refactor: fix headers with IWYU

src/nvim/assert_defs.h

@@ -0,0 +1,167 @@
+#pragma once
+
+#include "auto/config.h"
+#include "nvim/log.h"
+
+// support static asserts (aka compile-time asserts)
+
+// some compilers don't properly support short-circuiting apparently, giving
+// ugly syntax errors when using things like defined(__clang__) &&
+// defined(__has_feature) && __has_feature(...). Therefore we define Clang's
+// __has_feature and __has_extension macro's before referring to them.
+#ifndef __has_feature
+# define __has_feature(x) 0
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __has_extension
+# define __has_extension __has_feature
+#endif
+
+/// @def STATIC_ASSERT
+/// @brief Assert at compile time if condition is not satisfied.
+///
+/// Should be put on its own line, followed by a semicolon.
+///
+/// Example:
+///
+///     STATIC_ASSERT(sizeof(void *) == 8, "Expected 64-bit mode");
+///
+/// @param[in]  condition  Condition to check, should be an integer constant
+///                        expression.
+/// @param[in]  message  Message which will be given if check fails.
+
+/// @def STATIC_ASSERT_EXPR
+/// @brief Like #STATIC_ASSERT, but can be used where expressions are used.
+///
+/// STATIC_ASSERT_EXPR may be put in brace initializer lists. Error message
+/// given in this case is not very nice with the current implementation though
+/// and `message` argument is ignored.
+
+// define STATIC_ASSERT as C11's _Static_assert whenever either C11 mode is
+// detected or the compiler is known to support it. Note that Clang in C99
+// mode defines __has_feature(c_static_assert) as false and
+// __has_extension(c_static_assert) as true. Meaning it does support it, but
+// warns. A similar thing goes for gcc, which warns when it's not compiling
+// as C11 but does support _Static_assert since 4.6. Since we prefer the
+// clearer messages we get from _Static_assert, we suppress the warnings
+// temporarily.
+
+#define STATIC_ASSERT_PRAGMA_START
+#define STATIC_ASSERT_PRAGMA_END
+#define STATIC_ASSERT(cond, msg) \
+  do { \
+    STATIC_ASSERT_PRAGMA_START \
+    STATIC_ASSERT_STATEMENT(cond, msg); \
+    STATIC_ASSERT_PRAGMA_END \
+  } while (0)
+
+// the easiest case, when the mode is C11 (generic compiler) or Clang
+// advertises explicit support for c_static_assert, meaning it won't warn.
+#if __STDC_VERSION__ >= 201112 || __has_feature(c_static_assert)
+# define STATIC_ASSERT_STATEMENT(cond, msg) _Static_assert(cond, msg)
+// if we're dealing with gcc >= 4.6 in C99 mode, we can still use
+// _Static_assert but we need to suppress warnings, this is pretty ugly.
+#elif (!defined(__clang__) && !defined(__INTEL_COMPILER)) &&  /* NOLINT(whitespace/parens)*/ \
+  (__GNUC__ > 4 || (__GNUC__ == 4 && __GNUC_MINOR__ >= 6))
+
+# define STATIC_ASSERT_STATEMENT(cond, msg) _Static_assert(cond, msg)
+
+# undef STATIC_ASSERT_PRAGMA_START
+
+# if __GNUC__ >= 6
+#  define STATIC_ASSERT_PRAGMA_START \
+  _Pragma("GCC diagnostic push") \
+  _Pragma("GCC diagnostic ignored \"-Wpedantic\"")
+# else
+#  define STATIC_ASSERT_PRAGMA_START \
+  _Pragma("GCC diagnostic push") \
+  _Pragma("GCC diagnostic ignored \"-pedantic\"")
+# endif
+
+# undef STATIC_ASSERT_PRAGMA_END
+# define STATIC_ASSERT_PRAGMA_END \
+  _Pragma("GCC diagnostic pop")
+
+// the same goes for clang in C99 mode, but we suppress a different warning
+#elif defined(__clang__) && __has_extension(c_static_assert)
+
+# define STATIC_ASSERT_STATEMENT(cond, msg) _Static_assert(cond, msg)
+
+# undef STATIC_ASSERT_PRAGMA_START
+# define STATIC_ASSERT_PRAGMA_START \
+  _Pragma("clang diagnostic push") \
+  _Pragma("clang diagnostic ignored \"-Wc11-extensions\"")
+
+# undef STATIC_ASSERT_PRAGMA_END
+# define STATIC_ASSERT_PRAGMA_END \
+  _Pragma("clang diagnostic pop")
+
+// TODO(aktau): verify that this works, don't have MSVC on hand.
+#elif _MSC_VER >= 1600
+
+# define STATIC_ASSERT_STATEMENT(cond, msg) static_assert(cond, msg)
+
+// fallback for compilers that don't support _Static_assert or static_assert
+// not as pretty but gets the job done. Credit goes to Pádraig Brady and
+// contributors.
+#else
+# define STATIC_ASSERT_STATEMENT STATIC_ASSERT_EXPR
+#endif
+
+#define ASSERT_CONCAT_(a, b) a##b
+#define ASSERT_CONCAT(a, b) ASSERT_CONCAT_(a, b)
+// These can't be used after statements in c89.
+#ifdef __COUNTER__
+# define STATIC_ASSERT_EXPR(e, m) \
+  ((enum { ASSERT_CONCAT(static_assert_, __COUNTER__) = 1/(!!(e)), }) 0)
+#else
+// This can't be used twice on the same line so ensure if using in headers
+// that the headers are not included twice (by wrapping in #ifndef...#endif)
+// Note it doesn't cause an issue when used on same line of separate modules
+// compiled with gcc -combine -fwhole-program.
+# define STATIC_ASSERT_EXPR(e, m) \
+  ((enum { ASSERT_CONCAT(assert_line_, __LINE__) = 1/(!!(e)), }) 0)
+#endif
+
+/// @def STRICT_ADD
+/// @brief Adds (a + b) and stores result in `c`.  Aborts on overflow.
+///
+/// Requires GCC 5+ and Clang 3.8+
+///   https://clang.llvm.org/docs/LanguageExtensions.html
+///   https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Integer-Overflow-Builtins.html
+///
+/// Alternative for compilers without __builtin_xx_overflow ?
+///   https://stackoverflow.com/a/44830670/152142
+///
+/// @param a  Operand 1.
+/// @param b  Operand 2.
+/// @param c  Where to store the result.
+/// @param t  Result type. Not used if compiler supports __builtin_add_overflow.
+#ifdef HAVE_BUILTIN_ADD_OVERFLOW
+# define STRICT_ADD(a, b, c, t) \
+  do { \
+    if (__builtin_add_overflow(a, b, c)) { \
+      ELOG("STRICT_ADD overflow"); \
+      abort(); \
+    } \
+  } while (0)
+#else
+# define STRICT_ADD(a, b, c, t) \
+  do { *(c) = (t)((a) + (b)); } while (0)
+#endif
+
+/// @def STRICT_SUB
+/// @brief Subtracts (a - b) and stores result in `c`.  Aborts on overflow.
+/// @see STRICT_ADD
+#ifdef HAVE_BUILTIN_ADD_OVERFLOW
+# define STRICT_SUB(a, b, c, t) \
+  do { \
+    if (__builtin_sub_overflow(a, b, c)) { \
+      ELOG("STRICT_SUB overflow"); \
+      abort(); \
+    } \
+  } while (0)
+#else
+# define STRICT_SUB(a, b, c, t) \
+  do { *(c) = (t)((a) - (b)); } while (0)
+#endif