Windows builds are broken due to MSVC fold expression bug

[nolankramer]

This is addressed by adding workaround type traits into TypeTraits.hpp:

template<typename T, typename... Ts>
struct all_are_node_ptrs {
    static constexpr bool value = (is_node_ptr_v<T> && ... && is_node_ptr_v<Ts>);
};

template<typename T, typename... Ts>
inline constexpr bool all_are_node_ptrs_v = all_are_node_ptrs<T, Ts...>::value;

and

template<typename T, typename... Ts>
struct all_are_edge_ptrs {
    static constexpr bool value = (is_edge_ptr_v<T> && ... && is_edge_ptr_v<Ts>);
};

template<typename T, typename... Ts>
inline constexpr bool all_are_edge_ptrs_v = all_are_edge_ptrs<T, Ts...>::value;

I've also cleaned-up warnings on Windows that were caused by not explicitly typecasting.

[sbaldu]

The clang-format workflow fails in files test/DijkstraTest.cpp, TypeTraitsTest.hpp and welshPowellColoringTest.cpp.
I just noticed, also some files in include.

[nolankramer]

@sbaldu Ran it. Expect a high number of changes! Seems quite a few files weren't formatted correctly.

[nolankramer]

Looks like format is still broken on include/???

I wonder why. I'm using a freshly installed clang-format on WSL Ubuntu: Ubuntu clang-format version 14.0.0-1ubuntu1.1

[sbaldu]

The workflow uses clang-format 16, maybe it's due to some difference in the two versions. It's happened to me before when working with clang-format 14

[nolankramer]

Hmm let me try to get that version

[sbaldu]

@nolankramer I see that partition test is failing on windows, but I suppose that the issue is unrelated to this PR.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 96.21849% with 9 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 97.88%. Comparing base (1b31e63) to head (717f833).
Report is 21 commits behind head on master.

Files	Patch %	Lines
include/CXXGraph/Graph/Algorithm/Dijkstra_impl.hpp	95.48%	8 Missing ⚠️
include/CXXGraph/Graph/Algorithm/Boruvka_impl.hpp	87.50%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #416      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   97.58%   97.88%   +0.29%     
==========================================
  Files          87       87              
  Lines        9492    10057     +565     
  Branches        0      666     +666     
==========================================
+ Hits         9263     9844     +581     
+ Misses        229      213      -16     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	97.88% <96.21%> (+0.29%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[nolankramer]

@nolankramer I see that partition test is failing on windows, but I suppose that the issue is unrelated to this PR.

FWIW, that test has been failing for a long time. Somebody is grabbing a mutex they don't own in the partitioning code. That can likely be cleaned up in another PR.

[sbaldu]

@nolankramer I see that partition test is failing on windows, but I suppose that the issue is unrelated to this PR.

FWIW, that test has been failing for a long time. Somebody is grabbing a mutex they don't own in the partitioning code. That can likely be cleaned up in another PR.

Yes you're right.

[sbaldu]

@nolankramer Perfect

[nolankramer]

This can be merged after checks. Looks like the failing ones are due to infra bugs (and the tests b/c of the partitioning bug).

[nolankramer]

@sbaldu This can be merged now.

[sbaldu]

I agree. I'm waiting for @ZigRazor approval.

[ZigRazor]

Good one!

[ZigRazor]

We can merge it

[ZigRazor]

I think we can open a new issue for partitioning test failed, that you cite before @nolankramer