This reverts commit c861fe8a71e64f3d2108c58147e7375cd9314521.

Unfortunately, this use of hidden visibility attributes causes
user-defined specializations of standard-library types to also be marked
hidden by default, which is incorrect. See discussion thread on #131156.

...and also reverts the follow-up commits:

Revert "[libc++] Add explicit ABI annotations to functions from the block runtime declared in <__functional/function.h> (#140592)"
This reverts commit 3e4c9dc299c35155934688184319d391b298fff7.

Revert "[libc++] Make ABI annotations explicit for windows-specific code (#140507)"
This reverts commit f73287e623a6c2e4a3485832bc3e10860cd26eb5.

Revert "[libc++][NFC] Replace a few "namespace std" with the correct macro (#140510)"
This reverts commit 1d411f27c769a32cb22ce50b9dc4421e34fd40dd.

This patch introduces `_LIBCPP_{BEGIN,END}_EXPLICIT_ABI_ANNOTATIONS`,
which allow us to have implicit annotations for most functions, and just
where it's not "hide_from_abi everything" we add explicit annotations.
This allows us to drop the `_LIBCPP_HIDE_FROM_ABI` macro from most
functions in libc++.

We're currently adding `bad_function_call::what()` behind an ABI flag,
even though adding it is not an ABI break and can be handled through
availability.

This has multiple benefits:
- There is a single instance of our hash function, reducing object file
size
- The hash implementation isn't instantiated in every TU anymore,
reducing compile times
- Behind an ABI configuration macro it would be possible to salt the
hash

This patch uses our availability machinery to allow defining a key
function for bad_function_call and bad_expected_access at all times but
only rely on it when we can. This prevents compilers from complaining
about weak vtables and reduces code bloat and the amount of work done by
the dynamic linker.

rdar://111917845

This patch runs clang-format on all of libcxx/include and libcxx/src, in
accordance with the RFC discussed at [1]. Follow-up patches will format
the benchmarks, the test suite and remaining parts of the code. I'm
splitting this one into its own patch so the diff is a bit easier to
review.

This patch was generated with:

   find libcxx/include libcxx/src -type f \
      | grep -v 'module.modulemap.in' \
      | grep -v 'CMakeLists.txt' \
      | grep -v 'README.txt' \
      | grep -v 'libcxx.imp' \
      | grep -v '__config_site.in' \
      | xargs clang-format -i

A Git merge driver is available in libcxx/utils/clang-format-merge-driver.sh
to help resolve merge and rebase issues across these formatting changes.

[1]: https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-clang-formatting-all-of-libc-once-and-for-all

Our best guess is that the two syntaxes should have exactly equivalent
effects, so, let's be consistent with what we do in libcxx/include/.

I've left `#include "include/x.h"` and `#include "../y.h"` alone
because I'm less sure that they're interchangeable, and they aren't
inconsistent with libcxx/include/ because libcxx/include/ never
does that kind of thing.

Also, use the `_LIBCPP_PUSH_MACROS/POP_MACROS` dance for `<__undef_macros>`,
even though it's technically unnecessary in a standalone .cpp file,
just so we have consistently one way to do it.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D119561

We've stopped doing it in libc++ for a while now because these names
would end up rotting as we move things around and copy/paste stuff.
This cleans up all the existing files so as to stop the spreading
as people copy-paste headers around.

However, whether applications rely on the std::bad_function_call vtable
being in the dylib is still controlled by the ABI macro, since changing
that would be an ABI break.

Also separate preprocessor definitions for whether to use a key function
and whether to use a `bad_function_call`-specific `what` message
(`what` message is mandated by [LWG2233](http://wg21.link/LWG2233)).

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D92397

We always build the libraries in a Standard mode that supports noexcept,
so there's no need to use the _NOEXCEPT macro.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D97700