[libc++][test] Move the SFINAE test for return types of quoted to libcxx/test/libcxx/

[frederick-vs-ja]

[quoted.manip] only specifies that operator<</operator>> is well-formed for operands with suitable types, and leaves it undefined whether they are SFINAE-friendly.

Although it's worthwhile making them SFINAE-friendly, perhaps the SFINAE-friendliness should be considered as a libc++-specific choice at this moment.

Also clang-format the file to make CI happy.

[llvmbot]

@llvm/pr-subscribers-libcxx

Author: A. Jiang (frederick-vs-ja)

Changes

[quoted.manip] only specifies that operator<</operator>> is well-formed for operands with suitable types, and leaves it undefined whether they are SFINAE-friendly.

Although it's worthwhile making them SFINAE-friendly, perhaps the SFINAE-friendliness should be considered as a libc++-specific choice at this moment.

---

Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/157026.diff

1 Files Affected:

• (renamed) libcxx/test/libcxx/input.output/iostream.format/quoted.manip/quoted_traits.compile.pass.cpp ()

diff --git a/libcxx/test/std/input.output/iostream.format/quoted.manip/quoted_traits.compile.pass.cpp b/libcxx/test/libcxx/input.output/iostream.format/quoted.manip/quoted_traits.compile.pass.cpp
similarity index 100%
rename from libcxx/test/std/input.output/iostream.format/quoted.manip/quoted_traits.compile.pass.cpp
rename to libcxx/test/libcxx/input.output/iostream.format/quoted.manip/quoted_traits.compile.pass.cpp

[github-actions]

✅ With the latest revision this PR passed the C/C++ code formatter.

[philnik777]

Please don't clang-format anything if you only move files. Also, could we get an LWG issue on this?

[frederick-vs-ja]

Please don't clang-format anything if you only move files. Also, could we get an LWG issue on this?

I originally only moved the file, but CI complained.

I'm not sure whether this is worthy filing an LWG issue.

[philnik777]

Please don't clang-format anything if you only move files. Also, could we get an LWG issue on this?

I originally only moved the file, but CI complained.

You can ignore the formatting CI.

I'm not sure whether this is worthy filing an LWG issue.

There is implementation divergence, no? That seems like a good reason to ask LWG whether they would like to specify this any further or not.

[frederick-vs-ja]

I'm not sure whether this is worthy filing an LWG issue.

There is implementation divergence, no? That seems like a good reason to ask LWG whether they would like to specify this any further or not.

Opened LWG4364.