[Bug libstdc++/101268] Refer manual readers to cppreference.com for API details
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101268 --- Comment #4 from Christopher Yeleighton --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1) > (In reply to Christopher Yeleighton from comment #0) > > (I mean patches are not welcome) > > Have you actually tried submitting any? I only see bug reports from you, not > patches. VERBVM CARO FACTVM EST https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51106 >
[Bug libstdc++/51539] multiplies ::operator () undocumented
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51539 --- Comment #5 from Christopher Yeleighton --- Created attachment 51106 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51106=edit Add Doxygen documentation to items in stl_function.h
[Bug libstdc++/57840] ::std ::result_of is undocumented
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57840 --- Comment #9 from Christopher Yeleighton --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #8) > Already fixed in r12-1964 > > You know doxygen output isn't the only way to look at the code, right? I thought merged commits refresh the published documentation.
[Bug libstdc++/101306] positioning at line anchors is disturbed by the navigation bar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101306 Christopher Yeleighton changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |MOVED Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED --- Comment #4 from Christopher Yeleighton --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #3) > You should report this to doxygen then. The html is produced by doxygen, not > GCC. I reported at https://github.com/doxygen/doxygen/issues/8648 >. Please go there and fill in the version details as requested. I tried to resolve this one as UPSTREAM but there is no such resolution available.
[Bug libstdc++/97001] API documentation should mention the minimum dialect
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97001 --- Comment #3 from Christopher Yeleighton --- The problem with a module-level @since is that std:: symbols are easiest to locate in the std namespace (which provides a huge index of everything). Items that are undocumented (there is a lot of them) in the namespace index are not attributed to any module and the definition line is not available for them either, so the reader needs a priori knowledge of which symbols belong to which module. While it is possible to guess the matching module with some experience, just adding dummy documentation to those symbols (as a few of other symbols have) would help navigating the API (also because the definition sometimes is readable enough to be used instead of documentation). Of course, the fact that Doxygen bugs prevent some of the symbols from appearing in the corresponding modules only adds to the general feeling of helplessness.
[Bug libstdc++/101268] Refer manual readers to cppreference.com for API details
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101268 --- Comment #3 from Christopher Yeleighton --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1) > (In reply to Christopher Yeleighton from comment #0) > > (I mean patches are not welcome) > > Have you actually tried submitting any? I only see bug reports from you, not > patches. I have—the need to rebuild the whole thing before submitting had me in the first half, not gonna lie :-( It is so much easier in MSDN where the documentation is completely separate. What I wanted to say is: resolving an issue as WONTFIX normally means that patches would not be accepted.
[Bug libstdc++/101307] Variable templates for type traits—corrections
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101307 --- Comment #1 from Christopher Yeleighton --- (In reply to Christopher Yeleighton from comment #0) > 1. Please remove the trailing comma from the title: Variable templates for > type traits. The trailing full stop, of course.
[Bug libstdc++/101307] New: Variable templates for type traits—corrections
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101307 Bug ID: 101307 Summary: Variable templates for type traits—corrections Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: giecrilj at stegny dot 2a.pl Target Milestone: --- 1. Please remove the trailing comma from the title: Variable templates for type traits. 2. The general description (is_foovalue) should be (is_foo ::value) (or, preferably, equal to the constant value defined in the class is_foo).
[Bug libstdc++/57840] ::std ::result_of is undocumented
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57840 --- Comment #6 from Christopher Yeleighton --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #3) > I'm not sure why the comment on the primary template doesn't show up (maybe > doxygen is only interested in a definition) and adding comments to the > partial specialization doesn't show up in the generated HTML either. There is no comment as of https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/libstdc++-api.20210701.html/a00221_source.html#l02373 >, so there is nothing to show up, and neither was there any at https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/libstdc++-api-4.5/a00875_source.html#l00176 >.
[Bug libstdc++/57840] ::std ::result_of is undocumented
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57840
--- Comment #5 from Christopher Yeleighton ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #4)
> It shows up in the latest docs:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/libstdc++-api.20210701.html/a03925.
> html
>
> But several other classes don't appear on the type traits page:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/libstdc++-api.20210701.html/a01565.
> html
>
> That seems to be due to
> https://github.com/doxygen/doxygen/issues/8638
I am no Doxygen guru but the source at https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/libstdc++-api.20210701.html/a00209_source.html
> has 2 @{ (#l00051, #l00237) but only 1 @} (#l00266).
[Bug libstdc++/101306] positioning at line anchors is disturbed by the navigation bar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101306 --- Comment #2 from Christopher Yeleighton --- (In reply to Christopher Yeleighton from comment #1) > Interestingly enough, the problem does not affect https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/libstdc++-api.20210701.html/ > a00209_source.html#l00060 >. It may be a timing issue—the latter document > is way smaller. I am sorry, that was just an illusion. Wrong there too.
[Bug libstdc++/101306] positioning at line anchors is disturbed by the navigation bar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101306 --- Comment #1 from Christopher Yeleighton --- Interestingly enough, the problem does not affect https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/libstdc++-api.20210701.html/a00209_source.html#l00060 >. It may be a timing issue—the latter document is way smaller.
[Bug libstdc++/101306] New: positioning at line anchors is disturbed by the navigation bar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101306 Bug ID: 101306 Summary: positioning at line anchors is disturbed by the navigation bar Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: giecrilj at stegny dot 2a.pl Target Milestone: --- When I navigate to a line anchor like #l02373, the following things happen: 1. The source file opens. 2. The source file scrolls to the anchor. 3. The navigation bar opens. 4. The source file scrolls to the beginning. Workaround: 1. Change the anchor to #l02372! 2. Press ⏎! 3. Change the anchor to #l02373! 4. Press ⏎! (Steps 1 and 2 are necessary, at least in Chrome, because without them ⏎ reloads the page—which recreates the bug.)
[Bug libstdc++/101258] std ::is_integral_v is undocumented
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101258 --- Comment #14 from Christopher Yeleighton --- Will you accept an improvement regarding an issue RESOLVED WONTFIX?
[Bug libstdc++/101258] std ::is_integral_v is undocumented
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101258 --- Comment #12 from Christopher Yeleighton --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #10) > Lots of things in our API docs are not in the standard, and lots of things > in the standard are not in our API docs. If you're trying to use it for > that, no wonder it's painful. Stop it. The difference between compiler documentation and the standard is that compiler documentation is easier to use and to understand and more task-oriented, although it may be incomplete. I understand the difference. I understand that compiler documentation may sacrifice precision for clarity here and there. The sacrifice must not go too far though---hence my patches to MSDN for example. I still prefer reading the vendor documentation to reading the standard, except in some special cases. I promise I shall stop using GCC documentation if said documentation tells me what I should use instead. I have reported a request regarding that. I can still hardly accept that we are such a failure in this area (I believe that if we have time to implement things, we should also dedicate some to describe them).
[Bug libstdc++/101258] std ::is_integral_v is undocumented
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101258 --- Comment #8 from Christopher Yeleighton --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #6) > While it would be nice if the libstdc++ API docs were 100% complete and > described every piece of the library, that is never going to happen. If you > are trying to use those docs to learn C++ you should stop, and look > elsewhere. I am trying to read somebody else’s code and that developer is using things that I would never use and I think should never make it to the standard in the first place. The ugliness of these things compares only with sbumpc. So I wanted to check whether this is a standard thing he used---and the reply from the API doc was negative. Thank you for making this problem a bit less painful.
[Bug libstdc++/101268] New: Refer manual readers to cppreference.com for API details
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101268 Bug ID: 101268 Summary: Refer manual readers to cppreference.com for API details Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: giecrilj at stegny dot 2a.pl Target Milestone: --- Since we have given up on documenting all standard library features we have implemented (I mean patches are not welcome), we should add a reference to cppreference.com to the product manual.
[Bug libstdc++/101258] std ::is_integral_v is undocumented
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101258 --- Comment #7 from Christopher Yeleighton --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #5) > (In reply to Christopher Yeleighton from comment #3) > > It should at least be present on the API page. The standard is not for > > developers. > > cppreference.com is not the standard, it's a reference for developers. > > (In reply to Christopher Yeleighton from comment #4) > > What is self-explanatory in is_integral_v? > > If you don't know what the xxx_v variables in do, you should > get a good (modern) tutorial on C++. "Self-explanatory" implies that no tutorial is needed.
[Bug libstdc++/101258] std ::is_integral_v is undocumented
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101258 --- Comment #4 from Christopher Yeleighton --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1) > It does exactly what the standard says it does. And it's self explanatory. What is self-explanatory in is_integral_v? It could be "is integral verbose" or "is integral equal to Roman numeral v" or "is integral virtually" or anything else.
[Bug libstdc++/101258] std ::is_integral_v is undocumented
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101258 --- Comment #3 from Christopher Yeleighton --- It should at least be present on the API page. The standard is not for developers.
[Bug libstdc++/101258] New: std ::is_integral_v is undocumented
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101258 Bug ID: 101258 Summary: std ::is_integral_v is undocumented Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: giecrilj at stegny dot 2a.pl Target Milestone: ---
[Bug c++/99909] The value of 'std::is_integral_v' is not usable in a constant expression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99909
Christopher Yeleighton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||giecrilj at stegny dot 2a.pl
--- Comment #1 from Christopher Yeleighton ---
(In reply to 康桓瑋 from comment #0)
> template class>
> constexpr auto f() {}
That means auto is void, doesn’t it?
