This patch implements LWG-3657 (std::hash<std::filesystem::path> is not enabled) in libcxx. Since the February 2022 was virtual, I don't know what location to specify in docs/Status.
Diff Detail
- Repository
- rG LLVM Github Monorepo
Event Timeline
Could you rename the PR to something along the lines of [libc++] Implement LWG3657 to make clear which project this is part of and that you are implementing LWG3657?
libcxx/docs/Status/Cxx17Issues.csv | ||
---|---|---|
318–319 | This is currently in Cxx2bIssues.csv. I don't know if it should be there or here. @ldionne | |
libcxx/include/__filesystem/path.h | ||
1022 | You don't need availability for this function. It's not part of the dylib. | |
1027 | Please don't inherit from unary_function. This should be removed since C++17. | |
1029 | Please use _LIBCPP_HIDE_FROM_ABI. | |
1030 | ||
libcxx/test/std/input.output/filesystems/class.path/path.member/path.compare.pass.cpp | ||
12 | This doesn't test <functional>. | |
34–36 | Please add an empty line here. | |
libcxx/test/std/input.output/filesystems/class.path/path.nonmember/hash_tested_elswhere.pass.cpp | ||
1 ↗ | (On Diff #428679) | @ldionne Can we just remove this file? |
libcxx/docs/Status/Cxx17Issues.csv | ||
---|---|---|
318–319 | In general LWG issues are listed in the status list C++ version it was voted in the WP. |
@Fulgen Fly-by comment: can you please change the title (i.e., the first line) of the patch to include the name of the paper as well? It would make it a little easier to understand what the patch is about for somebody looking through the list of Phabricator reviews (or the output of git log --oneline).
Did that now, assuming you meant retitling the revision (there are now three commits in this revision due to feedback fixes, so I don't think you mean the commit message).
Is there anything still missing? As far as I can tell, I've implemented the feedback.
Please fix the CI and mark completed comments as Done. (BTW, next time you can ping earlier than 6 months later if you want :-) )
Unfortunately sometimes we miss message, so pinging after a week would be better.
Please make sure you rebase your patch on the latest main before updating it.
libcxx/docs/Status/Cxx2bIssues.csv | ||
---|---|---|
158 | This should be 16 now. |
Aw, sorry for not noticing this earlier. Phabricator notifications are kinda broken, they don't allow direct mentions to be separated from the rest of all reviews, which means I didn't see the pings here.
This was done and committed by D143452.. I'm sorry for the duplicate work, but it seems like we can close this now :-/
This is currently in Cxx2bIssues.csv. I don't know if it should be there or here. @ldionne
In the last "" should be the version in which it was implemented (15.0) in this case.