[libcxx-commits] [PATCH] D135016: [libc++] Implement P1169R4 (static operator())

[Nikolas Klauser via Phabricator via libcxx-commits]

philnik added inline comments.


================
Comment at: libcxx/include/__functional/function.h:1070-1071
 
-template<class _Fp>
-struct __strip_signature;
-
-template<class _Rp, class _Gp, class ..._Ap>
-struct __strip_signature<_Rp (_Gp::*) (_Ap...)> { using type = _Rp(_Ap...); };
-template<class _Rp, class _Gp, class ..._Ap>
-struct __strip_signature<_Rp (_Gp::*) (_Ap...) const> { using type = _Rp(_Ap...); };
-template<class _Rp, class _Gp, class ..._Ap>
-struct __strip_signature<_Rp (_Gp::*) (_Ap...) volatile> { using type = _Rp(_Ap...); };
-template<class _Rp, class _Gp, class ..._Ap>
-struct __strip_signature<_Rp (_Gp::*) (_Ap...) const volatile> { using type = _Rp(_Ap...); };
-
-template<class _Rp, class _Gp, class ..._Ap>
-struct __strip_signature<_Rp (_Gp::*) (_Ap...) &> { using type = _Rp(_Ap...); };
-template<class _Rp, class _Gp, class ..._Ap>
-struct __strip_signature<_Rp (_Gp::*) (_Ap...) const &> { using type = _Rp(_Ap...); };
-template<class _Rp, class _Gp, class ..._Ap>
-struct __strip_signature<_Rp (_Gp::*) (_Ap...) volatile &> { using type = _Rp(_Ap...); };
-template<class _Rp, class _Gp, class ..._Ap>
-struct __strip_signature<_Rp (_Gp::*) (_Ap...) const volatile &> { using type = _Rp(_Ap...); };
-
-template<class _Rp, class _Gp, class ..._Ap>
-struct __strip_signature<_Rp (_Gp::*) (_Ap...) noexcept> { using type = _Rp(_Ap...); };
-template<class _Rp, class _Gp, class ..._Ap>
-struct __strip_signature<_Rp (_Gp::*) (_Ap...) const noexcept> { using type = _Rp(_Ap...); };
-template<class _Rp, class _Gp, class ..._Ap>
-struct __strip_signature<_Rp (_Gp::*) (_Ap...) volatile noexcept> { using type = _Rp(_Ap...); };
-template<class _Rp, class _Gp, class ..._Ap>
-struct __strip_signature<_Rp (_Gp::*) (_Ap...) const volatile noexcept> { using type = _Rp(_Ap...); };
-
-template<class _Rp, class _Gp, class ..._Ap>
-struct __strip_signature<_Rp (_Gp::*) (_Ap...) & noexcept> { using type = _Rp(_Ap...); };
-template<class _Rp, class _Gp, class ..._Ap>
-struct __strip_signature<_Rp (_Gp::*) (_Ap...) const & noexcept> { using type = _Rp(_Ap...); };
-template<class _Rp, class _Gp, class ..._Ap>
-struct __strip_signature<_Rp (_Gp::*) (_Ap...) volatile & noexcept> { using type = _Rp(_Ap...); };
-template<class _Rp, class _Gp, class ..._Ap>
-struct __strip_signature<_Rp (_Gp::*) (_Ap...) const volatile & noexcept> { using type = _Rp(_Ap...); };
-
 template<class _Fp, class _Stripped = typename __strip_signature<decltype(&_Fp::operator())>::type>
 function(_Fp) -> function<_Stripped>;
 #endif // _LIBCPP_STD_VER >= 17
----------------
huixie90 wrote:
> Should this be C++23?
No, this has been added in C++17.


================
Comment at: libcxx/include/future:2053
 
+#if _LIBCPP_STD_VER >= 17
+
----------------
huixie90 wrote:
> Should the new deduction guide be C++23?
No, this is from LWG3117, which IIUC should be applied retroactively to C++17.


================
Comment at: libcxx/test/std/utilities/function.objects/func.wrap/func.wrap.func/func.wrap.func.con/ctad.static.compile.pass.cpp:18
+
+#if defined(__cpp_static_call_operator) && __cpp_static_call_operator >= 202207L
+
----------------
ldionne wrote:
> Let's mark this as `UNSUPPORTED: clang-14, clang-15, gcc-12` instead.
I'm `XFAIL`ing it to ensure we test it on all compilers that support `static operator()`.


================
Comment at: libcxx/test/std/utilities/function.objects/func.wrap/func.wrap.func/func.wrap.func.con/ctad.static.compile.pass.cpp:20
+
+struct Except {
+  static int operator()(int*, long*) { return 0; }
----------------
ldionne wrote:
> Please add a few more cases: 0 arguments, 1 argument, variadic arguments, default argument (why not?).
> 
> Also, let's run these tests (not compile only), unless you sign up to address the more general issue of testing the integration of `static operator()` in `std::function` (and probably other places). If you don't sign up for that, then let's run these tests cause that's going to be better than nothing.
I'd rather do it not at all or properly, than half-assed, so I guess I'm signing up for it. Otherwise it probably happens in 5 years.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D135016/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D135016