-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 5:47 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: STDCXX-600
Eric Lemings wrote:
FYI-type stuff.
I've been at this issue for the past couple hours
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2008 9:55 AM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: STDCXX-600
Eric Lemings wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Martin
-Original Message-
From: Eric Lemings
Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2008 11:10 AM
To: Eric Lemings; 'dev@stdcxx.apache.org'
Subject: RE: STDCXX-600
...
Should I just check in this change for this particular
exception for now? I suspect all other standard exceptions
would
-Original Message-
From: Travis Vitek (JIRA) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 4:32 PM
To: Eric Lemings
Subject: [jira] Commented: (STDCXX-974) [EDG eccp/Linux]
errors with optimization on long long in pthreadtypes.h
[
https://issues.apache.org
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 4:31 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: svn commit: r678913 - in /stdcxx/branches/4.3.x:
./ etc/config/src/ examples/include/ include/ include/loc/
-Original Message-
From: Andrew Black [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 9:53 AM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: [jira] Commented: (STDCXX-974) [EDG eccp/Linux]
errors with optimization on long long in pthreadtypes.h
Eric Lemings wrote:
[snip
-Original Message-
From: Eric Lemings [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 4:10 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: STDCXX-600
...
The following throw statements all throw exceptions that are not
getting caught by the compiler's runtime libraries
I'm trying to do a build on Linux with EDG eccp 3.10. I keep getting
the following errors during configuration.
creating BUILDDIR=/build/stdcxx-4.2.x-12D-eccp
generating /build/stdcxx-4.2.x-12D-eccp/makefile.in from
/source/stdcxx/branches/4.2.x/etc/config/eccp.config
make[1]: Entering
Ah, I found an issue for it:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STDCXX-800
-Original Message-
From: Eric Lemings [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 11:33 AM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Problem building with EDG eccp 3.10
I'm trying to do a build
-Original Message-
From: Eric Lemings
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 11:41 AM
To: 'dev@stdcxx.apache.org'
Subject: RE: Problem building with EDG eccp 3.10
Ah, I found an issue for it:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STDCXX-800
Shouldn't the priority for this issue
-Original Message-
From: Travis Vitek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 11:11 AM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: RE: svn commit: r678483 -
/stdcxx/branches/4.2.x/tests/regress/27.streambuf.buffer.stdcx
x-808.cpp
...
It seems that you're missing the
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor
Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 12:54 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: svn commit: r678483 -
/stdcxx/branches/4.2.x/tests/regress/27.streambuf.buffer.stdcx
x-808.cpp
Eric Lemings
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor
Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 2:25 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: STDCXX-978
...
It probably wouldn't hurt, although I suspect the raw patch might
be too big for ezmlm (AFAIK, the
-Original Message-
From: Eric Lemings
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 8:47 AM
To: 'dev@stdcxx.apache.org'
Subject: RE: structure of tuple tests ([Fwd: Re: svn commit:
r675044 - in /stdcxx/branches/4.3.x: include/rw/_tuple.h
include/tuple tests/utilities/20.tuple.cnstr.cpp
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 9:54 AM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: structure of tuple tests ([Fwd: Re: svn commit:
r675044 - in /stdcxx/branches/4.3.x: include/rw/_tuple.h
include/tuple
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor
Sent: Friday, July 11, 2008 1:06 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: structure of tuple tests ([Fwd: Re: svn commit:
r675044 - in /stdcxx/branches/4.3.x: include/rw/_tuple.h
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor
Sent: Friday, July 11, 2008 1:06 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: structure of tuple tests ([Fwd: Re: svn commit:
r675044 - in /stdcxx/branches/4.3.x: include/rw/_tuple.h
@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: svn commit: r675315 -
/stdcxx/branches/4.2.x/tests/utilities/20.operators.cpp
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: elemings
Date: Wed Jul 9 12:16:56 2008
New Revision: 675315
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=675315view=rev
Log:
2008-07-09 Eric
I double-checked on RH5 and HP-UX. Looks good to me. What error did
you get?
Brad.
-Original Message-
From: Eric Lemings [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2008 9:30 AM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: RE: svn commit: r675315 -
/stdcxx/branches/4.2.x/tests
-Original Message-
From: Eric Lemings
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2008 1:01 PM
To: 'dev@stdcxx.apache.org'
Subject: RE: Potential eccp-3.9 bug
-Original Message-
From: Travis Vitek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2008 11:41 AM
To: dev
-Original Message-
From: Travis Vitek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2008 6:04 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: RE: svn commit: r675044 - in /stdcxx/branches/4.3.x:
include/rw/_tuple.h include/tuple
tests/utilities/20.tuple.cnstr.cpp
/utilities/20.tuple.creation.cpp
tests/utilities/20.tuple.h tests/utilities/20.tuple.helpers.cpp
Eric Lemings wrote:
Travis Vitek wrote:
Modified:
stdcxx/branches/4.3.x/tests/utilities/20.tuple.creation.cpp
...
+rw_assert (0 == std::strcmp (s, string), __FILE__,
__LINE__
-Original Message-
From: Eric Lemings [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2008 12:40 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: RE: svn commit: r675044 - in /stdcxx/branches/4.3.x:
include/rw/_tuple.h include/tuple
tests/utilities/20.tuple.cnstr.cpp
tests
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2008 11:10 AM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: svn commit: r675044 - in /stdcxx/branches/4.3.x:
include/rw/_tuple.h include/tuple
tests/utilities/20.tuple.cnstr.cpp
tests/containers/23.vector.cons.cpp:
...
685 #ifndef _RWSTD_NO_EXCEPTIONS
686
687 try {
688 // throw an exception to initialize the lib (allocates
689 // memory that's never deallocated; shows up as leaks)
690 _RW::__rw_throw (_RWSTD_ERROR_LOGIC_ERROR, , );
691 }
I don't see any tests for the vector(size_t) constructor anywhere. Am I
not looking in the right place?
Thanks,
Brad.
/20.tuple.creation.cpp
tests/utilities/20.tuple.h tests/utilities/20.tuple.helpers.cpp
Eric Lemings wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2008 11:10 AM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: svn commit: r675044
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2008 11:10 AM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: svn commit: r675044 - in /stdcxx/branches/4.3.x:
include/rw/_tuple.h include/tuple
tests/utilities/20.tuple.cnstr.cpp
-Original Message-
From: Eric Lemings
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2008 3:14 PM
To: 'dev@stdcxx.apache.org'
Subject: RE: svn commit: r675044 - in /stdcxx/branches/4.3.x:
include/rw/_tuple.h include/tuple
tests/utilities/20.tuple.cnstr.cpp
tests/utilities/20.tuple.creation.cpp
For compile-time tests, would it be preferable to use a static assertion
or continue using good ol' rw_assert() even for compile-time checks? In
the former case, the test will fail to build and, in the latter case,
the compile-time check will not be easily distinguisable from other
runtime
FYI. http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2691.pdf
Getting the following compile error due to conflicting __rw_is_same
identifiers:
gcc -c -I/work/stdcxx/branches/4.3.x/include/ansi -D_RWSTDDEBUG
-pthread -I/work/stdcxx/branches/4.3.x/include
-I/build/stdcxx-4.3.x-15D/include
-I/work/stdcxx/branches/4.3.x/tests/include -pedantic -nostdinc++
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2008 10:52 AM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: Another potential hole in the tuple specs
Eric Lemings wrote:
[...]
A const assignment operator? Sounds unorthodox but I'll try
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2008 1:14 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: Another potential hole in the tuple specs
Eric Lemings wrote:
...
I tried making std::ignore const and adding const
-Original Message-
From: Travis Vitek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2008 2:36 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: RE: Another potential hole in the tuple specs
...
The following testcase works just fine (on acc-6.16, gcc-4.3.1
msvc-8.0)
namespace
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 9:16 AM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: Tuple status
Eric Lemings wrote:
...
I agree though: there is a lot of duplication and if it were
?
Brad.
-Original Message-
From: Travis Vitek
Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 2:00 PM
To: Eric Lemings
Subject: RE: svn commit: r673865 - in
/stdcxx/branches/4.3.x/tests/utilities: 20.forward.cpp
20.tuple.cnstr.cpp 20.tuple.creation.cpp 20.tuple.elem.cpp
20.tuple.helpers.cpp 20
-Original Message-
From: Travis Vitek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 4:24 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Makefile issues on hp-ux
I'm seeing some weird errors when porting some code to acc-6.16, and I
figured that I'd mention it because I've
Here's another potential problem with the tuple spec. The latest draft
declares std::ignore like so:
namespace std {
const /*unspecified*/ ignore;
}
The type of std::ignore is implementation-defined but for illustration,
let's say its defined like this:
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor
Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 4:36 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: Makefile issues on hp-ux
Travis Vitek wrote:
I'm seeing some weird errors when porting some code to
acc-6.16,
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor
Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 5:44 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: Another potential hole in the tuple specs
Eric Lemings wrote:
Here's another potential problem
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 3:18 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: error on tuple copy ctor
...
Should we add the ctor even if the standard does not
(currently) specify it?
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor
Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 11:08 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: Tuple status
...
c) in ctor initializer lists spanning multiple lines, please
avoid dropping the colon
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor
Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 2:51 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: svn commit: r672395 - in
/stdcxx/branches/4.3.x/include: functional rw/_ref_wrap.h
...
5. The definitions
-Original Message-
From: Eric Lemings
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 3:42 PM
To: 'dev@stdcxx.apache.org'
Subject: RE: svn commit: r672395 - in
/stdcxx/branches/4.3.x/include: functional rw/_ref_wrap.h
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 3:55 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: error on tuple copy ctor
Eric Lemings wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto
_Tuple_impl0,
_UElements...(__in))
246 { }
Brad.
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 3:55 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: error on tuple copy ctor
Eric Lemings wrote
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 5:17 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: error on tuple copy ctor
Eric Lemings wrote:
...
AFAICS, this is the same as S(S). Doesn't preferring
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor
Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 6:47 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: C++ 0x testing
Eric Lemings wrote:
...
Anyways,
the gcc.config flag appends the appropriate compiler flags
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor
Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 12:17 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] naming convention for variadic template arguments
Travis Vitek wrote:
Eric Lemings wrote
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor
Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 2:51 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: svn commit: r672395 - in
/stdcxx/branches/4.3.x/include: functional rw/_ref_wrap.h
...
@@ -45,10 +45,11 @@
Just a brief status on tuple progress.
I got the remaining portions of tuple (except the tie() function) work
late Friday. I did a personal code review over the weekend and am
applying some cleanup and other finishing touches. Should be checking
in a lot of changes later today. So just a
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor
Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 3:54 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: C++ 0x testing
Unless I'm missing something, C++ 0x testing is currently disabled
in nightly builds. I.e., because
-Original Message-
From: Travis Vitek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 27, 2008 10:16 AM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: RE: spacing suggestion for new code
...
As long as the number of lines of whitespace doesn't
outnumber the number of lines of 'code',
What is the proper build procedure for specifying additional
user-defined compiler flags?
Thanks,
Brad.
-Original Message-
From: Travis Vitek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 5:26 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: 22.locale.codecvt.out test failure
The named test fails on all platforms with an EXEC error. It
looks like
the problem is that when
NVM. I found it.
-Original Message-
From: Eric Lemings [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 11:24 AM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: !ERROR! from gcc 4.3?
Any idea why the GCC 4.3 preprocessor is translating this:
template class _Type
Anyone recall if some compilers might have problems and/or issue
warnings about unnamed template parameters? E.g.,
template class struct S;
Or is this safe practice?
Brad.
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 12:32 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: __rw_and (Was RE: Some internal aliases for
__rw_integral_constant?)
...
I can't say I understand this use
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 2:12 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: __rw_and (Was RE: Some internal aliases for
__rw_integral_constant?)
Eric Lemings wrote
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 5:21 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: spacing suggestion for new code
While reviewing all the new code that's been added I'm finding it
difficult to spot
-Original Message-
From: Eric Lemings [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 6:01 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: RE: Some internal aliases for __rw_integral_constant?
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
-Original Message-
From: Eric Lemings [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 11:41 AM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: __rw_and (Was RE: Some internal aliases for
__rw_integral_constant?)
-Original Message-
From: Eric Lemings [mailto:[EMAIL
On Jun 23, 2008, at 9:31 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
Travis Vitek wrote:
Martin Sebor wrote:
[...]
I gave a number of arguments against Doxygen comments in
stdcxx headers:
1) existing code doesn't use it and converting the raw HTML
docs to Doxygen is an enormous task that none of us has
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 6:55 AM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: svn commit: r667636 -
/stdcxx/branches/4.3.x/include/rw/_forward.h
Eric Lemings wrote:
...
BTW, I'm still trying to figure out what
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 5:11 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: Some internal aliases for __rw_integral_constant?
Eric Lemings wrote:
Propose adding the following defs
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 11:38 AM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: svn commit: r667636 -
/stdcxx/branches/4.3.x/include/rw/_forward.h
Eric Lemings wrote:
-Original Message-
From
: Mon Jun 16 09:31:03 2008
New Revision: 668225
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=668225view=rev
Log:
2008-06-16 Eric Lemings [EMAIL PROTECTED]
STDCXX-958
* etc/config/src/VA_LIST_FUNC_MACRO.cpp: Initial version of
configuration check for va-list function macros
.tuple.cnstr.cpp
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: elemings
Date: Mon Jun 16 14:16:48 2008
New Revision: 668318
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=668318view=rev
Log:
2008-06-16 Eric Lemings [EMAIL PROTECTED]
STDCXX-958
* include/tuple, include/rw/_tuple.h,
include/rw
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 3:50 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: svn commit: r668225 -
/stdcxx/branches/4.3.x/etc/config/src/VA_LIST_FUNC_MACRO.cpp
Eric Lemings wrote:
-Original Message
-Original Message-
From: Travis Vitek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 20, 2008 12:59 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: RE: tests/utilities/20.meta.help.cpp
...
So I am sure you can instantiate std::integral_constantvoid
(class_t::*)(), class::method, but
-Original Message-
From: Travis Vitek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 5:29 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: RE: :decay related question
Eric Lemings wrote:
Page 490, section 20.3.1.2, paragraph 1 in the latest draft
says this:
Let Ui
I need to add the std::reference_wrapper class template to implement
make_tuple. It's part of the functional header but I was wondering if
that header or some other header would be the most appropriate place to
put it.
I was thinking of adding rw/_result_of.h and rw/_ref_wrap.h headers.
-Original Message-
From: Travis Vitek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 5:43 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: preconditions for aligned_union
I'm looking at the standard, and it appears that the following is
legal...
struct incomplete_t;
Could be an error in a configuration test.
Is this a 32-bit or 64-bit machine? How about the build?
What are his/her configured values for _RWSTD_INT_MAX and
_RWSTD_PTRDIFF_MAX from $BUILDDIR/include/config.h?
Brad.
-Original Message-
From: Jeremy Dean [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Consider the following:
file $TOPDIR/include/memory:
...
30 #ifndef _RWSTD_MEMORY_INCLUDED
31 #define _RWSTD_MEMORY_INCLUDED
32
33 #include rw/_allocator.h
34 #include rw/_autoptr.h
35 #include rw/_iterbase.h
36 #include rw/_pair.h
37 #include rw/_rawiter.h
38 #include rw/_specialized.h
-Original Message-
From: Travis Vitek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 11:04 AM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: RE: preconditions for aligned_union
Eric Lemings wrote:
Travis Vitek wrote:
I'm looking at the standard, and it appears
Page 490, section 20.3.1.2, paragraph 1 in the latest draft says this:
Let Ui be decayTi::type for each Ti in Types. Then each Vi in VTypes
is X if Ui equals reference_wrapperX,
otherwise Vi is Ui.
What do you suppose the relationship is between type `X' and types `Ti'
and `Ui'? I see how
This is part of the type_traits header:
$TOPDIR/include/type_traits:
...
30 #ifndef _RWSTD_TYPE_TRAITS_INCLUDED
31 #define _RWSTD_TYPE_TRAITS_INCLUDED
32
33 #include rw/_defs.h
34
35 #ifdef _RWSTD_NO_EXT_CXX_0X
-Original Message-
From: Travis Vitek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 16, 2008 9:46 AM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: RE: svn commit: r667638 -
/stdcxx/branches/4.3.x/tests/utilities/20.forward.cpp
...
believe it should
be
Copyright 2008 Rogue Wave
initializers
Travis Vitek wrote:
Eric Lemings wrote:
Travis Vitek wrote:
This all gets back to the discussion we were having a few
weeks ago
about which compiler features we should expect the compiler
support for
4.3.x.
I'm adding a Wiki page listing these compiler
Should we define _RWSTD_STATIC_ASSERT as a no-op if _RWSTDDEBUG is
defined?
Brad.
-Original Message-
From: Travis Vitek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 16, 2008 3:34 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: RE: Empty member initializers
Eric Lemings wrote:
How about member templates? Are these unilaterally supported by all
compilers now
I was just looking at the indentation in the
$TOPDIR/include/rw/_static_assert.h header. Why are the defines within
the `#ifndef _RWSTD_NO_STATIC_ASSERT' indented but the directives
outside this #if/#else/#endif block are not? Should they all be
indented uniformly or not indented at all?
I
The macro is defined with one argument if no built-in static_assert is
available but with two arguments if it is available. Should be defined
with two arguments either way.
Brad.
I'm still noticing some tests not being reported in the nightly test
results, particularly 21.string.exceptions and 22.locale.synopsis. How
do I get these missing tests added to nightly testing?
Thanks,
Brad.
On Jun 11, 2008, at 1:57 PM, Travis Vitek wrote:
Eric Lemings wrote:
Travis Vitek wrote:
...
I've written an errily similar test already (pasted below)
I like your test better except for two things.
1. Need a static assert at file scope similar to the one in main().
2
Has anyone written or started on the forward/move helpers in 20.2.2 of
the latest draft (n2606)?
Brad.
-Original Message-
From: Travis Vitek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 4:00 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: RE: static_assert config check
Martin Sebor wrote:
Travis Vitek wrote:
Eric Lemings wrote:
How's this for a suitable
-Original Message-
From: Travis Vitek
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 4:18 PM
To: Eric Lemings
Subject: RE: remove_reference
Eric Lemings
...
I think you sorta missed my point. My point is that if the internal
type traits do not provide any real added value, why
-Original Message-
From: Eric Lemings [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 4:37 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: RE: static_assert config check
-Original Message-
From: Travis Vitek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 12
-Original Message-
From: Travis Vitek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 1:08 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: RE: static_assert config check
...
I've written an errily similar test already (pasted below)
I like your test better except for
Do the files in $TOPDIR/etc/nls ever change or need a periodic update?
Just wonderin.
Brad.
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor
Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 12:43 AM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: Default BUILDTYPE and/or BUILDMODE?
Travis Vitek wrote:
Eric Lemings wrote:
What is the default
-Original Message-
From: Travis Vitek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 10:34 AM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: RE: An internal add_const_reference type trait
Eric Lemings wrote:
Travis,
According to our plans for type traits, is this how you
-Original Message-
From: Travis Vitek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 09, 2008 12:22 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: RE: Default BUILDTYPE and/or BUILDMODE?
Eric Lemings wrote:
What is the default BUILDTYPE if it is not defined in the
build (make
: Thursday, June 05, 2008 2:09 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: New config macros for 4.3.x
Eric Lemings wrote:
Unless someone can think of a reason not to do this, I was
wondering if
we couldn't go ahead and commit the new config tests for r-value
referenes and variadic templates
Consider the following little program:
template class IntType, IntType IntVal
struct integer {
typedef IntType value_type;
static const value_type value = IntVal;
};
template class... TypesT
struct tuple
{
-Original Message-
From: Eric Lemings [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 12:18 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: RE: svn commit: r662858 [1/3] - in
/stdcxx/branches/4.2.x/tests: algorithms/ containers/
diagnostics/ include/ intro/ iostream/ iterators
Unless someone can think of a reason not to do this, I was wondering if
we couldn't go ahead and commit the new config tests for r-value
referenes and variadic templates that Travis wrote into the 4.3.x
branch? We'll almost certainly need these checks in 4.3.x.
Thanks,
Brad.
1 - 100 of 217 matches
Mail list logo
