[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 ...

[libc++] Take 2: Implement LWG 2510

Summary:
LWG2510 makes tag types like allocator_arg_t explicitly default
constructible instead of implicitly default constructible. It also
makes the constructors

[libc++] Take 2: Implement LWG 2510

Summary:
LWG2510 makes tag types like allocator_arg_t explicitly default
constructible instead of implicitly default constructible. It also
makes the constructors for std::pair and std::tuple conditionally
explicit based on the explicit-ness of the default constructibility
for the pair/tuple's elements.

This was previously committed as r372777 and reverted in r372832 due to
the commit breaking LLVM's build in C++14 mode. This issue has now been
addressed.

Reviewers: mclow.lists

Subscribers: christof, jkorous, dexonsmith, libcxx-commits

Tags: #libc

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D65161

llvm-svn: 372983

show more ...

Revert r372777: [libc++] Implement LWG 2510 and its follow-ups

This also reverts:
- r372778: [libc++] Implement LWG 3158
- r372782: [libc++] Try fixing tests that fail on GCC 5 and older
- r37278

Revert r372777: [libc++] Implement LWG 2510 and its follow-ups

This also reverts:
- r372778: [libc++] Implement LWG 3158
- r372782: [libc++] Try fixing tests that fail on GCC 5 and older
- r372787: Purge mentions of GCC 4 from the test suite

Reason: the change breaks compilation of LLVM with libc++, for details see
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/libcxx-dev/2019-September/000599.html

llvm-svn: 372832

show more ...

[libc++] Implement LWG 2510

Summary:
LWG2510 makes tag types like allocator_arg_t explicitly default
constructible instead of implicitly default constructible. It also
makes the constructors for std

[libc++] Implement LWG 2510

Summary:
LWG2510 makes tag types like allocator_arg_t explicitly default
constructible instead of implicitly default constructible. It also
makes the constructors for std::pair and std::tuple conditionally
explicit based on the explicit-ness of the default constructibility
for the pair/tuple's elements.

Reviewers: mclow.lists, EricWF

Subscribers: christof, jkorous, dexonsmith, libcxx-commits

Tags: #libc

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D65161

llvm-svn: 372777

show more ...

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 ...

Placate unused variable warnings uncovered by improvements to clang's -Wunused-variable

llvm-svn: 315809

Cleanup _LIBCPP_HAS_NO_<c++11-feature> in the utilities library

llvm-svn: 300635

[libcxx] [test] Fix comment typos, strip trailing whitespace.

No functional change, no code review.

llvm-svn: 292434

[libc++] Try and prevent evaluation of `is_default_constructible` on tuples default constructor if it is not needed.

Summary:
Currently parts of the SFINAE on tuples default constructor always gets

[libc++] Try and prevent evaluation of `is_default_constructible` on tuples default constructor if it is not needed.

Summary:
Currently parts of the SFINAE on tuples default constructor always gets evaluated even when the default constructor is never called or instantiated. This can cause a hard compile error when a tuple is created with types that do not have a default constructor. Below is a self contained example using a pair like class. This code will not compile but probably should.

```

#include <type_traits>

template <class T>
struct IllFormedDefaultImp {
IllFormedDefaultImp(T x) : value(x) {}
constexpr IllFormedDefaultImp() {}
T value;
};

typedef IllFormedDefaultImp<int &> IllFormedDefault;

template <class T, class U>
struct pair
{
template <bool Dummy = true,
class = typename std::enable_if<
std::is_default_constructible<T>::value
&& std::is_default_constructible<U>::value
&& Dummy>::type
>
constexpr pair() : first(), second() {}

pair(T const & t, U const & u) : first(t), second(u) {}

T first;
U second;
};

int main()
{
int x = 1;
IllFormedDefault v(x);
pair<IllFormedDefault, IllFormedDefault> p(v, v);
}
```

One way to fix this is to use `Dummy` in a more involved way in the constructor SFINAE. The following patch fixes these sorts of hard compile errors for tuple.


Reviewers: mclow.lists, rsmith, K-ballo, EricWF

Reviewed By: EricWF

Subscribers: ldionne, cfe-commits

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7569

llvm-svn: 230120

show more ...

[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