On 03/06/2015 06:03 PM, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
So.. just to clarify that we're on the same page.. making volatile-qualified types non-trivially copyable is ok, but making wrappers of volatile-qualified types non-trivially copyable is not ok? That's easily doable implementation-wise, but it makes me question the overall approach and its consistency.
Indeed. This is a question for CWG; we may want to reconsider the first point as well.
Is there a way to indicate that from the point of C++ a type is not trivially copyable without changing the "complexness" of a copy operation, ultimately without changing ABI?
There are various hacks I can imagine, but I think I'd prefer to resolve the standard issue before trying to implement it.
Jason
