> On Jan. 4, 2016, 5:30 p.m., Alexander Rojas wrote:
> > 3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/result_of.hpp, line 41
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/41461/diff/5/?file=1174022#file1174022line41>
> >
> >     my question here is, why does `result_of_type` needs to take 
> > parameters?, just so `fail result_of_type` can take and then ignore them?

Looks like the compiler cannot disambiguate between `<ret-type> foo(...)` and 
`<ret-type> foo()` because there is no conversion happening (my guess is based 
on a note in http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/variadic_arguments). 
MPark, looks like a comment here can be really helpful : ).


- Alexander


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/41461/#review112599
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Dec. 28, 2015, 3:42 p.m., Michael Park wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/41461/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Dec. 28, 2015, 3:42 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Alex Clemmer and Joris Van Remoortere.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-4220
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-4220
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> VS 2015 won't support C++14 `std::result_of` SFINAE until Update 2, so 
> `result_of` must be replaced with `decltype(invoke)`.
> 
> Here, we implement SFINAE `result_of` in `stout`.
> 
> Follow-up from [r40114](https://reviews.apache.org/r/40114/).
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/Makefile.am 
> b2dea9b93adfa3ea0415a0b5c81a369dd29b6cfe 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/result_of.hpp PRE-CREATION 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/41461/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> `make check` on OS X, compiled on Windows.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Michael Park
> 
>

Reply via email to