[libc++][ranges] Add ranges::in_in_result

Add `std::ranges::in_in_result`

Reviewed By: Quuxplusone, Mordante, #libc

Spies: ldionne, libcxx-commits, mgorny

Differential Revision: https://reviews.l

[libc++][ranges] Add ranges::in_in_result

Add `std::ranges::in_in_result`

Reviewed By: Quuxplusone, Mordante, #libc

Spies: ldionne, libcxx-commits, mgorny

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D116278

show more ...

[libc++][ranges] Implement `uninitialized_copy{,_n}` and `uninitialized_move{,_n}`.

Also implement `in_out_result` which is a prerequisite.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D116023

[libc++] Alphabetize header #includes. NFCI.

The NFC part of D116809. We still want to enforce this in CI,
but the mechanism for that is still to-be-determined.

Differential Revision: https://revie

[libc++] Alphabetize header #includes. NFCI.

The NFC part of D116809. We still want to enforce this in CI,
but the mechanism for that is still to-be-determined.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D116809

show more ...

[libc++][NFC] Remove duplicate header includes from <algorithm> and reorder them

Remove duplicate header includes from `<algorithm>` and reorder the includes

Reviewed By: Quuxplusone, ldionne, Mord

[libc++][NFC] Remove duplicate header includes from <algorithm> and reorder them

Remove duplicate header includes from `<algorithm>` and reorder the includes

Reviewed By: Quuxplusone, ldionne, Mordante, #libc, jloser

Spies: jloser, libcxx-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D116507

show more ...

[runtimes][NFC] Remove filenames at the top of the license notice

We've stopped doing it in libc++ for a while now because these names
would end up rotting as we move things around and copy/paste st

[runtimes][NFC] Remove filenames at the top of the license notice

We've stopped doing it in libc++ for a while now because these names
would end up rotting as we move things around and copy/paste stuff.
This cleans up all the existing files so as to stop the spreading
as people copy-paste headers around.

show more ...

[libc++][NFC] Remove useless _LIBCPP_PUSH_MACROS

Only files that actually use min/max are required to do this dance.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D108778

[libcxx][modularisation] moves <utility> content out of <type_traits>

Moves:

* `std::move`, `std::forward`, `std::declval`, and `std::swap` into
`__utility/${FUNCTION_NAME}`.
* `std::swap_ranges`

[libcxx][modularisation] moves <utility> content out of <type_traits>

Moves:

* `std::move`, `std::forward`, `std::declval`, and `std::swap` into
`__utility/${FUNCTION_NAME}`.
* `std::swap_ranges` and `std::iter_swap` into
`__algorithm/${FUNCTION_NAME}`

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103734

show more ...

[libcxx] Move all algorithms into their own headers

This is a fairly mechanical change, it just moves each algorithm into
its own header. This is intended to be a NFC.

This commit re-applies 7ed7d4

[libcxx] Move all algorithms into their own headers

This is a fairly mechanical change, it just moves each algorithm into
its own header. This is intended to be a NFC.

This commit re-applies 7ed7d4ccb899, which was reverted in 692d7166f771
because the Modules build got broken. The modules build has now been
fixed, so we're re-committing this.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103583

Attribution note
----------------
I'm only committing this. This commit is a mix of D103583, D103330 and
D104171 authored by:

Co-authored-by: Christopher Di Bella <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: zoecarver <[email protected]>

show more ...

Revert "[libcxx][gardening] Move all algorithms into their own headers."

This reverts commit 7ed7d4ccb8991e2b5b95334b508f8cec2faee737 as it
uncovered a Clang bug PR50592.

[libcxx][gardening] Move all algorithms into their own headers.

This is a fairly mechanical change, it just moves each algorithm into its own header. This is a NFC.

Note: during this change, I burn

[libcxx][gardening] Move all algorithms into their own headers.

This is a fairly mechanical change, it just moves each algorithm into its own header. This is a NFC.

Note: during this change, I burned down all the includes, so this follows "include only and exactly what you use."

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103583

show more ...

Revert "[libc++] NFC: Move unwrap_iter to its own header"

This reverts commit 924ea3bb53 *again*, this time because it broke the
LLDB build with modules. We need to figure out what's up with the lib

Revert "[libc++] NFC: Move unwrap_iter to its own header"

This reverts commit 924ea3bb53 *again*, this time because it broke the
LLDB build with modules. We need to figure out what's up with the libc++
modules build once and for all.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103369

show more ...

[libc++] NFC: Move unwrap_iter to its own header

This re-applies 9968896cd62a, which was reverted in b13edf6e907b because
it broke the build.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103369

[libc++] Alphabetize and include-what-you-use. NFCI.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D102781

Revert "[libc++] NFC: Move unwrap_iter to its own header"

This reverts commit 9968896cd62a62b11ac61085534dd598c4bd3c60.

This commit seems to cause the build failures of main.

[libc++] NFC: Move unwrap_iter to its own header

[libc++] Remove more unnecessary _VSTD:: from type names. NFCI.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D102181

[libc++] s/_VSTD::declval/declval/g. NFCI.

[libc++][NFC] Remove _VSTD:: when not needed.

Reviewed By: #libc, Quuxplusone

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D102133

[libc++] NFC: Normalize `#endif //` comment indentation

[libc++] Further improve the contiguous-iterator story, and fix some bugs.

- Quality-of-implementation: Avoid calling __unwrap_iter in constexpr contexts.
The user might conceivably write a cont

[libc++] Further improve the contiguous-iterator story, and fix some bugs.

- Quality-of-implementation: Avoid calling __unwrap_iter in constexpr contexts.
The user might conceivably write a contiguous iterator where normal iterator
arithmetic is constexpr-friendly but `std::to_address(it)` isn't.

- Bugfix: When you pass contiguous iterators to `std::copy`, you should get
back your contiguous iterator type, not a raw pointer. That means that
libc++ can't `__unwrap_iter` unless it also does `__rewrap_iter`.
Fortunately, this is implementable.

- Improve test coverage of the new `contiguous_iterator` test iterator.
This catches the bug described above.

- Tests: Stop testing that we can `std::copy` //into// an `input_iterator`.
Our test iterators may currently support that, but it seems nonsensical to me.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D95983

show more ...

Revert "Revert "[libc++] [P0879] constexpr std::nth_element, and rewrite its tests.""

This reverts commit b6ffece32035a90d181101f356bd9c04ea1d3122.

The bug is now fixed (it was a stupid cut-and-pas

Revert "Revert "[libc++] [P0879] constexpr std::nth_element, and rewrite its tests.""

This reverts commit b6ffece32035a90d181101f356bd9c04ea1d3122.

The bug is now fixed (it was a stupid cut-and-paste kind of error),
and the regression test added. The new patch is also simpler than the old one!

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D96084

show more ...

Revert "[libc++] [P0879] constexpr std::nth_element, and rewrite its tests."

This reverts commit 207d4be4d9d39fbb9aca30e5d5d11245db9bccc1 due to returning incorrect results. Regression test case pos

Revert "[libc++] [P0879] constexpr std::nth_element, and rewrite its tests."

This reverts commit 207d4be4d9d39fbb9aca30e5d5d11245db9bccc1 due to returning incorrect results. Regression test case posted in D96074.

show more ...

[libc++] [P0879] constexpr std::sort

This completes libc++'s implementation of
P0879 "Constexpr for swap and swap related functions."
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2018/p0879r0.

[libc++] [P0879] constexpr std::sort

This completes libc++'s implementation of
P0879 "Constexpr for swap and swap related functions."
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2018/p0879r0.html

For the feature-macro adjustment, see
https://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/issue3256

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D93661

show more ...

[libc++] Rationalize our treatment of contiguous iterators and __unwrap_iter().

- Implement C++20's changes to `reverse_iterator`, so that it won't be
accidentally counted as a contiguous iterat

[libc++] Rationalize our treatment of contiguous iterators and __unwrap_iter().

- Implement C++20's changes to `reverse_iterator`, so that it won't be
accidentally counted as a contiguous iterator in C++20 mode.
- Implement C++20's changes to `move_iterator` as well.
- `move_iterator` should not be contiguous. This fixes a bug where
we optimized `std::copy`-of-move-iterators in an observable way.
Add a regression test for that bugfix.
- Add libcxx tests for `__is_cpp17_contiguous_iterator` of all relevant
standard iterator types. Particularly check that vector::iterator
is still considered contiguous in all C++ modes, even C++03.

After this patch, there continues to be no supported way to write your
own iterator type in C++17-and-earlier such that libc++ will consider it
"contiguous"; however, we now fully support the C++20 approach (in C++20
mode only). If you want user-defined contiguous iterators in C++17-and-earlier,
libc++'s position is "please upgrade to C++20."

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D94807

show more ...

[libc++] [P0879] constexpr std::nth_element, and rewrite its tests.

This patch is more than just adding the `constexpr` keyword, because
the old code relied on `goto`, and `goto` is not constexpr-fr

[libc++] [P0879] constexpr std::nth_element, and rewrite its tests.

This patch is more than just adding the `constexpr` keyword, because
the old code relied on `goto`, and `goto` is not constexpr-friendly.
Refactor to eliminate `goto`, and then mark it as constexpr in C++20.

I freely admit that the name `__nth_element_partloop` is bad;
I couldn't find any better name because I don't really know
what this loop is doing, conceptually. Vice versa, I think
`__nth_element_find_guard` has a decent name.

Now the only one we're still missing from P0879 is `sort`.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D93557

show more ...