMPLATE_VIS map;
template <class, class, class, class> friend class _LIBCPP_TEMPLATE_VIS multimap;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
};
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__tree(const value_compare& __comp)
2011-06-04 22:31:57 +08:00
_NOEXCEPT_(
is_nothrow_default_constructible<__node_allocator>::value &&
is_nothrow_copy_constructible<value_compare>::value)
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
: __pair3_(0, __comp)
{
__begin_node() = __end_node();
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__tree(const allocator_type& __a)
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
: __begin_node_(__iter_pointer()),
__pair1_(__second_tag(), __node_allocator(__a)),
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__pair3_(0)
{
__begin_node() = __end_node();
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__tree(const value_compare& __comp,
const allocator_type& __a)
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
: __begin_node_(__iter_pointer()),
__pair1_(__second_tag(), __node_allocator(__a)),
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__pair3_(0, __comp)
{
__begin_node() = __end_node();
}
// Precondition: size() != 0
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__node_pointer
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__detach()
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__node_pointer __cache = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__begin_node());
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__begin_node() = __end_node();
__end_node()->__left_->__parent_ = nullptr;
__end_node()->__left_ = nullptr;
size() = 0;
// __cache->__left_ == nullptr
if (__cache->__right_ != nullptr)
__cache = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__cache->__right_);
// __cache->__left_ == nullptr
// __cache->__right_ == nullptr
return __cache;
}
// Precondition: __cache != nullptr
// __cache->left_ == nullptr
// __cache->right_ == nullptr
// This is no longer a red-black tree
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__node_pointer
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__detach(__node_pointer __cache)
{
if (__cache->__parent_ == nullptr)
return nullptr;
if (__tree_is_left_child(static_cast<__node_base_pointer>(__cache)))
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
__cache->__parent_->__left_ = nullptr;
__cache = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__cache->__parent_);
if (__cache->__right_ == nullptr)
return __cache;
return static_cast<__node_pointer>(__tree_leaf(__cache->__right_));
}
// __cache is right child
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__cache->__parent_unsafe()->__right_ = nullptr;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__cache = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__cache->__parent_);
if (__cache->__left_ == nullptr)
return __cache;
return static_cast<__node_pointer>(__tree_leaf(__cache->__left_));
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>&
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::operator=(const __tree& __t)
{
if (this != &__t)
{
value_comp() = __t.value_comp();
__copy_assign_alloc(__t);
__assign_multi(__t.begin(), __t.end());
}
return *this;
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
template <class _InputIterator>
void
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__assign_unique(_InputIterator __first, _InputIterator __last)
{
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
typedef iterator_traits<_InputIterator> _ITraits;
typedef typename _ITraits::value_type _ItValueType;
static_assert((is_same<_ItValueType, __container_value_type>::value),
"__assign_unique may only be called with the containers value type");
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
if (size() != 0)
{
__node_pointer __cache = __detach();
#ifndef _LIBCPP_NO_EXCEPTIONS
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
try
{
#endif // _LIBCPP_NO_EXCEPTIONS
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
for (; __cache != nullptr && __first != __last; ++__first)
{
__cache->__value_ = *__first;
__node_pointer __next = __detach(__cache);
__node_insert_unique(__cache);
__cache = __next;
}
#ifndef _LIBCPP_NO_EXCEPTIONS
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
catch (...)
{
while (__cache->__parent_ != nullptr)
__cache = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__cache->__parent_);
destroy(__cache);
throw;
}
#endif // _LIBCPP_NO_EXCEPTIONS
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
if (__cache != nullptr)
{
while (__cache->__parent_ != nullptr)
__cache = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__cache->__parent_);
destroy(__cache);
}
}
for (; __first != __last; ++__first)
__insert_unique(*__first);
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
template <class _InputIterator>
void
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__assign_multi(_InputIterator __first, _InputIterator __last)
{
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
typedef iterator_traits<_InputIterator> _ITraits;
typedef typename _ITraits::value_type _ItValueType;
static_assert((is_same<_ItValueType, __container_value_type>::value ||
is_same<_ItValueType, __node_value_type>::value),
"__assign_multi may only be called with the containers value type"
" or the nodes value type");
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
if (size() != 0)
{
__node_pointer __cache = __detach();
#ifndef _LIBCPP_NO_EXCEPTIONS
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
try
{
#endif // _LIBCPP_NO_EXCEPTIONS
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
for (; __cache != nullptr && __first != __last; ++__first)
{
__cache->__value_ = *__first;
__node_pointer __next = __detach(__cache);
__node_insert_multi(__cache);
__cache = __next;
}
#ifndef _LIBCPP_NO_EXCEPTIONS
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
catch (...)
{
while (__cache->__parent_ != nullptr)
__cache = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__cache->__parent_);
destroy(__cache);
throw;
}
#endif // _LIBCPP_NO_EXCEPTIONS
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
if (__cache != nullptr)
{
while (__cache->__parent_ != nullptr)
__cache = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__cache->__parent_);
destroy(__cache);
}
}
for (; __first != __last; ++__first)
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
__insert_multi(_NodeTypes::__get_value(*__first));
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__tree(const __tree& __t)
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
: __begin_node_(__iter_pointer()),
__pair1_(__second_tag(), __node_traits::select_on_container_copy_construction(__t.__node_alloc())),
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__pair3_(0, __t.value_comp())
{
__begin_node() = __end_node();
}
#ifndef _LIBCPP_CXX03_LANG
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__tree(__tree&& __t)
2011-06-04 22:31:57 +08:00
_NOEXCEPT_(
is_nothrow_move_constructible<__node_allocator>::value &&
is_nothrow_move_constructible<value_compare>::value)
: __begin_node_(_VSTD::move(__t.__begin_node_)),
__pair1_(_VSTD::move(__t.__pair1_)),
__pair3_(_VSTD::move(__t.__pair3_))
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
if (size() == 0)
__begin_node() = __end_node();
else
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__end_node()->__left_->__parent_ = static_cast<__parent_pointer>(__end_node());
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__t.__begin_node() = __t.__end_node();
__t.__end_node()->__left_ = nullptr;
__t.size() = 0;
}
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__tree(__tree&& __t, const allocator_type& __a)
: __pair1_(__second_tag(), __node_allocator(__a)),
__pair3_(0, _VSTD::move(__t.value_comp()))
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
if (__a == __t.__alloc())
{
if (__t.size() == 0)
__begin_node() = __end_node();
else
{
__begin_node() = __t.__begin_node();
__end_node()->__left_ = __t.__end_node()->__left_;
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__end_node()->__left_->__parent_ = static_cast<__parent_pointer>(__end_node());
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
size() = __t.size();
__t.__begin_node() = __t.__end_node();
__t.__end_node()->__left_ = nullptr;
__t.size() = 0;
}
}
else
{
__begin_node() = __end_node();
}
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
void
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__move_assign(__tree& __t, true_type)
2011-06-04 22:31:57 +08:00
_NOEXCEPT_(is_nothrow_move_assignable<value_compare>::value &&
is_nothrow_move_assignable<__node_allocator>::value)
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
destroy(static_cast<__node_pointer>(__end_node()->__left_));
__begin_node_ = __t.__begin_node_;
__pair1_.first() = __t.__pair1_.first();
__move_assign_alloc(__t);
__pair3_ = _VSTD::move(__t.__pair3_);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
if (size() == 0)
__begin_node() = __end_node();
else
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__end_node()->__left_->__parent_ = static_cast<__parent_pointer>(__end_node());
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__t.__begin_node() = __t.__end_node();
__t.__end_node()->__left_ = nullptr;
__t.size() = 0;
}
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
void
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__move_assign(__tree& __t, false_type)
{
if (__node_alloc() == __t.__node_alloc())
__move_assign(__t, true_type());
else
{
value_comp() = _VSTD::move(__t.value_comp());
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
const_iterator __e = end();
if (size() != 0)
{
__node_pointer __cache = __detach();
#ifndef _LIBCPP_NO_EXCEPTIONS
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
try
{
#endif // _LIBCPP_NO_EXCEPTIONS
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
while (__cache != nullptr && __t.size() != 0)
{
__cache->__value_ = _VSTD::move(__t.remove(__t.begin())->__value_);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__node_pointer __next = __detach(__cache);
__node_insert_multi(__cache);
__cache = __next;
}
#ifndef _LIBCPP_NO_EXCEPTIONS
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
catch (...)
{
while (__cache->__parent_ != nullptr)
__cache = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__cache->__parent_);
destroy(__cache);
throw;
}
#endif // _LIBCPP_NO_EXCEPTIONS
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
if (__cache != nullptr)
{
while (__cache->__parent_ != nullptr)
__cache = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__cache->__parent_);
destroy(__cache);
}
}
while (__t.size() != 0)
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
__insert_multi(__e, _NodeTypes::__move(__t.remove(__t.begin())->__value_));
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>&
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::operator=(__tree&& __t)
2011-06-04 22:31:57 +08:00
_NOEXCEPT_(
__node_traits::propagate_on_container_move_assignment::value &&
is_nothrow_move_assignable<value_compare>::value &&
is_nothrow_move_assignable<__node_allocator>::value)
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
__move_assign(__t, integral_constant<bool,
__node_traits::propagate_on_container_move_assignment::value>());
return *this;
}
#endif // _LIBCPP_CXX03_LANG
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::~__tree()
{
static_assert((is_copy_constructible<value_compare>::value),
"Comparator must be copy-constructible.");
#ifndef _LIBCPP_CXX03_LANG
static_assert((__diagnose_tree_helper<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::
__trigger_diagnostics()), "");
#endif
destroy(__root());
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
void
2011-06-04 22:31:57 +08:00
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::destroy(__node_pointer __nd) _NOEXCEPT
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
if (__nd != nullptr)
{
destroy(static_cast<__node_pointer>(__nd->__left_));
destroy(static_cast<__node_pointer>(__nd->__right_));
__node_allocator& __na = __node_alloc();
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
__node_traits::destroy(__na, _NodeTypes::__get_ptr(__nd->__value_));
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__node_traits::deallocate(__na, __nd, 1);
}
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
void
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::swap(__tree& __t)
#if _LIBCPP_STD_VER <= 11
_NOEXCEPT_(
__is_nothrow_swappable<value_compare>::value
&& (!__node_traits::propagate_on_container_swap::value ||
__is_nothrow_swappable<__node_allocator>::value)
)
#else
_NOEXCEPT_(__is_nothrow_swappable<value_compare>::value)
#endif
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
using _VSTD::swap;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
swap(__begin_node_, __t.__begin_node_);
swap(__pair1_.first(), __t.__pair1_.first());
__swap_allocator(__node_alloc(), __t.__node_alloc());
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__pair3_.swap(__t.__pair3_);
if (size() == 0)
__begin_node() = __end_node();
else
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__end_node()->__left_->__parent_ = static_cast<__parent_pointer>(__end_node());
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
if (__t.size() == 0)
__t.__begin_node() = __t.__end_node();
else
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__t.__end_node()->__left_->__parent_ = static_cast<__parent_pointer>(__t.__end_node());
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
void
2011-06-04 22:31:57 +08:00
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::clear() _NOEXCEPT
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
destroy(__root());
size() = 0;
__begin_node() = __end_node();
__end_node()->__left_ = nullptr;
}
// Find lower_bound place to insert
// Set __parent to parent of null leaf
// Return reference to null leaf
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__node_base_pointer&
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__find_leaf_low(__parent_pointer& __parent,
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
const key_type& __v)
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
__node_pointer __nd = __root();
if (__nd != nullptr)
{
while (true)
{
if (value_comp()(__nd->__value_, __v))
{
if (__nd->__right_ != nullptr)
__nd = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__nd->__right_);
else
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__parent = static_cast<__parent_pointer>(__nd);
return __nd->__right_;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
}
else
{
if (__nd->__left_ != nullptr)
__nd = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__nd->__left_);
else
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__parent = static_cast<__parent_pointer>(__nd);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
return __parent->__left_;
}
}
}
}
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__parent = static_cast<__parent_pointer>(__end_node());
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
return __parent->__left_;
}
// Find upper_bound place to insert
// Set __parent to parent of null leaf
// Return reference to null leaf
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__node_base_pointer&
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__find_leaf_high(__parent_pointer& __parent,
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
const key_type& __v)
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
__node_pointer __nd = __root();
if (__nd != nullptr)
{
while (true)
{
if (value_comp()(__v, __nd->__value_))
{
if (__nd->__left_ != nullptr)
__nd = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__nd->__left_);
else
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__parent = static_cast<__parent_pointer>(__nd);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
return __parent->__left_;
}
}
else
{
if (__nd->__right_ != nullptr)
__nd = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__nd->__right_);
else
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__parent = static_cast<__parent_pointer>(__nd);
return __nd->__right_;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
}
}
}
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__parent = static_cast<__parent_pointer>(__end_node());
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
return __parent->__left_;
}
// Find leaf place to insert closest to __hint
// First check prior to __hint.
// Next check after __hint.
// Next do O(log N) search.
// Set __parent to parent of null leaf
// Return reference to null leaf
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__node_base_pointer&
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__find_leaf(const_iterator __hint,
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__parent_pointer& __parent,
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
const key_type& __v)
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
if (__hint == end() || !value_comp()(*__hint, __v)) // check before
{
// __v <= *__hint
const_iterator __prior = __hint;
if (__prior == begin() || !value_comp()(__v, *--__prior))
{
// *prev(__hint) <= __v <= *__hint
if (__hint.__ptr_->__left_ == nullptr)
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__parent = static_cast<__parent_pointer>(__hint.__ptr_);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
return __parent->__left_;
}
else
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__parent = static_cast<__parent_pointer>(__prior.__ptr_);
return static_cast<__node_base_pointer>(__prior.__ptr_)->__right_;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
}
// __v < *prev(__hint)
return __find_leaf_high(__parent, __v);
}
// else __v > *__hint
return __find_leaf_low(__parent, __v);
}
// Find place to insert if __v doesn't exist
// Set __parent to parent of null leaf
// Return reference to null leaf
// If __v exists, set parent to node of __v and return reference to node of __v
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
template <class _Key>
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__node_base_pointer&
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__find_equal(__parent_pointer& __parent,
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
const _Key& __v)
{
__node_pointer __nd = __root();
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__node_base_pointer* __nd_ptr = __root_ptr();
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
if (__nd != nullptr)
{
while (true)
{
if (value_comp()(__v, __nd->__value_))
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
if (__nd->__left_ != nullptr) {
__nd_ptr = _VSTD::addressof(__nd->__left_);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__nd = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__nd->__left_);
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
} else {
__parent = static_cast<__parent_pointer>(__nd);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
return __parent->__left_;
}
}
else if (value_comp()(__nd->__value_, __v))
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
if (__nd->__right_ != nullptr) {
__nd_ptr = _VSTD::addressof(__nd->__right_);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__nd = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__nd->__right_);
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
} else {
__parent = static_cast<__parent_pointer>(__nd);
return __nd->__right_;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
}
else
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__parent = static_cast<__parent_pointer>(__nd);
return *__nd_ptr;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
}
}
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__parent = static_cast<__parent_pointer>(__end_node());
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
return __parent->__left_;
}
// Find place to insert if __v doesn't exist
// First check prior to __hint.
// Next check after __hint.
// Next do O(log N) search.
// Set __parent to parent of null leaf
// Return reference to null leaf
// If __v exists, set parent to node of __v and return reference to node of __v
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
template <class _Key>
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__node_base_pointer&
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__find_equal(const_iterator __hint,
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__parent_pointer& __parent,
__node_base_pointer& __dummy,
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
const _Key& __v)
{
if (__hint == end() || value_comp()(__v, *__hint)) // check before
{
// __v < *__hint
const_iterator __prior = __hint;
if (__prior == begin() || value_comp()(*--__prior, __v))
{
// *prev(__hint) < __v < *__hint
if (__hint.__ptr_->__left_ == nullptr)
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__parent = static_cast<__parent_pointer>(__hint.__ptr_);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
return __parent->__left_;
}
else
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__parent = static_cast<__parent_pointer>(__prior.__ptr_);
return static_cast<__node_base_pointer>(__prior.__ptr_)->__right_;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
}
// __v <= *prev(__hint)
return __find_equal(__parent, __v);
}
else if (value_comp()(*__hint, __v)) // check after
{
// *__hint < __v
const_iterator __next = _VSTD::next(__hint);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
if (__next == end() || value_comp()(__v, *__next))
{
// *__hint < __v < *_VSTD::next(__hint)
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
if (__hint.__get_np()->__right_ == nullptr)
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__parent = static_cast<__parent_pointer>(__hint.__ptr_);
return static_cast<__node_base_pointer>(__hint.__ptr_)->__right_;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
else
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__parent = static_cast<__parent_pointer>(__next.__ptr_);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
return __parent->__left_;
}
}
// *next(__hint) <= __v
return __find_equal(__parent, __v);
}
// else __v == *__hint
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__parent = static_cast<__parent_pointer>(__hint.__ptr_);
__dummy = static_cast<__node_base_pointer>(__hint.__ptr_);
return __dummy;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
void
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__insert_node_at(__parent_pointer __parent,
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__node_base_pointer& __child,
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__node_base_pointer __new_node)
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
__new_node->__left_ = nullptr;
__new_node->__right_ = nullptr;
__new_node->__parent_ = __parent;
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
// __new_node->__is_black_ is initialized in __tree_balance_after_insert
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__child = __new_node;
if (__begin_node()->__left_ != nullptr)
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__begin_node() = static_cast<__iter_pointer>(__begin_node()->__left_);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__tree_balance_after_insert(__end_node()->__left_, __child);
++size();
}
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
#ifndef _LIBCPP_CXX03_LANG
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
template <class _Key, class... _Args>
pair<typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::iterator, bool>
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__emplace_unique_key_args(_Key const& __k, _Args&&... __args)
#else
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
template <class _Key, class _Args>
pair<typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::iterator, bool>
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__emplace_unique_key_args(_Key const& __k, _Args& __args)
#endif
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__parent_pointer __parent;
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
__node_base_pointer& __child = __find_equal(__parent, __k);
__node_pointer __r = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__child);
bool __inserted = false;
if (__child == nullptr)
{
#ifndef _LIBCPP_CXX03_LANG
__node_holder __h = __construct_node(_VSTD::forward<_Args>(__args)...);
#else
__node_holder __h = __construct_node(__args);
#endif
__insert_node_at(__parent, __child, static_cast<__node_base_pointer>(__h.get()));
__r = __h.release();
__inserted = true;
}
return pair<iterator, bool>(iterator(__r), __inserted);
}
#ifndef _LIBCPP_CXX03_LANG
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
template <class _Key, class... _Args>
typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::iterator
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__emplace_hint_unique_key_args(
const_iterator __p, _Key const& __k, _Args&&... __args)
#else
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
template <class _Key, class _Args>
typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::iterator
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__emplace_hint_unique_key_args(
const_iterator __p, _Key const& __k, _Args& __args)
#endif
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__parent_pointer __parent;
__node_base_pointer __dummy;
__node_base_pointer& __child = __find_equal(__p, __parent, __dummy, __k);
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
__node_pointer __r = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__child);
if (__child == nullptr)
{
#ifndef _LIBCPP_CXX03_LANG
__node_holder __h = __construct_node(_VSTD::forward<_Args>(__args)...);
#else
__node_holder __h = __construct_node(__args);
#endif
__insert_node_at(__parent, __child, static_cast<__node_base_pointer>(__h.get()));
__r = __h.release();
}
return iterator(__r);
}
#ifndef _LIBCPP_CXX03_LANG
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
template <class ..._Args>
typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__node_holder
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__construct_node(_Args&& ...__args)
{
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
static_assert(!__is_tree_value_type<_Args...>::value,
"Cannot construct from __value_type");
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__node_allocator& __na = __node_alloc();
__node_holder __h(__node_traits::allocate(__na, 1), _Dp(__na));
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
__node_traits::construct(__na, _NodeTypes::__get_ptr(__h->__value_), _VSTD::forward<_Args>(__args)...);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__h.get_deleter().__value_constructed = true;
return __h;
}
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
template <class... _Args>
pair<typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::iterator, bool>
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__emplace_unique_impl(_Args&&... __args)
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
__node_holder __h = __construct_node(_VSTD::forward<_Args>(__args)...);
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__parent_pointer __parent;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__node_base_pointer& __child = __find_equal(__parent, __h->__value_);
__node_pointer __r = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__child);
bool __inserted = false;
if (__child == nullptr)
{
__insert_node_at(__parent, __child, static_cast<__node_base_pointer>(__h.get()));
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__r = __h.release();
__inserted = true;
}
return pair<iterator, bool>(iterator(__r), __inserted);
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
template <class... _Args>
typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::iterator
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__emplace_hint_unique_impl(const_iterator __p, _Args&&... __args)
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
__node_holder __h = __construct_node(_VSTD::forward<_Args>(__args)...);
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__parent_pointer __parent;
__node_base_pointer __dummy;
__node_base_pointer& __child = __find_equal(__p, __parent, __dummy, __h->__value_);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__node_pointer __r = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__child);
if (__child == nullptr)
{
__insert_node_at(__parent, __child, static_cast<__node_base_pointer>(__h.get()));
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__r = __h.release();
}
return iterator(__r);
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
template <class... _Args>
typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::iterator
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__emplace_multi(_Args&&... __args)
{
__node_holder __h = __construct_node(_VSTD::forward<_Args>(__args)...);
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__parent_pointer __parent;
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
__node_base_pointer& __child = __find_leaf_high(__parent, _NodeTypes::__get_key(__h->__value_));
__insert_node_at(__parent, __child, static_cast<__node_base_pointer>(__h.get()));
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
return iterator(static_cast<__node_pointer>(__h.release()));
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
template <class... _Args>
typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::iterator
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__emplace_hint_multi(const_iterator __p,
_Args&&... __args)
{
__node_holder __h = __construct_node(_VSTD::forward<_Args>(__args)...);
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__parent_pointer __parent;
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
__node_base_pointer& __child = __find_leaf(__p, __parent, _NodeTypes::__get_key(__h->__value_));
__insert_node_at(__parent, __child, static_cast<__node_base_pointer>(__h.get()));
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
return iterator(static_cast<__node_pointer>(__h.release()));
}
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
#else // _LIBCPP_CXX03_LANG
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__node_holder
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__construct_node(const __container_value_type& __v)
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
__node_allocator& __na = __node_alloc();
__node_holder __h(__node_traits::allocate(__na, 1), _Dp(__na));
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
__node_traits::construct(__na, _NodeTypes::__get_ptr(__h->__value_), __v);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__h.get_deleter().__value_constructed = true;
return _LIBCPP_EXPLICIT_MOVE(__h); // explicitly moved for C++03
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
#endif // _LIBCPP_CXX03_LANG
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
#ifdef _LIBCPP_CXX03_LANG
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::iterator
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__insert_multi(const __container_value_type& __v)
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__parent_pointer __parent;
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
__node_base_pointer& __child = __find_leaf_high(__parent, _NodeTypes::__get_key(__v));
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__node_holder __h = __construct_node(__v);
__insert_node_at(__parent, __child, static_cast<__node_base_pointer>(__h.get()));
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
return iterator(__h.release());
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::iterator
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__insert_multi(const_iterator __p, const __container_value_type& __v)
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__parent_pointer __parent;
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
__node_base_pointer& __child = __find_leaf(__p, __parent, _NodeTypes::__get_key(__v));
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__node_holder __h = __construct_node(__v);
__insert_node_at(__parent, __child, static_cast<__node_base_pointer>(__h.get()));
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
return iterator(__h.release());
}
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
#endif
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
pair<typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::iterator, bool>
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__node_insert_unique(__node_pointer __nd)
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__parent_pointer __parent;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__node_base_pointer& __child = __find_equal(__parent, __nd->__value_);
__node_pointer __r = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__child);
bool __inserted = false;
if (__child == nullptr)
{
__insert_node_at(__parent, __child, static_cast<__node_base_pointer>(__nd));
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__r = __nd;
__inserted = true;
}
return pair<iterator, bool>(iterator(__r), __inserted);
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::iterator
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__node_insert_unique(const_iterator __p,
__node_pointer __nd)
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__parent_pointer __parent;
__node_base_pointer __dummy;
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__node_base_pointer& __child = __find_equal(__p, __parent, __nd->__value_);
__node_pointer __r = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__child);
if (__child == nullptr)
{
__insert_node_at(__parent, __child, static_cast<__node_base_pointer>(__nd));
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__r = __nd;
}
return iterator(__r);
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::iterator
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__node_insert_multi(__node_pointer __nd)
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__parent_pointer __parent;
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
__node_base_pointer& __child = __find_leaf_high(__parent, _NodeTypes::__get_key(__nd->__value_));
__insert_node_at(__parent, __child, static_cast<__node_base_pointer>(__nd));
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
return iterator(__nd);
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::iterator
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__node_insert_multi(const_iterator __p,
__node_pointer __nd)
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__parent_pointer __parent;
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
__node_base_pointer& __child = __find_leaf(__p, __parent, _NodeTypes::__get_key(__nd->__value_));
__insert_node_at(__parent, __child, static_cast<__node_base_pointer>(__nd));
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
return iterator(__nd);
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::iterator
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::erase(const_iterator __p)
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__node_pointer __np = __p.__get_np();
iterator __r(__p.__ptr_);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
++__r;
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
if (__begin_node() == __p.__ptr_)
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__begin_node() = __r.__ptr_;
--size();
__node_allocator& __na = __node_alloc();
__tree_remove(__end_node()->__left_,
static_cast<__node_base_pointer>(__np));
Teach __tree how to handle map's __value_type This patch is fairly large and contains a number of changes. The changes all work towards allowing __tree to properly handle __value_type esspecially when inserting into the __tree. I chose not to break this change into smaller patches because it wouldn't be possible to write meaningful standard-compliant tests for each patch. It is very similar to r260513 "[libcxx] Teach __hash_table how to handle unordered_map's __hash_value_type". Changes in <map> * Remove __value_type's constructors because it should never be constructed directly. * Make map::emplace and multimap::emplace forward to __tree and remove the old definitions * Remove "__construct_node" map and multimap member functions. Almost all of the construction is done within __tree. * Fix map's move constructor to access "__value_type.__nc" directly and pass this object to __tree::insert. Changes in <__tree> * Add traits to detect, handle, and unwrap, map's "__value_type". * Convert methods taking "value_type" to take "__container_value_type" instead. Previously these methods caused unwanted implicit conversions from "std::pair<Key, Value>" to "__value_type<Key, Value>". * Delete __tree_node and __tree_node_base's constructors and assignment operators. The node types should never be constructed because the "__value_" member of __tree_node must be constructed directly by the allocator. * Make the __tree_node_destructor class and "__construct_node" methods unwrap "__node_value_type" into "__container_value_type" before invoking the allocator. The user's allocator can only be used to construct and destroy the container's value_type. Passing it map's "__value_type" was incorrect. * Cleanup the "__insert" and "__emplace" methods. Have __insert forward to an __emplace function wherever possible to reduce code duplication. __insert_unique(value_type const&) and __insert_unique(value_type&&) forward to __emplace_unique_key_args. These functions will not allocate a new node if the value is already in the tree. * Change the __find* functions to take the "key_type" directly instead of passing in "value_type" and unwrapping the key later. This change allows the find functions to be used without having to construct a "value_type" first. This allows for a number of optimizations. * Teach __move_assign and __assign_multi methods to unwrap map's __value_type. llvm-svn: 264986
2016-03-31 10:15:15 +08:00
__node_traits::destroy(__na, _NodeTypes::__get_ptr(
const_cast<__node_value_type&>(*__p)));
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__node_traits::deallocate(__na, __np, 1);
return __r;
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::iterator
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::erase(const_iterator __f, const_iterator __l)
{
while (__f != __l)
__f = erase(__f);
return iterator(__l.__ptr_);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
template <class _Key>
typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::size_type
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__erase_unique(const _Key& __k)
{
iterator __i = find(__k);
if (__i == end())
return 0;
erase(__i);
return 1;
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
template <class _Key>
typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::size_type
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__erase_multi(const _Key& __k)
{
pair<iterator, iterator> __p = __equal_range_multi(__k);
size_type __r = 0;
for (; __p.first != __p.second; ++__r)
__p.first = erase(__p.first);
return __r;
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
template <class _Key>
typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::iterator
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::find(const _Key& __v)
{
iterator __p = __lower_bound(__v, __root(), __end_node());
if (__p != end() && !value_comp()(__v, *__p))
return __p;
return end();
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
template <class _Key>
typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::const_iterator
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::find(const _Key& __v) const
{
const_iterator __p = __lower_bound(__v, __root(), __end_node());
if (__p != end() && !value_comp()(__v, *__p))
return __p;
return end();
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
template <class _Key>
typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::size_type
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__count_unique(const _Key& __k) const
{
__node_pointer __rt = __root();
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
while (__rt != nullptr)
{
if (value_comp()(__k, __rt->__value_))
{
__rt = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__rt->__left_);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
else if (value_comp()(__rt->__value_, __k))
__rt = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__rt->__right_);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
else
return 1;
}
return 0;
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
template <class _Key>
typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::size_type
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__count_multi(const _Key& __k) const
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__iter_pointer __result = __end_node();
__node_pointer __rt = __root();
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
while (__rt != nullptr)
{
if (value_comp()(__k, __rt->__value_))
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__result = static_cast<__iter_pointer>(__rt);
__rt = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__rt->__left_);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
else if (value_comp()(__rt->__value_, __k))
__rt = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__rt->__right_);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
else
return _VSTD::distance(
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__lower_bound(__k, static_cast<__node_pointer>(__rt->__left_), static_cast<__iter_pointer>(__rt)),
__upper_bound(__k, static_cast<__node_pointer>(__rt->__right_), __result)
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
);
}
return 0;
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
template <class _Key>
typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::iterator
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__lower_bound(const _Key& __v,
__node_pointer __root,
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__iter_pointer __result)
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
while (__root != nullptr)
{
if (!value_comp()(__root->__value_, __v))
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__result = static_cast<__iter_pointer>(__root);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__root = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__root->__left_);
}
else
__root = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__root->__right_);
}
return iterator(__result);
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
template <class _Key>
typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::const_iterator
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__lower_bound(const _Key& __v,
__node_pointer __root,
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__iter_pointer __result) const
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
while (__root != nullptr)
{
if (!value_comp()(__root->__value_, __v))
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__result = static_cast<__iter_pointer>(__root);
__root = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__root->__left_);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
else
__root = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__root->__right_);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
return const_iterator(__result);
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
template <class _Key>
typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::iterator
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__upper_bound(const _Key& __v,
__node_pointer __root,
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__iter_pointer __result)
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
while (__root != nullptr)
{
if (value_comp()(__v, __root->__value_))
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__result = static_cast<__iter_pointer>(__root);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__root = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__root->__left_);
}
else
__root = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__root->__right_);
}
return iterator(__result);
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
template <class _Key>
typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::const_iterator
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__upper_bound(const _Key& __v,
__node_pointer __root,
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__iter_pointer __result) const
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
while (__root != nullptr)
{
if (value_comp()(__v, __root->__value_))
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__result = static_cast<__iter_pointer>(__root);
__root = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__root->__left_);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
else
__root = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__root->__right_);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
return const_iterator(__result);
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
template <class _Key>
pair<typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::iterator,
typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::iterator>
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__equal_range_unique(const _Key& __k)
{
typedef pair<iterator, iterator> _Pp;
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__iter_pointer __result = __end_node();
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__node_pointer __rt = __root();
while (__rt != nullptr)
{
if (value_comp()(__k, __rt->__value_))
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__result = static_cast<__iter_pointer>(__rt);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__rt = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__rt->__left_);
}
else if (value_comp()(__rt->__value_, __k))
__rt = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__rt->__right_);
else
return _Pp(iterator(__rt),
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
iterator(
__rt->__right_ != nullptr ?
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
static_cast<__iter_pointer>(__tree_min(__rt->__right_))
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
: __result));
}
return _Pp(iterator(__result), iterator(__result));
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
template <class _Key>
pair<typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::const_iterator,
typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::const_iterator>
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__equal_range_unique(const _Key& __k) const
{
typedef pair<const_iterator, const_iterator> _Pp;
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__iter_pointer __result = __end_node();
__node_pointer __rt = __root();
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
while (__rt != nullptr)
{
if (value_comp()(__k, __rt->__value_))
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__result = static_cast<__iter_pointer>(__rt);
__rt = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__rt->__left_);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
else if (value_comp()(__rt->__value_, __k))
__rt = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__rt->__right_);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
else
return _Pp(const_iterator(__rt),
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
const_iterator(
__rt->__right_ != nullptr ?
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
static_cast<__iter_pointer>(__tree_min(__rt->__right_))
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
: __result));
}
return _Pp(const_iterator(__result), const_iterator(__result));
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
template <class _Key>
pair<typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::iterator,
typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::iterator>
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__equal_range_multi(const _Key& __k)
{
typedef pair<iterator, iterator> _Pp;
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__iter_pointer __result = __end_node();
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__node_pointer __rt = __root();
while (__rt != nullptr)
{
if (value_comp()(__k, __rt->__value_))
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__result = static_cast<__iter_pointer>(__rt);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__rt = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__rt->__left_);
}
else if (value_comp()(__rt->__value_, __k))
__rt = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__rt->__right_);
else
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
return _Pp(__lower_bound(__k, static_cast<__node_pointer>(__rt->__left_), static_cast<__iter_pointer>(__rt)),
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
__upper_bound(__k, static_cast<__node_pointer>(__rt->__right_), __result));
}
return _Pp(iterator(__result), iterator(__result));
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
template <class _Key>
pair<typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::const_iterator,
typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::const_iterator>
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__equal_range_multi(const _Key& __k) const
{
typedef pair<const_iterator, const_iterator> _Pp;
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__iter_pointer __result = __end_node();
__node_pointer __rt = __root();
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
while (__rt != nullptr)
{
if (value_comp()(__k, __rt->__value_))
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__result = static_cast<__iter_pointer>(__rt);
__rt = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__rt->__left_);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
else if (value_comp()(__rt->__value_, __k))
__rt = static_cast<__node_pointer>(__rt->__right_);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
else
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
return _Pp(__lower_bound(__k, static_cast<__node_pointer>(__rt->__left_), static_cast<__iter_pointer>(__rt)),
__upper_bound(__k, static_cast<__node_pointer>(__rt->__right_), __result));
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
return _Pp(const_iterator(__result), const_iterator(__result));
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
typename __tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::__node_holder
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>::remove(const_iterator __p) _NOEXCEPT
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__node_pointer __np = __p.__get_np();
if (__begin_node() == __p.__ptr_)
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
{
if (__np->__right_ != nullptr)
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__begin_node() = static_cast<__iter_pointer>(__np->__right_);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
else
Fix undefined behavior in __tree Summary: This patch attempts to fix the undefined behavior in __tree by changing the node pointer types used throughout. The pointer types are changed for raw pointers in the current ABI and for fancy pointers in ABI V2 (since the fancy pointer types may not be ABI compatible). The UB in `__tree` arises because tree downcasts the embedded end node and then deferences that pointer. Currently there are 3 node types in __tree. * `__tree_end_node` which contains the `__left_` pointer. This node is embedded within the container. * `__tree_node_base` which contains `__right_`, `__parent_` and `__is_black`. This node is used throughout the tree rebalancing algorithms. * `__tree_node` which contains `__value_`. Currently `__tree` stores the start of the tree, `__begin_node_`, as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. Additionally the iterators store their position as a pointer to a `__tree_node`. In both of these cases the pointee can be the end node. This is fixed by changing them to store `__tree_end_node` pointers instead. To make this change I introduced an `__iter_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node` in the current one. Both `__tree::__begin_node_` and iterator pointers are now stored as `__iter_pointers`. The other situation where `__tree_end_node` is stored as the wrong type is in `__tree_node_base::__parent_`. Currently `__left_`, `__right_`, and `__parent_` are all `__tree_node_base` pointers. Since the end node will only be stored in `__parent_` the fix is to change `__parent_` to be a pointer to `__tree_end_node`. To make this change I introduced a `__parent_pointer` typedef which is defined to be a pointer to either `__tree_end_node` in the new ABI or `__tree_node_base` in the current one. Note that in the new ABI `__iter_pointer` and `__parent_pointer` are the same type (but not in the old one). The confusion between these two types is unfortunate but it was the best solution I could come up with that maintains the ABI. The typedef changes force a ton of explicit type casts to correct pointer types and to make current code compatible with both the old and new pointer typedefs. This is the bulk of the change and it's really messy. Unfortunately I don't know how to avoid it. Please let me know what you think. Reviewers: howard.hinnant, mclow.lists Subscribers: howard.hinnant, bbannier, cfe-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20786 llvm-svn: 276003
2016-07-20 01:56:20 +08:00
__begin_node() = static_cast<__iter_pointer>(__np->__parent_);
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
--size();
__tree_remove(__end_node()->__left_,
static_cast<__node_base_pointer>(__np));
return __node_holder(__np, _Dp(__node_alloc(), true));
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
}
2011-06-04 22:31:57 +08:00
template <class _Tp, class _Compare, class _Allocator>
inline _LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
void
swap(__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>& __x,
__tree<_Tp, _Compare, _Allocator>& __y)
_NOEXCEPT_(_NOEXCEPT_(__x.swap(__y)))
{
__x.swap(__y);
}
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
_LIBCPP_END_NAMESPACE_STD
_LIBCPP_POP_MACROS
2010-05-12 03:42:16 +08:00
#endif // _LIBCPP___TREE