[cxx-interop] Conform to UnsafeCxxContiguousIterator based on iterator_concept nested type
#77049
+119
−36
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…ator_concept` nested type 3a200de has a logic bug where we tried to conform C++ iterator types to `UnsafeCxxContiguousIterator` protocol based on their nested type called `iterator_category`. The C++20 standard says we should rely on `iterator_concept` instead. https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/iterator/iterator_tags#Iterator_concept Despite what the name suggests, we are not actually using C++ concepts in this change. rdar://137877849
egorzhdan
requested review from
zoecarver,
hyp,
Xazax-hun,
beccadax and
ian-twilightcoder
as code owners
|
@swift-ci please smoke test |
Xazax-hun
reviewed
Oct 16, 2024
| // `iterator_concept`. It is not possible to detect a contiguous iterator | ||
| // based on its `iterator_category`. The type might not have an | ||
| // `iterator_concept` defined. | ||
| auto iteratorConcept = getIteratorConceptDecl(clangDecl); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would it make sense to move this down, closer to its use?
| auto unwrapUnderlyingTypeDecl = | ||
| [](clang::TypeDecl *typeDecl) -> clang::CXXRecordDecl * { | ||
| clang::CXXRecordDecl *underlyingDecl = nullptr; | ||
| if (auto typedefDecl = dyn_cast<clang::TypedefNameDecl>(typeDecl)) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could we have multiple layers of TypedefNameDecls? Would that be a problem?
E.g.:
struct MyIterator {
using iterator_concept = std::vector<int>::iterator::iterator_concept;
// ...
private:
std::vector<int>::iterator it;
};
| }; | ||
|
|
||
| // Traverse all transitive bases of `underlyingDecl` to check if | ||
| // it inherits from `std::input_iterator_tag`. | ||
| bool isInputIterator = isInputIteratorDecl(underlyingCategoryDecl); | ||
| bool isRandomAccessIterator = | ||
| isRandomAccessIteratorDecl(underlyingCategoryDecl); | ||
| bool isContiguousIterator = isContiguousIteratorDecl(underlyingCategoryDecl); | ||
| underlyingCategoryDecl->forallBases([&](const clang::CXXRecordDecl *base) { | ||
| if (isInputIteratorDecl(base)) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We do not shortcut the search if we only found an input iterator but we do when we found a random access one. Is this intended?
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
3a200de has a logic bug where we tried to conform C++ iterator types to
UnsafeCxxContiguousIteratorprotocol based on their nested type callediterator_category. The C++20 standard says we should rely oniterator_conceptinstead.https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/iterator/iterator_tags#Iterator_concept
Despite what the name suggests, we are not actually using C++ concepts in this change.
rdar://137877849