[libcxx-commits] [libcxx] [libc++][hardening] Categorize more assertions. (PR #75918)

[Konstantin Varlamov via libcxx-commits]

================
@@ -915,7 +915,10 @@ public:
     return __bc != 0 ? (float)size() / __bc : 0.f;
   }
   _LIBCPP_HIDE_FROM_ABI void max_load_factor(float __mlf) _NOEXCEPT {
-    _LIBCPP_ASSERT_UNCATEGORIZED(__mlf > 0, "unordered container::max_load_factor(lf) called with lf <= 0");
+    // While passing a non-positive load factor is undefined behavior, in practice the result will be benign (the
+    // call will be equivalent to `max_load_factor(load_factor())`, which is also the case for passing a valid value
+    // less than the current `load_factor`).
+    _LIBCPP_ASSERT_PEDANTIC(__mlf > 0, "unordered container::max_load_factor(lf) called with lf <= 0");
     max_load_factor() = std::max(__mlf, load_factor());
----------------
var-const wrote:

That's actually a very interesting question. So far, our non-internal assertions always (AFAIK) directly correspond to a prerequisite in the Standard. In this case, the only prerequisite is that the given argument is greater than `0`. Should we start extending our (non-internal) validation beyond what the Standard requires directly? Tagging @ldionne as well.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/75918