[Bug libstdc++/57840] ::std ::result_of is undocumented

[redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57840

--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely  ---
No that has never been true. The date in the URL is a clue.

[Bug libstdc++/57840] ::std ::result_of is undocumented

[giecrilj at stegny dot 2a.pl via Gcc-bugs]

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++/57840] ::std ::result_of is undocumented

[redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57840

--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely  ---
(In reply to Christopher Yeleighton from comment #5)
> 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).

Already fixed in r12-1964

You know doxygen output isn't the only way to look at the code, right?

[Bug libstdc++/57840] ::std ::result_of is undocumented

[redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57840

--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely  ---
Like 2371 is a comment using doxygen syntax. That comment was there in 2014
when I wrote comment 3 here.

[Bug libstdc++/57840] ::std ::result_of is undocumented

[giecrilj at stegny dot 2a.pl via Gcc-bugs]

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

[giecrilj at stegny dot 2a.pl via Gcc-bugs]

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++/57840] ::std ::result_of is undocumented

[redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57840

Jonathan Wakely  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |FIXED
 Status|NEW |RESOLVED

--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely  ---
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

[Bug libstdc++/57840] ::std ::result_of is undocumented

[redi at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57840

Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Keywords||documentation
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
   Last reconfirmed||2014-09-23
 Ever confirmed|0   |1

--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
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.

[Bug libstdc++/57840] ::std ::result_of is undocumented

[fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57840

François Dumont fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #1 from François Dumont fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 30595
  -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30595action=edit
To replace hashtable_policy.h in include/bits folder

[Bug libstdc++/57840] ::std ::result_of is undocumented

[fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57840

--- Comment #2 from François Dumont fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 30596
  -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30596action=edit
The modified hashtable implementation

To replace hashtable.h in include/bits