[libc++][hardening] Categorize assertions that produce incorrect results (#77183)

Introduce a new `argument-within-domain` category that covers cases
where the given arguments make it impossible to produce a correct result
(or create a valid object in case of constructors). While the incorrect
result doesn't create an immediate problem within the library (like e.g.
a null pointer dereference would), it always indicates a logic error in
user code and is highly likely to lead to a bug in the program once the
value is used.

1 files changed, 2 insertions, 3 deletions

diff --git a/libcxx/src/filesystem/operations.cpp b/libcxx/src/filesystem/operations.cpp
index 6bee340..8a7d6cc 100644
--- a/libcxx/src/filesystem/operations.cpp
+++ b/libcxx/src/filesystem/operations.cpp
@@ -608,10 +608,9 @@ void __permissions(const path& p, perms prms, perm_options opts, error_code* ec)
   const bool resolve_symlinks = !has_opt(perm_options::nofollow);
   const bool add_perms        = has_opt(perm_options::add);
   const bool remove_perms     = has_opt(perm_options::remove);
-  _LIBCPP_ASSERT_UNCATEGORIZED(
+  _LIBCPP_ASSERT_ARGUMENT_WITHIN_DOMAIN(
       (add_perms + remove_perms + has_opt(perm_options::replace)) == 1,
-      "One and only one of the perm_options constants replace, add, or remove "
-      "is present in opts");
+      "One and only one of the perm_options constants 'replace', 'add', or 'remove' must be present in opts");
 
   bool set_sym_perms = false;
   prms &= perms::mask;