Now in libcxx and clang, all the coroutine components are defined in
std::experimental namespace.
And now the coroutine TS is merged into C++20. So in the working draft
like N4892, we could find the coroutine components is defined in std
namespace instead of std::experimental namespace.
And the coroutine support in clang seems to be relatively stable. So I
think it may be suitable to move the coroutine component into the
experiment namespace now.
This patch would make clang lookup coroutine_traits in std namespace
first. For the compatibility consideration, clang would lookup in
std::experimental namespace if it can't find definitions in std
namespace. So the existing codes wouldn't be break after update
compiler.
And in case the compiler found std::coroutine_traits and
std::experimental::coroutine_traits at the same time, it would emit an
error for it.
The support for looking up std::experimental::coroutine_traits would be
removed in Clang16.
Reviewed By: lxfind, Quuxplusone
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D108696
This reverts commit 2fbd254aa4, which broke the libc++ CI. I'm reverting
to get things stable again until we've figured out a way forward.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D108696
Summary: Now in libcxx and clang, all the coroutine components are
defined in std::experimental namespace.
And now the coroutine TS is merged into C++20. So in the working draft
like N4892, we could find the coroutine components is defined in std
namespace instead of std::experimental namespace.
And the coroutine support in clang seems to be relatively stable. So I
think it may be suitable to move the coroutine component into the
experiment namespace now.
But move the coroutine component into the std namespace may be an break
change. So I planned to split this change into two patch. One in clang
and other in libcxx.
This patch would make clang lookup coroutine_traits in std namespace
first. For the compatibility consideration, clang would lookup in
std::experimental namespace if it can't find definitions in std
namespace and emit a warning in this case. So the existing codes
wouldn't be break after update compiler.
Test Plan: check-clang, check-libcxx
Reviewed By: lxfind
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D108696
Summary:
Previously we tried too hard to uphold the fiction that destructor
variants work like they do on Itanium throughout the ABI-neutral parts
of clang. This lead to MS C++ ABI incompatiblities and other bugs. Now,
-mconstructor-aliases will no longer control this ABI detail, and clang
-cc1's LLVM IR output will be this much closer to the clang driver's.
Based on a patch by Zahira Ammarguellat:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D39063
I've tried to move the logic that Zahira added into MicrosoftCXXABI.cpp.
There is only one ABI-specific detail sticking out, and that is in
CodeGenModule::getAddrOfCXXStructor, where we collapse complete dtors to
base dtors in the MS ABI.
This fixes PR32990.
Reviewers: erichkeane, zahiraam, majnemer, rjmccall
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D44505
llvm-svn: 327732
Summary:
If unhandled_exception member function is present in the coroutine promise,
wrap the body of the coroutine in:
```
try {
body
} catch(...) { promise.unhandled_exception(); }
```
Reviewers: EricWF, rnk, rsmith
Reviewed By: rsmith
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31692
llvm-svn: 303583
Summary:
For WinEH, We add a funclet bundle to a coro.end call, so that CoroSplit in LLVM can replace it with cleanup ret and cut the rest out.
For landing pad, we add a branch to resume block if coro.end returns true.
LLVM Part: https://reviews.llvm.org/D25445
Reviewers: majnemer
Reviewed By: majnemer
Subscribers: EricWF, cfe-commits, rsmith, mehdi_amini
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D25444
llvm-svn: 299510
Chuanqi Xu