[PATCH] D48616: Implement LWG 2946, 3075 and 3076
mclow.lists closed this revision. mclow.lists added a comment. Committed as revision 336132. https://reviews.llvm.org/D48616 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[PATCH] D48616: Implement LWG 2946, 3075 and 3076
ldionne accepted this revision. ldionne added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. LGTM https://reviews.llvm.org/D48616 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[PATCH] D48616: Implement LWG 2946, 3075 and 3076
mclow.lists updated this revision to Diff 153432.
mclow.lists marked 3 inline comments as done.
mclow.lists added a comment.
Update in response to comments.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D48616
Files:
include/memory
include/string
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/copy_assignment.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/default_noexcept.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/dtor_noexcept.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/implicit_deduction_guides.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/move_assign_noexcept.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/move_noexcept.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/pointer_size_alloc.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/string_view_deduction.fail.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/string_view_deduction.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/string_view_size_size_deduction.fail.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/string_view_size_size_deduction.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.modifiers/string_append/string.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.modifiers/string_insert/size_string.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.modifiers/string_op_plus_equal/string.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.modifiers/string_replace/iter_iter_string.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.modifiers/string_replace/size_size_string.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.nonmembers/string.special/swap_noexcept.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_compare/size_size_string.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_compare/string.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.first.not.of/string_size.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.first.of/string_size.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.last.not.of/string_size.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.last.of/string_size.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find/string_size.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_rfind/string_size.pass.cpp
Index: test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_rfind/string_size.pass.cpp
===
--- test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_rfind/string_size.pass.cpp
+++ test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_rfind/string_size.pass.cpp
@@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
#include
#include
+#include "test_macros.h"
#include "min_allocator.h"
template
@@ -154,4 +155,11 @@
test1();
}
#endif
+
+#if TEST_STD_VER > 3
+{ // LWG 2946
+std::string s = " !";
+assert(s.rfind({"abc", 1}) == std::string::npos);
+}
+#endif
}
Index: test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.last.of/string_size.pass.cpp
===
--- test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.last.of/string_size.pass.cpp
+++ test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.last.of/string_size.pass.cpp
@@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
#include
#include
+#include "test_macros.h"
#include "min_allocator.h"
template
@@ -154,4 +155,11 @@
test1();
}
#endif
+
+#if TEST_STD_VER > 3
+{ // LWG 2946
+std::string s = " !";
+assert(s.find_last_of({"abc", 1}) == std::string::npos);
+}
+#endif
}
Index: test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.last.not.of/string_size.pass.cpp
===
--- test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.last.not.of/string_size.pass.cpp
+++ test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.last.not.of/string_size.pass.cpp
@@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
#include
#include
+#include "test_macros.h"
#include "min_allocator.h"
template
@@ -154,4 +155,11 @@
test1();
}
#endif
+
+#if TEST_STD_VER > 3
+{ // LWG 2946
+std::string s = " !";
+assert(s.find_last_not_of({"abc", 1}) == s.size() - 1);
+}
+#endif
}
Index: test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.first.of/string_size.pass.cpp
===
--- test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.first.of/string_size.pass.cpp
+++ test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.first.of/string_size.pass.cpp
@@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
#include
#include
+#include "test_macros.h"
#include "min_allocator.h"
template
@@ -154,4 +155,11 @@
test1();
}
#endif
+
+#if TEST_STD_VER > 3
+{ // LWG 2946
+std::string s = " !";
+assert(s.find_first_of({"abc", 1}) == std::string::npos);
+}
+#endif
}
Index: test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.first.not.of/string_size.pass.cpp
===
---
[PATCH] D48616: Implement LWG 2946, 3075 and 3076
mclow.lists marked 5 inline comments as done.
mclow.lists added inline comments.
Comment at: include/string:836
_LIBCPP_METHOD_TEMPLATE_IMPLICIT_INSTANTIATION_VIS
-basic_string(const _Tp& __t, size_type __pos, size_type __n,
- const allocator_type& __a = allocator_type(),
- typename
enable_if<__can_be_converted_to_string_view<_CharT, _Traits, _Tp>::value,
void>::type* = 0);
-_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY explicit
-basic_string(__self_view __sv);
-_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
-basic_string(__self_view __sv, const _Allocator& __a);
+explicit basic_string(const _Tp& __t, size_type __pos, size_type __n,
+ const allocator_type& __a = allocator_type());
ldionne wrote:
> I believe an unwelcome `explicit` snuck in here.
Right.
Comment at: include/string:839
+
+// template
+// _LIBCPP_METHOD_TEMPLATE_IMPLICIT_INSTANTIATION_VIS
ldionne wrote:
> Did you mean to leave those comments there?
Nope. Thanks.
Comment at: include/string:856
+_LIBCPP_METHOD_TEMPLATE_IMPLICIT_INSTANTIATION_VIS
+explicit basic_string(const _Tp& __t, const allocator_type& __a);
+
ldionne wrote:
> tcanens wrote:
> > ldionne wrote:
> > > I think this `explicit` shouldn't be there, too.
> > This one is `explicit` in the standard (because it had a default argument:
> > `template explicit basic_string(const T& t, const Allocator& a =
> > Allocator());`)
> Ah, you're right. So basically
>
> ```
> template
> explicit basic_string(const T& t,
> const Allocator& a = Allocator());
> ```
>
> is implemented as two overloads
>
> ```
> template
> explicit basic_string(const T& t);
> ```
>
> and
>
> ```
> template
> explicit basic_string(const T& t, const Allocator& a);
> ```
>
Right. We frequently split defaulted allocator ctors.
Comment at: include/string:1987
{
__self_view __sv = __self_view(__t).substr(__pos, __n);
tcanens wrote:
> `__self_view(__t)` is wrong - the wording was intentionally crafted to
> require the conversion to `basic_string_view` to be done using
> copy-initialization. Using direct-initialization can potentially result in
> different overload resolution results.
Nice catch!
https://reviews.llvm.org/D48616
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[PATCH] D48616: Implement LWG 2946, 3075 and 3076
ldionne added inline comments. Comment at: include/string:856 +_LIBCPP_METHOD_TEMPLATE_IMPLICIT_INSTANTIATION_VIS +explicit basic_string(const _Tp& __t, const allocator_type& __a); + tcanens wrote: > ldionne wrote: > > I think this `explicit` shouldn't be there, too. > This one is `explicit` in the standard (because it had a default argument: > `template explicit basic_string(const T& t, const Allocator& a = > Allocator());`) Ah, you're right. So basically ``` template explicit basic_string(const T& t, const Allocator& a = Allocator()); ``` is implemented as two overloads ``` template explicit basic_string(const T& t); ``` and ``` template explicit basic_string(const T& t, const Allocator& a); ``` https://reviews.llvm.org/D48616 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[PATCH] D48616: Implement LWG 2946, 3075 and 3076
tcanens added inline comments.
Comment at: include/string:856
+_LIBCPP_METHOD_TEMPLATE_IMPLICIT_INSTANTIATION_VIS
+explicit basic_string(const _Tp& __t, const allocator_type& __a);
+
ldionne wrote:
> I think this `explicit` shouldn't be there, too.
This one is `explicit` in the standard (because it had a default argument:
`template explicit basic_string(const T& t, const Allocator& a =
Allocator());`)
Comment at: include/string:1987
{
__self_view __sv = __self_view(__t).substr(__pos, __n);
`__self_view(__t)` is wrong - the wording was intentionally crafted to require
the conversion to `basic_string_view` to be done using copy-initialization.
Using direct-initialization can potentially result in different overload
resolution results.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D48616
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[PATCH] D48616: Implement LWG 2946, 3075 and 3076
ldionne added inline comments. Comment at: include/string:836 _LIBCPP_METHOD_TEMPLATE_IMPLICIT_INSTANTIATION_VIS -basic_string(const _Tp& __t, size_type __pos, size_type __n, - const allocator_type& __a = allocator_type(), - typename enable_if<__can_be_converted_to_string_view<_CharT, _Traits, _Tp>::value, void>::type* = 0); -_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY explicit -basic_string(__self_view __sv); -_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY -basic_string(__self_view __sv, const _Allocator& __a); +explicit basic_string(const _Tp& __t, size_type __pos, size_type __n, + const allocator_type& __a = allocator_type()); I believe an unwelcome `explicit` snuck in here. Comment at: include/string:839 + +// template +// _LIBCPP_METHOD_TEMPLATE_IMPLICIT_INSTANTIATION_VIS Did you mean to leave those comments there? Comment at: include/string:856 +_LIBCPP_METHOD_TEMPLATE_IMPLICIT_INSTANTIATION_VIS +explicit basic_string(const _Tp& __t, const allocator_type& __a); + I think this `explicit` shouldn't be there, too. https://reviews.llvm.org/D48616 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[PATCH] D48616: Implement LWG 2946, 3075 and 3076
mclow.lists updated this revision to Diff 153178.
mclow.lists marked 2 inline comments as done.
mclow.lists added a comment.
Update diff per Louis' suggestion.
Remove noexcepts from the synopsis.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D48616
Files:
include/memory
include/string
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/copy_assignment.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/default_noexcept.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/dtor_noexcept.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/implicit_deduction_guides.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/move_assign_noexcept.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/move_noexcept.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/pointer_size_alloc.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/string_view_deduction.fail.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/string_view_deduction.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/string_view_size_size_deduction.fail.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/string_view_size_size_deduction.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.modifiers/string_append/string.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.modifiers/string_insert/size_string.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.modifiers/string_op_plus_equal/string.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.modifiers/string_replace/iter_iter_string.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.modifiers/string_replace/size_size_string.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.nonmembers/string.special/swap_noexcept.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_compare/size_size_string.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_compare/string.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.first.not.of/string_size.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.first.of/string_size.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.last.not.of/string_size.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.last.of/string_size.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find/string_size.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_rfind/string_size.pass.cpp
Index: test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_rfind/string_size.pass.cpp
===
--- test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_rfind/string_size.pass.cpp
+++ test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_rfind/string_size.pass.cpp
@@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
#include
#include
+#include "test_macros.h"
#include "min_allocator.h"
template
@@ -154,4 +155,11 @@
test1();
}
#endif
+
+#if TEST_STD_VER > 3
+{ // LWG 2946
+std::string s = " !";
+assert(s.rfind({"abc", 1}) == std::string::npos);
+}
+#endif
}
Index: test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.last.of/string_size.pass.cpp
===
--- test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.last.of/string_size.pass.cpp
+++ test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.last.of/string_size.pass.cpp
@@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
#include
#include
+#include "test_macros.h"
#include "min_allocator.h"
template
@@ -154,4 +155,11 @@
test1();
}
#endif
+
+#if TEST_STD_VER > 3
+{ // LWG 2946
+std::string s = " !";
+assert(s.find_last_of({"abc", 1}) == std::string::npos);
+}
+#endif
}
Index: test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.last.not.of/string_size.pass.cpp
===
--- test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.last.not.of/string_size.pass.cpp
+++ test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.last.not.of/string_size.pass.cpp
@@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
#include
#include
+#include "test_macros.h"
#include "min_allocator.h"
template
@@ -154,4 +155,11 @@
test1();
}
#endif
+
+#if TEST_STD_VER > 3
+{ // LWG 2946
+std::string s = " !";
+assert(s.find_last_not_of({"abc", 1}) == s.size() - 1);
+}
+#endif
}
Index: test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.first.of/string_size.pass.cpp
===
--- test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.first.of/string_size.pass.cpp
+++ test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.first.of/string_size.pass.cpp
@@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
#include
#include
+#include "test_macros.h"
#include "min_allocator.h"
template
@@ -154,4 +155,11 @@
test1();
}
#endif
+
+#if TEST_STD_VER > 3
+{ // LWG 2946
+std::string s = " !";
+assert(s.find_first_of({"abc", 1}) == std::string::npos);
+}
+#endif
}
Index: test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.first.not.of/string_size.pass.cpp
===
---
[PATCH] D48616: Implement LWG 2946, 3075 and 3076
mclow.lists marked 5 inline comments as done. mclow.lists added inline comments. Comment at: include/memory:5647 + typename __void_t::type, + typename __void_t().allocate(size_t(0)))>::type + > ldionne wrote: > Sorry -- still not very fluent with how things are done in libc++, but don't > we need to guard this based on C++11 at the very least because it's using > `decltype`? libc++ has an emulation of `decltype` for C++03, based on `typeof`. It's not perfect, but it works in a lot of cases. Comment at: include/string:842 +explicit basic_string(const _Tp& __t, + typename enable_if<__can_be_converted_to_string_view<_CharT, _Traits, _Tp>::value, void>::type* = 0); + ldionne wrote: > mclow.lists wrote: > > ldionne wrote: > > > Is there a reason why you use a different `enable_if` pattern here (as a > > > default argument) and above (as a default template argument)? > > One for constructors, one for non-constructors. > > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/17842478/select-class-constructor-using-enable-if > Even after reading the SO question, I think the following would work as well? > > ``` > template enable_if<__can_be_converted_to_string_view<_CharT, _Traits, _Tp>::value, > void>::type> > _LIBCPP_METHOD_TEMPLATE_IMPLICIT_INSTANTIATION_VIS > explicit basic_string(const _Tp& __t); > ``` > > Again, I'm not suggesting any change, just trying to understand, I tried this locally, and it seems to work. Updated patch incoming. https://reviews.llvm.org/D48616 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[PATCH] D48616: Implement LWG 2946, 3075 and 3076
ldionne added inline comments. Comment at: include/string:842 +explicit basic_string(const _Tp& __t, + typename enable_if<__can_be_converted_to_string_view<_CharT, _Traits, _Tp>::value, void>::type* = 0); + mclow.lists wrote: > ldionne wrote: > > Is there a reason why you use a different `enable_if` pattern here (as a > > default argument) and above (as a default template argument)? > One for constructors, one for non-constructors. > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/17842478/select-class-constructor-using-enable-if Even after reading the SO question, I think the following would work as well? ``` template::value, void>::type> _LIBCPP_METHOD_TEMPLATE_IMPLICIT_INSTANTIATION_VIS explicit basic_string(const _Tp& __t); ``` Again, I'm not suggesting any change, just trying to understand, Comment at: include/string:1646 + class _Allocator = allocator<_CharT>, + class = typename enable_if<__is_allocator<_Allocator>::value, void>::type + > mclow.lists wrote: > ldionne wrote: > > You don't need to specify the `void` in `enable_if<__is_allocator, > > void>::type`. There's no harm in specifying it, but I'm curious to know if > > there's a reason for it? > Habit, I guess - I always put the type into `enable_if`, even if I don't use > it. Sometimes I use `nullptr_t` instead of `void`. Understood. https://reviews.llvm.org/D48616 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[PATCH] D48616: Implement LWG 2946, 3075 and 3076
mclow.lists added inline comments. Comment at: include/string:842 +explicit basic_string(const _Tp& __t, + typename enable_if<__can_be_converted_to_string_view<_CharT, _Traits, _Tp>::value, void>::type* = 0); + ldionne wrote: > Is there a reason why you use a different `enable_if` pattern here (as a > default argument) and above (as a default template argument)? One for constructors, one for non-constructors. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/17842478/select-class-constructor-using-enable-if Comment at: include/string:1646 + class _Allocator = allocator<_CharT>, + class = typename enable_if<__is_allocator<_Allocator>::value, void>::type + > ldionne wrote: > You don't need to specify the `void` in `enable_if<__is_allocator, > void>::type`. There's no harm in specifying it, but I'm curious to know if > there's a reason for it? Habit, I guess - I always put the type into `enable_if`, even if I don't use it. Sometimes I use `nullptr_t` instead of `void`. https://reviews.llvm.org/D48616 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[PATCH] D48616: Implement LWG 2946, 3075 and 3076
ldionne added a comment. More missed `noexcept`s. Comment at: include/string:279 +template +size_type find_first_of(const T& t, size_type pos = 0) const noexcept; // C++17 size_type find_first_of(const value_type* s, size_type pos, size_type n) const noexcept; I think you need to remove this `noexcept`. Comment at: include/string:286 +template +size_type find_last_of(const T& t, size_type pos = npos) const noexcept; // C++17 size_type find_last_of(const value_type* s, size_type pos, size_type n) const noexcept; Remove `noexcept`. Comment at: include/string:293 +template +size_type find_first_not_of(const T& t, size_type pos = 0) const noexcept; // C++17 size_type find_first_not_of(const value_type* s, size_type pos, size_type n) const noexcept; Remove `noexcept`. Comment at: include/string:307 +template +int compare(const T& t) const noexcept; // C++17 int compare(size_type pos1, size_type n1, const basic_string& str) const; Remove `noexcept`. https://reviews.llvm.org/D48616 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[PATCH] D48616: Implement LWG 2946, 3075 and 3076
ldionne added a comment. LGTM. All comments/questions are just for my education. Other things I did: double-check that you changed all the functions changed by https://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-defects.html#2946. Comment at: include/memory:5647 + typename __void_t::type, + typename __void_t().allocate(size_t(0)))>::type + > Sorry -- still not very fluent with how things are done in libc++, but don't we need to guard this based on C++11 at the very least because it's using `decltype`? Comment at: include/string:842 +explicit basic_string(const _Tp& __t, + typename enable_if<__can_be_converted_to_string_view<_CharT, _Traits, _Tp>::value, void>::type* = 0); + Is there a reason why you use a different `enable_if` pattern here (as a default argument) and above (as a default template argument)? Comment at: include/string:1646 + class _Allocator = allocator<_CharT>, + class = typename enable_if<__is_allocator<_Allocator>::value, void>::type + > You don't need to specify the `void` in `enable_if<__is_allocator, void>::type`. There's no harm in specifying it, but I'm curious to know if there's a reason for it? Comment at: include/string:1779 template -inline _LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY +template basic_string<_CharT, _Traits, _Allocator>::basic_string(const _CharT* __s) Wow, it's terrible that we need to write this. https://reviews.llvm.org/D48616 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[PATCH] D48616: Implement LWG 2946, 3075 and 3076
mclow.lists updated this revision to Diff 153097.
mclow.lists added a comment.
Update the tests from 2946 - they are removed for C++03
https://reviews.llvm.org/D48616
Files:
include/memory
include/string
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/copy_assignment.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/default_noexcept.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/dtor_noexcept.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/implicit_deduction_guides.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/move_assign_noexcept.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/move_noexcept.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/pointer_size_alloc.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/string_view_deduction.fail.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/string_view_deduction.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/string_view_size_size_deduction.fail.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/string_view_size_size_deduction.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.modifiers/string_append/string.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.modifiers/string_insert/size_string.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.modifiers/string_op_plus_equal/string.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.modifiers/string_replace/iter_iter_string.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.modifiers/string_replace/size_size_string.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.nonmembers/string.special/swap_noexcept.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_compare/size_size_string.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_compare/string.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.first.not.of/string_size.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.first.of/string_size.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.last.not.of/string_size.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.last.of/string_size.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find/string_size.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_rfind/string_size.pass.cpp
Index: test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_rfind/string_size.pass.cpp
===
--- test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_rfind/string_size.pass.cpp
+++ test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_rfind/string_size.pass.cpp
@@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
#include
#include
+#include "test_macros.h"
#include "min_allocator.h"
template
@@ -154,4 +155,11 @@
test1();
}
#endif
+
+#if TEST_STD_VER > 3
+{ // LWG 2946
+std::string s = " !";
+assert(s.rfind({"abc", 1}) == std::string::npos);
+}
+#endif
}
Index: test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.last.of/string_size.pass.cpp
===
--- test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.last.of/string_size.pass.cpp
+++ test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.last.of/string_size.pass.cpp
@@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
#include
#include
+#include "test_macros.h"
#include "min_allocator.h"
template
@@ -154,4 +155,11 @@
test1();
}
#endif
+
+#if TEST_STD_VER > 3
+{ // LWG 2946
+std::string s = " !";
+assert(s.find_last_of({"abc", 1}) == std::string::npos);
+}
+#endif
}
Index: test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.last.not.of/string_size.pass.cpp
===
--- test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.last.not.of/string_size.pass.cpp
+++ test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.last.not.of/string_size.pass.cpp
@@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
#include
#include
+#include "test_macros.h"
#include "min_allocator.h"
template
@@ -154,4 +155,11 @@
test1();
}
#endif
+
+#if TEST_STD_VER > 3
+{ // LWG 2946
+std::string s = " !";
+assert(s.find_last_not_of({"abc", 1}) == s.size() - 1);
+}
+#endif
}
Index: test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.first.of/string_size.pass.cpp
===
--- test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.first.of/string_size.pass.cpp
+++ test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.first.of/string_size.pass.cpp
@@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
#include
#include
+#include "test_macros.h"
#include "min_allocator.h"
template
@@ -154,4 +155,11 @@
test1();
}
#endif
+
+#if TEST_STD_VER > 3
+{ // LWG 2946
+std::string s = " !";
+assert(s.find_first_of({"abc", 1}) == std::string::npos);
+}
+#endif
}
Index: test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.first.not.of/string_size.pass.cpp
===
---
[PATCH] D48616: Implement LWG 2946, 3075 and 3076
mclow.lists added inline comments.
Comment at:
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_rfind/string_size.pass.cpp:161
+std::string s = " !";
+assert(s.rfind({"abc", 1}) == std::string::npos);
+}
These tests don't work in C++03; they'll need to be ifdef-ed.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D48616
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[PATCH] D48616: Implement LWG 2946, 3075 and 3076
mclow.lists updated this revision to Diff 153001.
mclow.lists added a comment.
Updated the `__is_allocator` type trait to work all the way back to C++03
Added a bunch of tests from issue2946.
I think this has all the pieces that it needs now.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D48616
Files:
include/memory
include/string
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/copy_assignment.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/default_noexcept.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/dtor_noexcept.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/implicit_deduction_guides.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/move_assign_noexcept.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/move_noexcept.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/pointer_size_alloc.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/string_view_deduction.fail.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/string_view_deduction.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/string_view_size_size_deduction.fail.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/string_view_size_size_deduction.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.modifiers/string_append/string.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.modifiers/string_insert/size_string.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.modifiers/string_op_plus_equal/string.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.modifiers/string_replace/iter_iter_string.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.modifiers/string_replace/size_size_string.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.nonmembers/string.special/swap_noexcept.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_compare/size_size_string.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_compare/string.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.first.not.of/string_size.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.first.of/string_size.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.last.not.of/string_size.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.last.of/string_size.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find/string_size.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_rfind/string_size.pass.cpp
Index: test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_rfind/string_size.pass.cpp
===
--- test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_rfind/string_size.pass.cpp
+++ test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_rfind/string_size.pass.cpp
@@ -154,4 +154,10 @@
test1();
}
#endif
+
+
+{ // LWG 2946
+std::string s = " !";
+assert(s.rfind({"abc", 1}) == std::string::npos);
+}
}
Index: test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.last.of/string_size.pass.cpp
===
--- test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.last.of/string_size.pass.cpp
+++ test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.last.of/string_size.pass.cpp
@@ -154,4 +154,9 @@
test1();
}
#endif
+
+{ // LWG 2946
+std::string s = " !";
+assert(s.find_last_of({"abc", 1}) == std::string::npos);
+}
}
Index: test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.last.not.of/string_size.pass.cpp
===
--- test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.last.not.of/string_size.pass.cpp
+++ test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.last.not.of/string_size.pass.cpp
@@ -154,4 +154,9 @@
test1();
}
#endif
+
+{ // LWG 2946
+std::string s = " !";
+assert(s.find_last_not_of({"abc", 1}) == s.size() - 1);
+}
}
Index: test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.first.of/string_size.pass.cpp
===
--- test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.first.of/string_size.pass.cpp
+++ test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.first.of/string_size.pass.cpp
@@ -154,4 +154,10 @@
test1();
}
#endif
+
+
+{ // LWG 2946
+std::string s = " !";
+assert(s.find_first_of({"abc", 1}) == std::string::npos);
+}
}
Index: test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.first.not.of/string_size.pass.cpp
===
--- test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.first.not.of/string_size.pass.cpp
+++ test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find.first.not.of/string_size.pass.cpp
@@ -154,4 +154,9 @@
test1();
}
#endif
+
+{ // LWG 2946
+std::string s = " !";
+assert(s.find_first_not_of({"abc", 1}) == 0);
+}
}
Index: test/std/strings/basic.string/string.ops/string_find/string_size.pass.cpp
===
---
[PATCH] D48616: Implement LWG 2946, 3075 and 3076
mclow.lists updated this revision to Diff 152995.
mclow.lists added a comment.
Remove a bunch of `noexcept`s that I missed the first time.
Put in an error message to be checked in one of the failing deduction cases
that was lacking it.
Address STL's comments.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D48616
Files:
include/memory
include/string
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/default_noexcept.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/dtor_noexcept.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/implicit_deduction_guides.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/move_assign_noexcept.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/move_noexcept.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/string_view_deduction.fail.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/string_view_deduction.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/string_view_size_size_deduction.fail.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/string_view_size_size_deduction.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.nonmembers/string.special/swap_noexcept.pass.cpp
Index: test/std/strings/basic.string/string.nonmembers/string.special/swap_noexcept.pass.cpp
===
--- test/std/strings/basic.string/string.nonmembers/string.special/swap_noexcept.pass.cpp
+++ test/std/strings/basic.string/string.nonmembers/string.special/swap_noexcept.pass.cpp
@@ -35,8 +35,8 @@
some_alloc() {}
some_alloc(const some_alloc&);
+ T *allocate(size_t);
void deallocate(void*, unsigned) {}
-
typedef std::true_type propagate_on_container_swap;
};
@@ -47,6 +47,7 @@
some_alloc2() {}
some_alloc2(const some_alloc2&);
+ T *allocate(size_t);
void deallocate(void*, unsigned) {}
typedef std::false_type propagate_on_container_swap;
Index: test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/string_view_size_size_deduction.pass.cpp
===
--- test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/string_view_size_size_deduction.pass.cpp
+++ test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/string_view_size_size_deduction.pass.cpp
@@ -0,0 +1,99 @@
+//===--===//
+//
+// The LLVM Compiler Infrastructure
+//
+// This file is dual licensed under the MIT and the University of Illinois Open
+// Source Licenses. See LICENSE.TXT for details.
+//
+//===--===//
+
+//
+// UNSUPPORTED: c++98, c++03, c++11, c++14
+// XFAIL: libcpp-no-deduction-guides
+
+// template
+// basic_string(InputIterator begin, InputIterator end,
+// const Allocator& a = Allocator());
+
+// template
+// >
+// basic_string(basic_string_view,
+//typename see below::size_type,
+//typename see below::size_type,
+//const Allocator& = Allocator())
+// -> basic_string;
+//
+// A size_type parameter type in a basic_string deduction guide refers to the size_type
+// member type of the type deduced by the deduction guide.
+//
+// The deduction guide shall not participate in overload resolution if Allocator
+// is a type that does not qualify as an allocator.
+
+
+#include
+#include
+#include
+#include
+#include
+
+#include "test_macros.h"
+#include "test_allocator.h"
+#include "../input_iterator.h"
+#include "min_allocator.h"
+
+int main()
+{
+{
+std::string_view sv = "12345678901234";
+std::basic_string s1{sv, 0, 4};
+using S = decltype(s1); // what type did we get?
+static_assert(std::is_same_v, "");
+static_assert(std::is_same_v>, "");
+static_assert(std::is_same_v>, "");
+assert(s1.size() == 4);
+assert(s1.compare(0, s1.size(), sv.data(), s1.size()) == 0);
+}
+
+{
+std::string_view sv = "12345678901234";
+std::basic_string s1{sv, 0, 4, std::allocator{}};
+using S = decltype(s1); // what type did we get?
+static_assert(std::is_same_v, "");
+static_assert(std::is_same_v>, "");
+static_assert(std::is_same_v>, "");
+assert(s1.size() == 4);
+assert(s1.compare(0, s1.size(), sv.data(), s1.size()) == 0);
+}
+{
+std::wstring_view sv = L"12345678901234";
+std::basic_string s1{sv, 0, 4, test_allocator{}};
+using S = decltype(s1); // what type did we get?
+static_assert(std::is_same_v, "");
+static_assert(std::is_same_v>, "");
+static_assert(std::is_same_v>, "");
+assert(s1.size() == 4);
+assert(s1.compare(0, s1.size(), sv.data(), s1.size()) == 0);
+}
+{
+std::u16string_view sv = u"12345678901234";
+std::basic_string s1{sv, 0, 4, min_allocator{}};
+using S = decltype(s1); // what type did we get?
+static_assert(std::is_same_v, "");
+static_assert(std::is_same_v>, "");
+static_assert(std::is_same_v>, "");
+assert(s1.size() == 4);
+assert(s1.compare(0,
[PATCH] D48616: Implement LWG 2946, 3075 and 3076
STL_MSFT added inline comments.
Comment at:
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/string_view_deduction.fail.cpp:26
+// The deduction guide shall not participate in overload resolution if
Allocator is
+// is a type that does not qualify as an allocator.
+
Repeated "is", occurs repeatedly in other files.
Comment at:
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/string_view_deduction.fail.cpp:37
+{
+std::string_view sv = "12345678901234";
+std::basic_string s1{sv, 23}; // 23 is not an allocator!
You need to include ``, occurs in other files.
Comment at:
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/string_view_deduction.pass.cpp:32
+#include
+#include
+
You technically need `` for std::allocator, `` for
std::is_same_v.
Comment at:
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.nonmembers/string.special/swap_noexcept.pass.cpp:38
some_alloc(const some_alloc&);
+ T *allocate(size_t);
void deallocate(void*, unsigned) {}
Weird indentation here - is there a tab instead of spaces? Occurs below.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D48616
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[PATCH] D48616: Implement LWG 2946, 3075 and 3076
mclow.lists added a comment. Ok, for some reason, the four tests that I *added* didn't get into the diff. https://reviews.llvm.org/D48616 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[PATCH] D48616: Implement LWG 2946, 3075 and 3076
mclow.lists created this revision.
mclow.lists added reviewers: EricWF, ldionne, STL_MSFT.
A massive amount of doinking around in .
https://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/issue2946
https://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/issue3075
https://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/issue3076
This is not quite right yet, but I wanted to get it up here for people to look
at.
I may have stepped on a bug fix for old versions of gcc in C++03 mode - Eric? [
was introduced in r292830 ]
Stephan - I updated your deduction guide tests now that we implement all of
them.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D48616
Files:
include/memory
include/string
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/default_noexcept.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/dtor_noexcept.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/implicit_deduction_guides.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/move_assign_noexcept.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/move_noexcept.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/string_view_deduction.fail.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/string_view_deduction.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/string_view_size_size_deduction.fail.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/string_view_size_size_deduction.pass.cpp
test/std/strings/basic.string/string.nonmembers/string.special/swap_noexcept.pass.cpp
Index: test/std/strings/basic.string/string.nonmembers/string.special/swap_noexcept.pass.cpp
===
--- test/std/strings/basic.string/string.nonmembers/string.special/swap_noexcept.pass.cpp
+++ test/std/strings/basic.string/string.nonmembers/string.special/swap_noexcept.pass.cpp
@@ -35,8 +35,8 @@
some_alloc() {}
some_alloc(const some_alloc&);
+ T *allocate(size_t);
void deallocate(void*, unsigned) {}
-
typedef std::true_type propagate_on_container_swap;
};
@@ -47,6 +47,7 @@
some_alloc2() {}
some_alloc2(const some_alloc2&);
+ T *allocate(size_t);
void deallocate(void*, unsigned) {}
typedef std::false_type propagate_on_container_swap;
Index: test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/string_view_size_size_deduction.pass.cpp
===
--- test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/string_view_size_size_deduction.pass.cpp
+++ test/std/strings/basic.string/string.cons/string_view_size_size_deduction.pass.cpp
@@ -0,0 +1,98 @@
+//===--===//
+//
+// The LLVM Compiler Infrastructure
+//
+// This file is dual licensed under the MIT and the University of Illinois Open
+// Source Licenses. See LICENSE.TXT for details.
+//
+//===--===//
+
+//
+// UNSUPPORTED: c++98, c++03, c++11, c++14
+// XFAIL: libcpp-no-deduction-guides
+
+// template
+// basic_string(InputIterator begin, InputIterator end,
+// const Allocator& a = Allocator());
+
+// template
+// >
+// basic_string(basic_string_view,
+//typename see below::size_type,
+//typename see below::size_type,
+//const Allocator& = Allocator())
+// -> basic_string;
+//
+// A size_type parameter type in a basic_string deduction guide refers to the size_type
+// member type of the type deduced by the deduction guide.
+//
+// The deduction guide shall not participate in overload resolution if Allocator is
+// is a type that does not qualify as an allocator.
+
+
+#include
+#include
+#include
+#include
+
+#include "test_macros.h"
+#include "test_allocator.h"
+#include "../input_iterator.h"
+#include "min_allocator.h"
+
+int main()
+{
+{
+std::string_view sv = "12345678901234";
+std::basic_string s1{sv, 0, 4};
+using S = decltype(s1); // what type did we get?
+static_assert(std::is_same_v, "");
+static_assert(std::is_same_v>, "");
+static_assert(std::is_same_v>, "");
+assert(s1.size() == 4);
+assert(s1.compare(0, s1.size(), sv.data(), s1.size()) == 0);
+}
+
+{
+std::string_view sv = "12345678901234";
+std::basic_string s1{sv, 0, 4, std::allocator{}};
+using S = decltype(s1); // what type did we get?
+static_assert(std::is_same_v, "");
+static_assert(std::is_same_v>, "");
+static_assert(std::is_same_v>, "");
+assert(s1.size() == 4);
+assert(s1.compare(0, s1.size(), sv.data(), s1.size()) == 0);
+}
+{
+std::wstring_view sv = L"12345678901234";
+std::basic_string s1{sv, 0, 4, test_allocator{}};
+using S = decltype(s1); // what type did we get?
+static_assert(std::is_same_v, "");
+static_assert(std::is_same_v>, "");
+static_assert(std::is_same_v>, "");
+assert(s1.size() == 4);
+assert(s1.compare(0, s1.size(), sv.data(), s1.size()) == 0);
+}
+{
+std::u16string_view sv = u"12345678901234";
+
