[libcxx-commits] [libcxx] [llvm] [libcxx] improves diagnostics for containers with bad value types (PR #106296)

[Louis Dionne via libcxx-commits]

================
@@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
+//===----------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+//
+// Part of the LLVM Project, under the Apache License v2.0 with LLVM Exceptions.
+// See https://llvm.org/LICENSE.txt for license information.
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 WITH LLVM-exception
+//
+//===----------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
+#ifndef _LIBCPP___TYPE_TRAITS_DIAGNOSTIC_UTILITIES_H
+#define _LIBCPP___TYPE_TRAITS_DIAGNOSTIC_UTILITIES_H
+
+#include <__config>
+#include <__type_traits/decay.h>
+#include <__type_traits/integral_constant.h>
+#include <__type_traits/is_bounded_array.h>
+#include <__type_traits/is_const.h>
+#include <__type_traits/is_function.h>
+#include <__type_traits/is_reference.h>
+#include <__type_traits/is_same.h>
+#include <__type_traits/is_unbounded_array.h>
+#include <__type_traits/is_void.h>
+#include <__type_traits/is_volatile.h>
+
+#if !defined(_LIBCPP_HAS_NO_PRAGMA_SYSTEM_HEADER)
+#  pragma GCC system_header
+#endif
+
+_LIBCPP_BEGIN_NAMESPACE_STD
+
+// Many templates require their type parameters to be cv-unqualified objects.
+template <template <class...> class _Template, class _Tp, bool = is_same<__decay_t<_Tp>, _Tp>::value>
+struct __requires_cv_unqualified_object_type : true_type {};
+
+#define _LIBCPP_DEFINE__REQUIRES_CV_UNQUALIFIED_OBJECT_TYPE(_Template, _Verb)                                          \
+  template <class _Tp>                                                                                                 \
+  struct __requires_cv_unqualified_object_type<_Template, _Tp, false>                                                  \
----------------
ldionne wrote:

Is there a reason why the patch now defines these `__requires_cv_unqualified_object_type` specializations for each container? Was that in response to the comment about too many instantiations?

This adds complexity but I don't see the benefit (yet), I'd rather keep this patch as simple as can be. After all the goal here is to issue diagnostics -- that's a fairly simple problem and I'd like to keep the solution accordingly simple.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106296