> -----Original Message----- > From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2008 1:16 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Differences between tr1 and c++0x > > Travis Vitek wrote: > > > > > > Martin Sebor wrote: > >> Travis Vitek wrote: > >>> As most of us know, I've been working on type_traits for the 4.3 > >>> release. In doing so, I've noticed that there are some pretty > >>> significant differences between tr1 and c++0x. My question is what > >>> _exactly_ are we wanting to implement here? Do we want to > >>> have the tr1 stuff as it is documented [in the tr1 final], or do > >>> we want the tr1 additions as they appear in the c++0x working > >>> draft? > >>> > >>> Some of the issues... > >>> > >>> 1. The namespace that these features appear in [std::tr1 vs std] > >>> 2. Section numbers for test names [4.meta.rel.cpp vs > >>> 20.meta.rel.cpp] > >>> 3. Subtle differences between behavior of traits > >>> 4. Deprecated traits like add_reference [now > >>> add_lvalue_reference] > >>> > >>> I just want to make absolutely sure that I'm working with the same > >>> expectations as everyone else and that we are trying to > implement the > >>> c++0x draft features that were introduced in tr1. I'm > >> currently writing > >>> to the c++0x draft, but my tests use old section numbers > from the tr1 > >>> final, and everything I've written is currently in the std::tr1 > >>> namespace [using a macro _TR1]. > >> IMO, we should target C++ 0x and forget TR1 even exists ;-) > > > > So no _TR1 macro, no std::tr1 namespace, all tests named > according to > > the section in the draft in which the feature appears, and > requirements > > directly from the draft. That sounds good. > > We should probably also rename and/or reorganize the Jira TR1 > Components. Two possible approaches come to mind: > > 1) Integrate each TR1 component into the C++ component where > it will end up in C++ 0x. > > 2) Rename each TR1 component to start with the C++ 0x section > number but the (possibly new) name from C++0 0x and with > the C++ 0x suffix. E.g., rename TR1.2 - General Utilities > to 20. General Utilities (C++ 0x). > > Do we have a preference?
I like the first choice and put "(C++ 0x)" somewhere in the issue name. Brad.
