|
Revision tags: llvmorg-20.1.0, llvmorg-20.1.0-rc3, llvmorg-20.1.0-rc2, llvmorg-20.1.0-rc1, llvmorg-21-init, llvmorg-19.1.7, llvmorg-19.1.6, llvmorg-19.1.5, llvmorg-19.1.4, llvmorg-19.1.3, llvmorg-19.1.2, llvmorg-19.1.1, llvmorg-19.1.0, llvmorg-19.1.0-rc4, llvmorg-19.1.0-rc3, llvmorg-19.1.0-rc2, llvmorg-19.1.0-rc1, llvmorg-20-init, llvmorg-18.1.8, llvmorg-18.1.7, llvmorg-18.1.6, llvmorg-18.1.5, llvmorg-18.1.4, llvmorg-18.1.3, llvmorg-18.1.2, llvmorg-18.1.1, llvmorg-18.1.0, llvmorg-18.1.0-rc4, llvmorg-18.1.0-rc3, llvmorg-18.1.0-rc2, llvmorg-18.1.0-rc1, llvmorg-19-init, llvmorg-17.0.6, llvmorg-17.0.5, llvmorg-17.0.4, llvmorg-17.0.3, llvmorg-17.0.2, llvmorg-17.0.1, llvmorg-17.0.0, llvmorg-17.0.0-rc4, llvmorg-17.0.0-rc3, llvmorg-17.0.0-rc2, llvmorg-17.0.0-rc1, llvmorg-18-init, llvmorg-16.0.6, llvmorg-16.0.5, llvmorg-16.0.4, llvmorg-16.0.3, llvmorg-16.0.2, llvmorg-16.0.1, llvmorg-16.0.0, llvmorg-16.0.0-rc4, llvmorg-16.0.0-rc3, llvmorg-16.0.0-rc2, llvmorg-16.0.0-rc1, llvmorg-17-init, llvmorg-15.0.7, llvmorg-15.0.6, llvmorg-15.0.5, llvmorg-15.0.4, llvmorg-15.0.3, llvmorg-15.0.2, llvmorg-15.0.1, llvmorg-15.0.0, llvmorg-15.0.0-rc3, llvmorg-15.0.0-rc2, llvmorg-15.0.0-rc1, llvmorg-16-init, llvmorg-14.0.6, llvmorg-14.0.5, llvmorg-14.0.4, llvmorg-14.0.3, llvmorg-14.0.2, llvmorg-14.0.1, llvmorg-14.0.0, llvmorg-14.0.0-rc4, llvmorg-14.0.0-rc3, llvmorg-14.0.0-rc2 |
|
| #
bbb0f2c7 |
| 11-Feb-2022 |
Arthur O'Dwyer <[email protected]> |
[libc++] Replace `#include ""` with `<>` in libcxx/src/. NFCI.
Our best guess is that the two syntaxes should have exactly equivalent
effects, so, let's be consistent with what we do in libcxx/inclu
[libc++] Replace `#include ""` with `<>` in libcxx/src/. NFCI.
Our best guess is that the two syntaxes should have exactly equivalent
effects, so, let's be consistent with what we do in libcxx/include/.
I've left `#include "include/x.h"` and `#include "../y.h"` alone
because I'm less sure that they're interchangeable, and they aren't
inconsistent with libcxx/include/ because libcxx/include/ never
does that kind of thing.
Also, use the `_LIBCPP_PUSH_MACROS/POP_MACROS` dance for `<__undef_macros>`,
even though it's technically unnecessary in a standalone .cpp file,
just so we have consistently one way to do it.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D119561
show more ...
|
|
Revision tags: llvmorg-14.0.0-rc1, llvmorg-15-init, llvmorg-13.0.1, llvmorg-13.0.1-rc3, llvmorg-13.0.1-rc2, llvmorg-13.0.1-rc1 |
|
| #
eb8650a7 |
| 17-Nov-2021 |
Louis Dionne <[email protected]> |
[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 ...
|
| #
434dc0a5 |
| 15-Nov-2021 |
Konstantin Varlamov <[email protected]> |
[libc++] Always define a key function for std::bad_function_call in the dylib
However, whether applications rely on the std::bad_function_call vtable
being in the dylib is still controlled by the AB
[libc++] Always define a key function for std::bad_function_call in the dylib
However, whether applications rely on the std::bad_function_call vtable
being in the dylib is still controlled by the ABI macro, since changing
that would be an ABI break.
Also separate preprocessor definitions for whether to use a key function
and whether to use a `bad_function_call`-specific `what` message
(`what` message is mandated by [LWG2233](http://wg21.link/LWG2233)).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D92397
show more ...
|
|
Revision tags: llvmorg-13.0.0, llvmorg-13.0.0-rc4, llvmorg-13.0.0-rc3, llvmorg-13.0.0-rc2, llvmorg-13.0.0-rc1, llvmorg-14-init, llvmorg-12.0.1, llvmorg-12.0.1-rc4, llvmorg-12.0.1-rc3, llvmorg-12.0.1-rc2, llvmorg-12.0.1-rc1, llvmorg-12.0.0, llvmorg-12.0.0-rc5, llvmorg-12.0.0-rc4, llvmorg-12.0.0-rc3 |
|
| #
5601305f |
| 01-Mar-2021 |
Louis Dionne <[email protected]> |
[libc++/abi] Replace uses of _NOEXCEPT in src/ by noexcept
We always build the libraries in a Standard mode that supports noexcept,
so there's no need to use the _NOEXCEPT macro.
Differential Revis
[libc++/abi] Replace uses of _NOEXCEPT in src/ by noexcept
We always build the libraries in a Standard mode that supports noexcept,
so there's no need to use the _NOEXCEPT macro.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D97700
show more ...
|
|
Revision tags: llvmorg-12.0.0-rc2, llvmorg-11.1.0, llvmorg-11.1.0-rc3, llvmorg-12.0.0-rc1, llvmorg-13-init, llvmorg-11.1.0-rc2, llvmorg-11.1.0-rc1, llvmorg-11.0.1, llvmorg-11.0.1-rc2, llvmorg-11.0.1-rc1, llvmorg-11.0.0, llvmorg-11.0.0-rc6, llvmorg-11.0.0-rc5, llvmorg-11.0.0-rc4, llvmorg-11.0.0-rc3, llvmorg-11.0.0-rc2, llvmorg-11.0.0-rc1, llvmorg-12-init, llvmorg-10.0.1, llvmorg-10.0.1-rc4, llvmorg-10.0.1-rc3, llvmorg-10.0.1-rc2, llvmorg-10.0.1-rc1, llvmorg-10.0.0, llvmorg-10.0.0-rc6, llvmorg-10.0.0-rc5, llvmorg-10.0.0-rc4, llvmorg-10.0.0-rc3, llvmorg-10.0.0-rc2, llvmorg-10.0.0-rc1, llvmorg-11-init, llvmorg-9.0.1, llvmorg-9.0.1-rc3, llvmorg-9.0.1-rc2, llvmorg-9.0.1-rc1, llvmorg-9.0.0, llvmorg-9.0.0-rc6, llvmorg-9.0.0-rc5, llvmorg-9.0.0-rc4, llvmorg-9.0.0-rc3, llvmorg-9.0.0-rc2, llvmorg-9.0.0-rc1, llvmorg-10-init, llvmorg-8.0.1, llvmorg-8.0.1-rc4, llvmorg-8.0.1-rc3, llvmorg-8.0.1-rc2, llvmorg-8.0.1-rc1, llvmorg-8.0.0, llvmorg-8.0.0-rc5, llvmorg-8.0.0-rc4, llvmorg-8.0.0-rc3, llvmorg-7.1.0, llvmorg-7.1.0-rc1, llvmorg-8.0.0-rc2, llvmorg-8.0.0-rc1 |
|
| #
57b08b09 |
| 19-Jan-2019 |
Chandler Carruth <[email protected]> |
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 ...
|
|
Revision tags: llvmorg-7.0.1, llvmorg-7.0.1-rc3, llvmorg-7.0.1-rc2, llvmorg-7.0.1-rc1, llvmorg-7.0.0, llvmorg-7.0.0-rc3, llvmorg-7.0.0-rc2, llvmorg-7.0.0-rc1, llvmorg-6.0.1, llvmorg-6.0.1-rc3, llvmorg-6.0.1-rc2, llvmorg-6.0.1-rc1, llvmorg-5.0.2, llvmorg-5.0.2-rc2, llvmorg-5.0.2-rc1, llvmorg-6.0.0, llvmorg-6.0.0-rc3, llvmorg-6.0.0-rc2, llvmorg-6.0.0-rc1, llvmorg-5.0.1, llvmorg-5.0.1-rc3, llvmorg-5.0.1-rc2, llvmorg-5.0.1-rc1, llvmorg-5.0.0, llvmorg-5.0.0-rc5, llvmorg-5.0.0-rc4, llvmorg-5.0.0-rc3, llvmorg-5.0.0-rc2, llvmorg-5.0.0-rc1, llvmorg-4.0.1, llvmorg-4.0.1-rc3, llvmorg-4.0.1-rc2, llvmorg-4.0.1-rc1 |
|
| #
c7cd73e8 |
| 28-Mar-2017 |
Shoaib Meenai <[email protected]> |
[libc++] Add a key function for bad_function_call
Summary:
bad_function_call is currently an empty class, so any object files using
that class will end up with their own copy of its typeinfo, typein
[libc++] Add a key function for bad_function_call
Summary:
bad_function_call is currently an empty class, so any object files using
that class will end up with their own copy of its typeinfo, typeinfo
name and vtable, leading to unnecessary duplication that has to be
resolved by the dynamic linker. Instead, give bad_function_call a key
function and put a definition for that key function in libc++ itself, to
centralize the typeinfo and vtable.
This is consistent with the behavior for other exception classes. The
key functions are defined in libc++ rather than libc++abi since the
class is defined in the libc++ versioning namespace, so ABI
compatibility with libstdc++ is not a concern.
Guard this change behind an ABI macro, since it isn't backwards
compatible (i.e., clients built against the new libc++ headers wouldn't
be able to run against an older libc++ library).
Reviewers: mclow.lists, EricWF
Subscribers: mgorny, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27387
llvm-svn: 298937
show more ...
|