This patch adds the weak_type typedef in shared_ptr. It is available in
C++17 and newer.
This patch also updates the _LIBCPP_STD_VER and TEST_STD_VER macros to
have the value of 16, since 2016 is the current year.
llvm-svn: 273839
So the macros TEST_HAS_NO_EXCEPTIONS and TEST_HAS_NO_RTTI were always
getting defined because I spelt __cpp_exceptions and __cpp_rtti as
__cxx_exceptions and __cxx_rtti.
Tests incoming after this patch.
llvm-svn: 273381
Add the completed std::experimental::filesystem implementation and tests.
The implementation supports C++11 or newer.
The TS is built as part of 'libc++experimental.a'. Users of the TS need to
manually link this library. Building and testing the TS can be disabled using
the CMake option '-DLIBCXX_ENABLE_FILESYSTEM=OFF'.
Currently 'libc++experimental.a' is not installed by default. To turn on the
installation of the library use '-DLIBCXX_INSTALL_EXPERIMENTAL_LIBRARY=ON'.
llvm-svn: 273034
Summary:
After putting this question up on cfe-dev I have decided that it would be best to allow the use of `<atomic>` in C++03. Although static initialization is a concern the syntax required to get it is C++11 only. Meaning that C++11 constant static initialization cannot silently break in C++03, it will always cause a syntax error. Furthermore `ATOMIC_VAR_INIT` and `ATOMIC_FLAG_INIT` remain defined in C++03 even though they cannot be used because C++03 usages will cause better error messages.
The main change in this patch is to replace `__has_feature(cxx_atomic)`, which only returns true when C++ >= 11, to `__has_extension(c_atomic)` which returns true whenever clang supports the required atomic builtins.
This patch adds the following macros:
* `_LIBCPP_HAS_C_ATOMIC_IMP` - Defined on clang versions which provide the C `_Atomic` keyword.
* `_LIBCPP_HAS_GCC_ATOMIC_IMP` - Defined on GCC > 4.7. We must use the fallback atomic implementation.
* `_LIBCPP_HAS_NO_ATOMIC_HEADER` - Defined when it is not safe to include `<atomic>`.
`_LIBCPP_HAS_C_ATOMIC_IMP` and `_LIBCPP_HAS_GCC_ATOMIC_IMP` are mutually exclusive, only one should be defined. If neither is defined then `<atomic>` is not implemented and including `<atomic>` will issue an error.
Reviewers: chandlerc, jroelofs, mclow.lists
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11555
llvm-svn: 245463
Eric Fiselier