This is an archive of the discontinued LLVM Phabricator instance.

[libc++][chrono] Adds formatter file_time.
ClosedPublic

Authored by Mordante on Apr 21 2023, 8:26 AM.

Details

Reviewers
ldionne
Group Reviewers
Restricted Project
Commits
rG96f303324f58: [libc++][chrono] Adds formatter file_time.

Diff Detail

Event Timeline

Mordante created this revision.Apr 21 2023, 8:26 AM
Herald added a project: Restricted Project. · View Herald TranscriptApr 21 2023, 8:26 AM
Mordante requested review of this revision.Apr 21 2023, 8:26 AM
Herald added a project: Restricted Project. · View Herald TranscriptApr 21 2023, 8:26 AM
Herald added a reviewer: Restricted Project. · View Herald Transcript
Mordante updated this revision to Diff 515842.Apr 21 2023, 11:12 AM

Trigger CI.

h-vetinari added a subscriber: h-vetinari.EditedApr 21 2023, 7:37 PM

Is there anywhere where the missing <chrono> bits are tracked? I tracked down the "In progress" status for P0355 on https://libcxx.llvm.org/Status/Cxx20.html back to https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/ebff3123a2d7c6b3d74d27c50700f0582ec45e85, but that's a long time ago.

Mordante updated this revision to Diff 516051.Apr 22 2023, 3:15 AM

CI fixes.

Is there anywhere where the missing <chrono> bits are tracked? I tracked down the "In progress" status for P0355 on https://libcxx.llvm.org/Status/Cxx20.html back to https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/ebff3123a2d7c6b3d74d27c50700f0582ec45e85, but that's a long time ago.

No not really. Some information is here https://libcxx.llvm.org/Status/Format.html (dependency "A <chrono> implementation"). I know there are no parse functions too. However I haven't spend time investigating the exact status. I still intend to work on chrono in the future, at which time I probably will create a status page. But for now I'm focusing on format and modules.

No not really. Some information is here https://libcxx.llvm.org/Status/Format.html (dependency "A <chrono> implementation"). I know there are no parse functions too. However I haven't spend time investigating the exact status. I still intend to work on chrono in the future, at which time I probably will create a status page. But for now I'm focusing on format and modules.

Not everything has to fall on you! But the combination of showing it "in progress" and not having a dedicated issue drastically lowers the visibility and thus the chance that someone would pick this up otherwise. Perhaps we should just open an issue?

I'm mainly curious about getting format out of experimental status, which at the time was blocked on chrono (well not exactly blocked, but you said you preferred to wait for chrono).

No not really. Some information is here https://libcxx.llvm.org/Status/Format.html (dependency "A <chrono> implementation"). I know there are no parse functions too. However I haven't spend time investigating the exact status. I still intend to work on chrono in the future, at which time I probably will create a status page. But for now I'm focusing on format and modules.

Not everything has to fall on you!

True and I don't like it does. That something is on my todo list does not mean I will do it. Some items have been already been done before I had time to do them.

But the combination of showing it "in progress" and not having a dedicated issue drastically lowers the visibility and thus the chance that someone would pick this up otherwise. Perhaps we should just open an issue?

I don't feel GitHub issues helps us here. What would help is a status page that properly documents the status. But that is also quite some work since we don't know what exactly is done.

I'm mainly curious about getting format out of experimental status, which at the time was blocked on chrono (well not exactly blocked, but you said you preferred to wait for chrono).

I'm not sure at what time that exactly was. But I expect that was at a time I hadn't looked deeply at what chrono offers and what formatting challenges there are. At the moment I have a better understanding of chrono. I hope/expect that the experimental flag will be removed in LLVM 17. Note the feature-test macro does require the missing chrono parts to be available, so that will remain unset.

@Mordante Sorry for the off-topic question. I am seen (I think) the same build issue with no report in all my builds from last week and retuning the CI doesn't fix them: "1145730 merge_guards_bot fail".
Am I doing something wrong or the CI isn't working currently?

ldionne accepted this revision.Apr 25 2023, 9:15 AM
ldionne added a subscriber: ldionne.
ldionne added inline comments.
libcxx/test/std/time/time.syn/formatter.file_time.pass.cpp
43 ↗(On Diff #516051)
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Apr 25 2023, 9:15 AM
Mordante marked an inline comment as done.Apr 27 2023, 8:12 AM
This revision was landed with ongoing or failed builds.Apr 27 2023, 8:13 AM
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.

@Mordante Sorry for the off-topic question. I am seen (I think) the same build issue with no report in all my builds from last week and retuning the CI doesn't fix them: "1145730 merge_guards_bot fail".
Am I doing something wrong or the CI isn't working currently?

According to Louis that is a recent change and the list of fixes should be looked at in buildkite itself. Note it would be better to ask these questions on Discord, that will result in faster replies.