- add zip_view and views::zip for C++23
- added unit tests
- implemented section 5.6 (zip) in P2321R2
I used clang-format to format the files but they look nothing like the rest of the code base. Manually indenting each line to match the styles sounds like an impossible task. Is there any clang-format file which can format it reasonable similar to the rest of the code base so that I can manually format the rest lines that look weird?
Reviewed By: ldionne, #libc, philnik, var-const
Spies: Mordante, philnik, libcxx-commits, mgorny
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D122806
- added views::join adaptor object
- added test for the adaptor object
- fixed some join_view's tests. e.g iter_swap test
- added some negative tests for join_view to test that operations do not exist when constraints aren't met
- added tests that locks down issues that were already addressed in previous change
- LWG3500 `join_view::iterator::operator->()` is bogus
- LWG3313 `join_view::iterator::operator--` is incorrectly constrained
- LWG3517 `join_view::iterator`'s `iter_swap` is underconstrained
- P2328R1 join_view should join all views of ranges
- fixed some issues in join_view and added tests
- LWG3535 `join_view::iterator::iterator_category` and `::iterator_concept` lie
- LWG3474 Nesting ``join_views`` is broken because of CTAD
- added tests for an LWG issue that isn't resolved in the standard yet, but the previous code has workaround.
- LWG3569 Inner iterator not default_initializable
Reviewed By: #libc, var-const
Spies: var-const, libcxx-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D123466
Note that this class was called just `split_view` in the original One
Ranges Proposal and was renamed to `lazy_split_view` by
[P2210](https://wg21.link/p2210).
Co-authored-by: zoecarver <z.zoelec2@gmail.com>
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D107500
[libc++] add global variable template std::views::empty
Note it is neither a range adaptor, nor a CPO. It is simplify a global variable template.
Reviewed By: #libc, Mordante
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D122996
All supported compilers that support C++20 now support concepts. So, remove
`_LIB_LIBCPP_HAS_NO_CONCEPTS` in favor of `_LIBCPP_STD_VER > 17`. Similarly in
the tests, remove `// UNSUPPORTED: libcpp-no-concepts`.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D121528
Zero-sized types are a GCC extension, also supported by Clang.
In theory it's already invalid to `delete` a void pointer or a
pointer-to-incomplete, so we shouldn't need any special code
to catch those cases; but in practice Clang accepts both
constructs with just a warning, and GCC even accepts `sizeof(void)`
with just a warning! So we must keep the static_asserts.
The hard errors are tested in `unique_ptr_dltr_dflt/*.compile.fail.cpp`.
In ranges::begin/end, check `sizeof >= 0` instead of `sizeof != 0`,
so as to permit zero-sized types while still disallowing incomplete
types.
Fixes#54100.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D120633
This commit reverts 5aaefa51 (and also partly 7f285f48e7 and b6d75682f9,
which were related to the original commit). As landed, 5aaefa51 had
unintended consequences on some downstream bots and didn't have proper
coverage upstream due to a few subtle things. Implementing this is
something we should do in libc++, however we'll first need to address
a few issues listed in https://reviews.llvm.org/D106124#3349710.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D120683
libc++ has started splicing standard library headers into much more
fine-grained content for maintainability. It's very likely that outdated
and naive tooling (some of which is outside of LLVM's scope) will
suggest users include things such as <__ranges/access.h> instead of
<ranges>, and Hyrum's law suggests that users will eventually begin to
rely on this without the help of tooling. As such, this commit
intends to protect users from themselves, by making it a hard error for
anyone outside of the standard library to include libc++ detail headers.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D106124
This is the first step towards disentangling the debug mode and assertions
in libc++. This patch doesn't make any functional change: it simply moves
_LIBCPP_ASSERT-related stuff to its own file so as to make it clear that
libc++ assertions and the debug mode are different things. Future patches
will make it possible to enable assertions without enabling the debug
mode.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D119769
As suggested in D117966.
These conditional noexcepts are *permitted* by the Standard (as long
as there were no mistakes in them, I guess); but not *mandated*.
The Standard doesn't put any noexcept-specifications on these member functions.
The same logic would apply to `transform_view::iterator::operator*`
and `transform_view::iterator::operator[]`, but the Standard mandates
conditional noexcept on `iter_move(transform_view::iterator)`, and
I think it doesn't make much sense to say "moving from this iterator
is conditionally noexcept but not-moving from it is noexcept(false),"
so I'm leaving transform_view alone for now.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D119374
The logic here is that we are disabling *only* things in `std::ranges::`.
Everything in `std::` is permitted, including `default_sentinel`, `contiguous_iterator`,
`common_iterator`, `projected`, `swappable`, and so on. Then, we include
anything from `std::ranges::` that is required in order to make those things
work: `ranges::swap`, `ranges::swap_ranges`, `input_range`, `ranges::begin`,
`ranges::iter_move`, and so on. But then that's all. Everything else (including
notably all of the "views" and the `std::views` namespace itself) is still
locked up behind `_LIBCPP_HAS_NO_INCOMPLETE_RANGES`.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D118736
Despite the comment saying `[[no_unique_address]]` on the `__base_` data member
makes clang crash, this does not seem to be true on CI. So, mark `__base_` with
`_LIBCPP_NO_UNIQUE_ADDRESS`.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D119208
- add some test cases for `cbegin`/`cend`;
- make class definitions generally follow the order in which they are
used;
- add a missing include.
Reviewed By: philnik
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D119214
var-const points out that `ranges::begin` is (non-normatively
but explicitly) always supposed to return a `std::input_or_output_iterator`,
and `Incomplete*` is not a `std::input_or_output_iterator` because it
has no `operator++`. Therefore, we should never return `Incomplete*`
from `ranges::begin(x)`, even when `x` is `Incomplete(&)[]`. Instead,
just SFINAE away.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D118963
Discovered in the comments on D118748: we would like this namespace
to exist anytime Ranges exists, regardless of whether concepts syntax
is supported. Also, we'd like to fully granularize the <ranges> header,
which means not putting any loose declarations at the top level.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D118809
Per Discord discussion, we're normalizing on a simple `!defined(_LIBCPP_HAS_NO_CONCEPTS)`
so that we can do a big search-and-replace for `!defined(_LIBCPP_HAS_NO_CONCEPTS)`
back into `_LIBCPP_STD_VER > 17` when we're ready to abandon support for concept-syntax-less
compilers.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D118748
With this patch there should be no more namespaces without closing comment
Reviewed By: ldionne, Quuxplusone, #libc
Spies: libcxx-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D118668
Each "Nothing To Do" issue only changed nits in the English wording,
not anything to do with the code.
Each "Complete" issue was completed already, as far as I can tell.
I tried to err on the side of caution: I didn't mark a few issues
whose P/Rs were very invasive and would take time to verify, and I
didn't mark a lot of issues involving features we haven't even started
yet.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D117960
The macro that opts out of `std::ranges::` functionality is called
`_LIBCPP_HAS_NO_INCOMPLETE_RANGES`, and is unrelated to this macro
which is specifically about _compiler_ support for the _syntax_.
The only non-mechanical diff here is in `<__config>`.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D118507
Fixed in counted_iterator and transform_view::iterator.
The LWG issue also affected elements_view::iterator, but we haven't
implemented that one yet, and whoever does implement it will get
the fix for free if they just follow the working draft's wording.
Drive-by stop calling `.base()` on test iterators in the test,
and improve the transform_view::iterator/sentinel tests.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D117329
Implement LWG3549 by making `view_interface` not inherit from `view_base`. Types
are still views if they have a public and unambiguous derivation from
`view_interface`, so adjust the `enable_view` machinery as such to account for
that.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D117714
Also remove some bogus `std::forward`s. My impression is that these
forwards were actually harmless, because `ranges::begin(FWD(t))` is
always identical to `ranges::begin(t)` (except when it's ill-formed,
and that can't happen in this case). However, they're also superfluous
and don't reflect the wording in the standard, so let's eliminate them.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D117043
The NFC part of D116809. We still want to enforce this in CI,
but the mechanism for that is still to-be-determined.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D116809
For example, `std::ranges::range<Holder<Incomplete>*>` should be
well-formed false, not a hard error at compile time.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D116239
The big change here is that they now work as intended for rvalues,
e.g. `ranges::cbegin(std::string_view("hello"))`.
Also, add tests verifying their return types.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D116199
It was missing the cast to `bool` in `bool(__t.empty())`.
It was wrongly using `std::forward` in some places.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D115312
These headers have stabilized; we don't expect anyone to be
blindly clang-formatting them anymore.
Leave the comments in `__format/*.h` for Mark to remove at his leisure.
Clang is gaining `auto(x)` support in D113393; sadly there
seems to be no feature-test macro for it. Zhihao is opening
a core issue for that macro.
Use `_LIBCPP_AUTO_CAST` where C++20 specifies we should use `auto(x)`;
stop using `__decay_copy(x)` in those places.
In fact, remove `__decay_copy` entirely. As of C++20, it's purely
a paper specification tool signifying "Return just `x`, but it was
perfect-forwarded, so we understand you're going to have to call
its move-constructor sometimes." I believe there's no reason we'd
ever need to do its operation explicitly in code.
This heisenbugs away a test failure on MinGW; see D112214.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D115686
Hui Xie