We pretty consistently don't define those cause they are not needed,
and it removes the potential pitfall to think that these tests are
being run. This doesn't touch .compile.fail.cpp tests since those
should be replaced by .verify.cpp tests anyway, and there would be
a lot to fix up.
As a fly-by, I also fixed a bit of formatting, removed a few unused
includes and made some very minor, clearly NFC refactorings such as
in allocator.traits/allocator.traits.members/allocate.verify.cpp where
the old test basically made no sense the way it was written.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D146236
This patch rewords the static assert diagnostic output. Failing a
_Static_assert in C should not report that static_assert failed. This
changes the wording to be more like GCC and uses "static assertion"
when possible instead of hard coding the name. This also changes some
instances of 'static_assert' to instead be based on the token in the
source code.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D129048
Looks like we again are going to have problems with libcxx tests that
are overly specific in their dependency on clang's diagnostics.
This reverts commit 6542cb55a3eb115b1c3592514590a19987ffc498.
This patch is basically the rewording of the static assert statement's
output(error) on screen after failing. Failing a _Static_assert in C
should not report that static_assert failed. It’d probably be better to
reword the diagnostic to be more like GCC and say “static assertion”
failed in both C and C++.
consider a c file having code
_Static_assert(0, "oh no!");
In clang the output is like:
<source>:1:1: error: static_assert failed: oh no!
_Static_assert(0, "oh no!");
^ ~
1 error generated.
Compiler returned: 1
Thus here the "static_assert" is not much good, it will be better to
reword it to the "static assertion failed" to more generic. as the gcc
prints as:
<source>:1:1: error: static assertion failed: "oh no!"
1 | _Static_assert(0, "oh no!");
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Compiler returned: 1
The above can also be seen here. This patch is about rewording
the static_assert to static assertion.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D129048
Display 'static_assert failed: message' instead of
'static_assert failed "message"' to be consistent
with other implementations and be slightly more
readable.
Reviewed By: #libc, aaron.ballman, philnik, Mordante
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D128844
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
This is needed when running the tests in Freestanding mode, where main()
isn't treated specially. In Freestanding, main() doesn't get mangled as
extern "C", so whatever runtime we're using fails to find the entry point.
One way to solve this problem is to define a symbol alias from __Z4mainiPPc
to _main, however this requires all definitions of main() to have the same
mangling. Hence this commit.
Similar to <concepts>, we need to protect the header and test against
inclusion and being run if concepts aren't supported by the compiler.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D82171
