[libc++] Remove the CI job testing Clang 15 (#66406)

Since LLVM 17 has been branched and is on the verge of being released,
we can drop the CI job that tests against Clang 15. I think the number
o

[libc++] Remove the CI job testing Clang 15 (#66406)

Since LLVM 17 has been branched and is on the verge of being released,
we can drop the CI job that tests against Clang 15. I think the number
of cherry-picks to `release/17.x` will be a lot smaller now, so keeping
a Clang 15 job around for that purpose seems unnecessary.

As a fly-by, this patch also removes some Clang 15 workarounds and test
suite annotations as we usually do. It also removes some slightly older
gcc test suite annotations that were missed.

show more ...

[libc++] Removes Clang 14 support.

Per our policy we only support the last two releases.

Reviewed By: #libc, EricWF, philnik

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D148359

[libc++] Removes Clang 13 support.

Reviewed By: #libc, ldionne, jloser

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D133435

[libc++] Define _LIBCPP_HAS_NO_PRAGMA_SYSTEM_HEADER whenever we enable warnings in the test suite

This should make CI consistent on all the compilers we support. Most of
this patch is working around

[libc++] Define _LIBCPP_HAS_NO_PRAGMA_SYSTEM_HEADER whenever we enable warnings in the test suite

This should make CI consistent on all the compilers we support. Most of
this patch is working around various warnings emitted by GCC in our code
base, which are now being shown when we compile the tests.

After this patch, the whole test suite should be warning free on all
compilers we support and test, except for a few warnings on GCC that
we silence explicitly until we figure out the proper fix for them.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D120684

show more ...

[libc++] Add UNSUPPORTED for clang-15

This started breaking in the CI because we bumped the Clang version
to 15, which requires adjusting the markup in the test suite.

Differential Revision: https:

[libc++] Add UNSUPPORTED for clang-15

This started breaking in the CI because we bumped the Clang version
to 15, which requires adjusting the markup in the test suite.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D118838

show more ...

[libc++] Add UNSUPPORTED for clang-14 since the underlying bug hasn't been fixed yet

This started breaking in the CI because we bumped the Clang version to 14,
which requires adjusting the markup in

[libc++] Add UNSUPPORTED for clang-14 since the underlying bug hasn't been fixed yet

This started breaking in the CI because we bumped the Clang version to 14,
which requires adjusting the markup in the test suite. I think it's actually
nice the we need to do that and that it doesn't happen automatically, since
it serves as a reminder that this is broken in Clang.

show more ...

[libc++] Mark convert_copy.pass.cpp as UNSUPPORTED on clang-13 (i.e. trunk).

Because the constexpr-time codepath triggers a Clang bug. It seems
that Clang compiles it okay in release mode, but when

[libc++] Mark convert_copy.pass.cpp as UNSUPPORTED on clang-13 (i.e. trunk).

Because the constexpr-time codepath triggers a Clang bug. It seems
that Clang compiles it okay in release mode, but when Clang itself
is compiled in debug mode (with assertions turned on), this input
triggers an assertion failure in Clang itself. See comments on D96385
and Clang bug report https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45879

This commit should get the debug-mode buildbots back to green.

show more ...

[libc++] [P1032] Misc constexpr bits in <iterator>, <string_view>, <tuple>, <utility>.

This completes the implementation of P1032's changes to <iterator>,
<string_view>, <tuple>, and <utility> in C+

[libc++] [P1032] Misc constexpr bits in <iterator>, <string_view>, <tuple>, <utility>.

This completes the implementation of P1032's changes to <iterator>,
<string_view>, <tuple>, and <utility> in C++20.
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2018/p1032r1.html

Drive-by fix a couple of unintended rvalues in "*iterators*/*.fail.cpp".

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D96385

show more ...

[libc++] NFC: Fix a few tests in tuple that would succeed trivially

[libc++] Fix tuple assignment from types derived from a tuple-like

The implementation of tuple's constructors and assignment operators
currently diverges from the way the Standard specifies them, wh

[libc++] Fix tuple assignment from types derived from a tuple-like

The implementation of tuple's constructors and assignment operators
currently diverges from the way the Standard specifies them, which leads
to subtle cases where the behavior is not as specified. In particular, a
class derived from a tuple-like type (e.g. pair) can't be assigned to a
tuple with corresponding members, when it should. This commit re-implements
the assignment operators (BUT NOT THE CONSTRUCTORS) in a way much closer
to the specification to get rid of this bug. Most of the tests have been
stolen from Eric's patch https://reviews.llvm.org/D27606.

As a fly-by improvement, tests for noexcept correctness have been added
to all overloads of operator=. We should tackle the same issue for the
tuple constructors in a future patch - I'm just trying to make progress
on fixing this long-standing bug.

PR17550
rdar://15837420

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D50106

show more ...

[libc++][nfc] SFINAE on pair/tuple assignment operators: LWG 2729.

This patch ensures that SFINAE is used to delete assignment operators in pair and tuple based on issue 2729.

Differential Review:

[libc++][nfc] SFINAE on pair/tuple assignment operators: LWG 2729.

This patch ensures that SFINAE is used to delete assignment operators in pair and tuple based on issue 2729.

Differential Review: https://reviews.llvm.org/D62454

show more ...

[libc++] Remove the c++98 Lit feature from the test suite

C++98 and C++03 are effectively aliases as far as Clang is concerned.
As such, allowing both std=c++98 and std=c++03 as Lit parameters is
ju

[libc++] Remove the c++98 Lit feature from the test suite

C++98 and C++03 are effectively aliases as far as Clang is concerned.
As such, allowing both std=c++98 and std=c++03 as Lit parameters is
just slightly confusing, but provides no value. It's similar to allowing
both std=c++17 and std=c++1z, which we don't do.

This was discovered because we had an internal bot that ran the test
suite under both c++98 AND c++03 -- one of which is redundant.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D80926

show more ...

[libcxx][test][NFC] Fix comment typos.

(Testing git commit access.)

Add include for 'test_macros.h' to all the tests that were missing them. Thanks to Zoe for the (big, but simple) patch. NFC intended.

llvm-svn: 362252

Support tests in freestanding

Summary:
Freestanding is *weird*. The standard allows it to differ in a bunch of odd
manners from regular C++, and the committee would like to improve that
situation. I

Support tests in freestanding

Summary:
Freestanding is *weird*. The standard allows it to differ in a bunch of odd
manners from regular C++, and the committee would like to improve that
situation. I'd like to make libc++ behave better with what freestanding should
be, so that it can be a tool we use in improving the standard. To do that we
need to try stuff out, both with "freestanding the language mode" and
"freestanding the library subset".

Let's start with the super basic: run the libc++ tests in freestanding, using
clang as the compiler, and see what works. The easiest hack to do this:

In utils/libcxx/test/config.py add:

self.cxx.compile_flags += ['-ffreestanding']

Run the tests and they all fail.

Why? Because in freestanding `main` isn't special. This "not special" property
has two effects: main doesn't get mangled, and main isn't allowed to omit its
`return` statement. The first means main gets mangled and the linker can't
create a valid executable for us to test. The second means we spew out warnings
(ew) and the compiler doesn't insert the `return` we omitted, and main just
falls of the end and does whatever undefined behavior (if you're luck, ud2
leading to non-zero return code).

Let's start my work with the basics. This patch changes all libc++ tests to
declare `main` as `int main(int, char**` so it mangles consistently (enabling us
to declare another `extern "C"` main for freestanding which calls the mangled
one), and adds `return 0;` to all places where it was missing. This touches 6124
files, and I apologize.

The former was done with The Magic Of Sed.

The later was done with a (not quite correct but decent) clang tool:

https://gist.github.com/jfbastien/793819ff360baa845483dde81170feed

This works for most tests, though I did have to adjust a few places when e.g.
the test runs with `-x c`, macros are used for main (such as for the filesystem
tests), etc.

Once this is in we can create a freestanding bot which will prevent further
regressions. After that, we can start the real work of supporting C++
freestanding fairly well in libc++.

<rdar://problem/47754795>

Reviewers: ldionne, mclow.lists, EricWF

Subscribers: christof, jkorous, dexonsmith, arphaman, miyuki, libcxx-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57624

llvm-svn: 353086

show more ...

Update more file headers across all of the LLVM projects in the monorepo
to reflect the new license. These used slightly different spellings that
defeated my regular expressions.

We understand that

Update more file headers across all of the LLVM projects in the monorepo
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

show more ...

[libcxx] [test] Fix MSVC warning C4244 "conversion from 'X' to 'Y', possible loss of data", part 5/7.

Instead of storing double in double and then truncating to int, store int in long
and then widen

[libcxx] [test] Fix MSVC warning C4244 "conversion from 'X' to 'Y', possible loss of data", part 5/7.

Instead of storing double in double and then truncating to int, store int in long
and then widen to long long. This preserves test coverage (as these tests are
interested in various tuple conversions) while avoiding truncation warnings.

test/std/utilities/tuple/tuple.tuple/tuple.cnstr/const_pair.pass.cpp
Since we aren't physically truncating anymore, t1 is equal to p0.

test/std/utilities/tuple/tuple.tuple/tuple.cnstr/convert_copy.pass.cpp
One edit is different from the usual pattern. Previously, we were storing
double in double and then converting to A, which has an implicitly converting
constructor from int. Now, we're storing int in int and then converting to A,
avoiding the truncation.

Fixes D27542.

llvm-svn: 289109

show more ...

Cleanup SFINAE in tuple, and add tests for reference assignment

llvm-svn: 274414

[libcxx] Mark most tuple tests UNSUPPORTED for c++03 and c++98.

Summary: No declaration for the type `tuple` is given in c++03 or c++98 modes. Mark all tests that use the actual `tuple` type as UNSU

[libcxx] Mark most tuple tests UNSUPPORTED for c++03 and c++98.

Summary: No declaration for the type `tuple` is given in c++03 or c++98 modes. Mark all tests that use the actual `tuple` type as UNSUPPORTED.

Reviewers: jroelofs, mclow.lists, danalbert

Reviewed By: danalbert

Subscribers: cfe-commits

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D5956

llvm-svn: 229808

show more ...

Move test into test/std subdirectory.

llvm-svn: 224658