Deduction guides for containers should not participate in overload
resolution when called with certain incorrect types (e.g. when called
with a template argument in place of an `InputIterator` that doesn't
qualify as an input iterator). Similarly, class template argument
deduction should not select `unique_ptr` constructors that take a
a pointer.
The tests try out every possible incorrect parameter (but never more
than one incorrect parameter in the same invocation).
Also add deduction guides to the synopsis for associative and unordered
containers (this was accidentally omitted from [D112510](https://reviews.llvm.org/D112510)).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D112904
In other places in the code, we use lowercase spelling for things that
are not available in prior standards.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D109435
I just ran into a compiler error involving __bind_back and some overloads
that were being disabled with _EnableIf. I noticed that the error message
was quite bad and did not mention the reason for the overload being
excluded. Specifically, the error looked like this:
candidate template ignored: substitution failure [with _Args =
<ContiguousView>]: no member named '_EnableIfImpl' in 'std::_MetaBase<false>'
Instead, when using enable_if or enable_if_t, the compiler is clever and
can produce better diagnostics, like so:
candidate template ignored: requirement 'is_invocable_v<
std::__bind_back_op<1, std::integer_sequence<unsigned long, 0>>,
std::ranges::views::__transform::__fn &, std::tuple<PlusOne> &,
ContiguousView>' was not satisfied [with _Args = <ContiguousView>]
Basically, it tries to do a poor man's implementation of concepts, which
is already a lot better than simply complaining about substitution failure.
Hence, this commit uses enable_if_t instead of _EnableIf whenever
possible. That is both more straightforward than using the internal
helper, and also leads to better error messages in those cases.
I understand the motivation for _EnableIf's implementation was to improve
compile-time performance, however I believe striving to improve error
messages is even more important for our QOI, hence this patch. Furthermore,
it is unclear that _EnableIf actually improved compile-time performance
in any noticeable way (see discussion in the review for details).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D108216
All supported compilers have supported deduction guides in C++17 for a
while, so this isn't necessary anymore.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D108213
Implement the changes in all language modes.
LWG3506 "Missing allocator-extended constructors for priority_queue"
makes the following changes:
- New allocator-extended constructors for priority_queue.
- New deduction guides targeting those constructors.
LWG3522: "Missing requirement on InputIterator template parameter
for priority_queue constructors". The iterator parameter should be
constrained to actually be an iterator type. `priority_queue{1,2}`
should be SFINAE-friendly ill-formed.
Also, do a drive-by fix in the allocator-extended move constructor:
there's no need to do a `make_heap` after moving from `__q.c` into
our own `c`, because that container was already heapified when it
was part of `__q`. [priqueue.cons.alloc] actually specifies the
behavior and does *not* mention calling `make_heap`. I think this
was just a copy-paste thinko. It dates back to the initial import
of libc++.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D106824
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D106827
Moves:
* `std::move`, `std::forward`, `std::declval`, and `std::swap` into
`__utility/${FUNCTION_NAME}`.
* `std::swap_ranges` and `std::iter_swap` into
`__algorithm/${FUNCTION_NAME}`
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103734
P1518 does the following in C++23 but we'll just do it in C++17 as well:
- Stop requiring `Alloc` to be an allocator on some container-adaptor deduction guides
- Stop deducing from `Allocator` on some sequence container constructors
- Stop deducing from `Allocator` on some other container constructors (libc++ already did this)
The affected constructors are the "allocator-extended" versions of
constructors where the non-allocator arguments are already sufficient
to deduce the allocator type. For example,
std::pmr::vector<int> v1;
std::vector v2(v1, std::pmr::new_delete_resource());
std::stack s2(v1, std::pmr::new_delete_resource());
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D97742
As mandated by the Standard's various synopses, e.g. [iterator.synopsis].
Searching the TeX source for '#include' is a good way to find all of these
mandates.
The new tests are all autogenerated by utils/generate_header_inclusion_tests.py.
I was SHOCKED by how many mandates there are, and how many of them
libc++ wasn't conforming with.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D99309
Specifically, use these metafunctions consistently in areas that are
about to be affected by P1518R2's changes.
This is the NFCI part of https://reviews.llvm.org/D97742 .
The functional-change part is still waiting for P1518R2 to be
officially merged into the working draft.
With the upcoming introduction of iterator concepts in ranges,
the meaning of "__is_contiguous_iterator" changes drastically.
Currently we intend it to mean "does it have this iterator category",
but it could now also mean "does it meet the requirements of this
concept", and these can be different.
to reflect the new license. These used slightly different spellings that
defeated my regular expressions.
We understand that people may be surprised that we're moving the header
entirely to discuss the new license. We checked this carefully with the
Foundation's lawyer and we believe this is the correct approach.
Essentially, all code in the project is now made available by the LLVM
project under our new license, so you will see that the license headers
include that license only. Some of our contributors have contributed
code under our old license, and accordingly, we have retained a copy of
our old license notice in the top-level files in each project and
repository.
llvm-svn: 351648
The name _LIBCPP_TYPE_VIS_ONLY is no longer accurate because both
_LIBCPP_TYPE_VIS and _LIBCPP_TYPE_VIS_ONLY expand to
__attribute__((__type_visibility__)) with Clang. The only remaining difference
is that _LIBCPP_TYPE_VIS_ONLY can be applied to templates whereas
_LIBCPP_TYPE_VIS cannot (due to dllimport/dllexport not being allowed on
templates).
This patch renames _LIBCPP_TYPE_VIS_ONLY to _LIBCPP_TEMPLATE_VIS.
llvm-svn: 291035
Konstantin Varlamov