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
`uniform_int_distribution<T>` is UB unless `T` is one of the non-character,
non-boolean integer types (`short` or larger). However, libc++ has never
enforced this. D114129 accidentally made `uniform_int_distribution<bool>`
into an error. Make it now *intentionally* an error; and likewise for the
character types and all user-defined class and enum types; but permit
`__[u]int128_t` to continue working.
Apply the same static_assert to all the integer distributions.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D114920
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 It's very likely that outdated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
In addition to being more consistent with our approach for helpers, this
solves an actual issue where <cmath> was using numeric_limits but never
including the <limits> header directly. In a normal setup, this is not
an issue because the <math.h> header included by <cmath> does include
<limits>. However, I did stumble upon some code where that didn't work,
most likely because they were placing their own <math.h> header in front
of ours. I didn't bother investigating further.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D115282
Actually there's one functional change here, which is that users can
no longer depend on <random> to include all of C++20 <concepts>. That
inclusion is so new that we believe nobody should be depending on it
yet, even in the presence of Hyrum's Law. We keep the includes of <vector>,
<algorithm>, etc., so as not to break pre-C++20 Hyrum's Law users.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D114281
Arthur O'Dwyer