| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
|
|
The AnyString concept is currently broken because it checks whether a
StringView is constructible from a type T. The StringView constructors,
however, only accept constant rvalue references - i.e. `T const&`.
This also adds a test to ensure this continues to work.
|
|
|
|
This was dearly missing and can be used in many existing templates.
|
|
|
|
AK internals like to use concepts and details without a fully qualified
name, which usually works just fine because we make everything
AK-related available to the unqualified namespace.
However, this breaks as soon as we start not using `USING_AK_GLOBALLY`,
due to those identifiers no longer being made available. Instead, we
just export those into the `AK` namespace instead.
|
|
This patch adds the `USING_AK_GLOBALLY` macro which is enabled by
default, but can be overridden by build flags.
This is a step towards integrating Jakt and AK types.
|
|
This ensures that the function may be wrapped with TRY() and MUST().
|
|
Some functions want to ignore cv-qualifiers, and it's much easier to
constrain the type through a concept than a separate requires clause on
the function.
|
|
Similar to 'SameAs', but for multiple types.
|
|
|
|
The counterpart to the IsSpecializationOf<...> template.
|
|
The ArrayLike type concept focuses on array-like data accesses. This
means the ability to randomly index, obtain size information, as well as
being able to expose the storage pointer. The last two already have the
standard APIs `size` and `data`, respectively.
The ArrayLike concept should always be fulfilled by Vector, FixedArray
and Array as the three main array-like types. C-style arrays themselves
of course can't fulfil ArrayLike (which could be considered ironic), but
as we don't use them much anyways this isn't a problem.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This concept describes a type with a begin()/end() pair that can
function as an iterator, given the following criteria:
- The return type of begin() is comparable with the return type of
end(), and the comparison (with operator!=) yields a bool
- The object returned from begin() can be pre-incremented
- The iterator has an operator*() implementation
|
|
If an enum has a supported underlying type we can provide encoding and
decoding for the enum as well.
|
|
The latest GCC and Clang versions both support this, so we can freely
use these in our code.
|
|
By constraining two implementations, the compiler will select the best
fitting one. All this will require is duplicating the implementation and
simplifying for the `void` case.
This constraining also informs both the caller and compiler by passing
the callback parameter types as part of the constraint
(e.g.: `IterationFunction<int>`).
Some `for_each` functions in LibELF only take functions which return
`void`. This is a minimal correctness check, as it removes one way for a
function to incompletely do something.
There seems to be a possible idiom where inside a lambda, a `return;` is
the same as `continue;` in a for-loop.
|
|
SPDX License Identifiers are a more compact / standardized
way of representing file license information.
See: https://spdx.dev/resources/use/#identifiers
This was done with the `ambr` search and replace tool.
ambr --no-parent-ignore --key-from-file --rep-from-file key.txt rep.txt *
|
|
This commit makes the user-facing StdLibExtras templates and utilities
arguably more nice-looking by removing the need to reach into the
wrapper structs generated by them to get the value/type needed.
The C++ standard library had to invent `_v` and `_t` variants (likely
because of backwards compat), but we don't need to cater to any codebase
except our own, so might as well have good things for free. :^)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Useful for diverse algorithms.
Also added some tests for it.
|
|
|
|
The Coverity compiler doesn't support C++2a yet, and thus doesn't
even recognize concept keywords. To allow serenity to be built and
analyzed on such compilers, add a fallback underdef to perform
the same template restriction based on AK::EnableIf<..> meta
programming.
Note: Coverity does seem to (annoyingly) define __cpp_concepts, even
though it doesn't support them, so we need to further check for
__COVERITY__ explicitly.
|
|
|
|
|
