[libcxx-commits] [PATCH] D94807: [libc++] Rationalize our treatment of contiguous iterators and __unwrap_iter().

[Reid Kleckner via Phabricator via libcxx-commits]

rnk added a comment.

In D94807#2520226 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D94807#2520226>, @ldionne wrote:

> I like this - I find it cleaner than a "private contract" with some specific users that they are allowed to overload `__unwrap_iter`. But I'd like to know why can't we leave that only enabled in C++20 mode. @rnk Would it be acceptable for Chrome to compile with C++20? It seems like an optimization that would justify the work to upgrade?
>
> As a matter of policy, I'm a bit reluctant to say "let's add this as an extension because our very important client Chrome is using it". I don't think it's a great way to make decisions. The only reason why I could see us doing it here is because Chrome previously had a free-pass with `__unwrap_iter` and we broke them. But my preference would be to avoid adding those extensions pre-C++20. @rnk can you comment?

Chrome hasn't yet migrated to C++17 yet: https://crbug.com/752720 The major blocker is that nacl compilers are still used somewhere, so I'm pretty sure we are not ready to enable C++20.

In the discussion on the bug with the author of these checked iterators, they seemed OK with relying on implementation details, including re-opening the `std::__1` namespaces with the necessary macros to make the `__unwrap_iter` overload work. I think the optimization only has to work with bundled libc++ version. If that is not in use, the optimization is disabled. I think we might be OK without a properly supported way to do this until we make it to C++20. NaCl is supposed to go away in 2021, so at that point we could probably spring forward and use the officially supported mechanism.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D94807/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D94807