[libcxx-commits] [PATCH] D116808: fix __simple_view concept in std::ranges

Mon Jan 10 07:57:17 PST 2022

ldionne added a comment.

@huixie90 Thanks for the fix. Since this already has some people involved, I won't chime in more than to clarify a few things:

In D116808#3227470 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D116808#3227470>, @huixie90 wrote:

> I am not sure about the process and I am happy to undo the formatting change. But I followed the instructions of the contribution guide and used the "arc" tool for the review and the tool suggested me to lint the code in this way and automatically applied the formatting fix.

Don't worry -- it's indeed very misleading. This is a frequent issue for contributors, and we should make it so that `arc` doesn't try to run lint by default on `libcxx/` and `libcxxabi/`. But I don't know how to make that happen (which also points out to another problem, which is the high barrier to LLVM's infrastructure).

In D116808#3227888 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D116808#3227888>, @Quuxplusone wrote:

> When you searched for test coverage, I'm guessing you grepped for `views::take`. libc++ doesn't implement that CPO yet. All we have implemented so far is the `ranges::take_view` //type//. But I believe @ldionne is working on `views::take`, because he mentioned it after I'd also posted it in D115122 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D115122> (but D115122 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D115122> lacks tests).

Indeed, I have local patches I'm slowly finishing up in the middle of everything else. They add `views::take`, `views::drop` and `views::join`. Those views are tested though, just not their range adaptor objects.

Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D116808/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D116808