On Sun, 1 Dec 2019 at 04:10, Barry Revzin via Lib <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi SG10 and LWG, > > cpplearner points out in https://github.com/BRevzin/sd6/issues/1 that: > > "Since unwrap_reference and unwrap_ref_decay are defined in <functional> > ([functional.syn]), their feature test macro should also be defined there." > > P1902R1 adds this feature test macro in <type_traits> instead. I agree > with them - I think the choice of <type_traits> was my mistake. > > Didn't I create an issue saying those traits *should* be in <type_traits>? I think I meant to. No, I complained about it in the https://lists.isocpp.org/lib-ext/2019/04/11223.php thread but only fixed the accidental application of the wrong paper (via the https://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/issue3202 issue). > Does anybody object to moving it to <functional>? > > I'd rather move the traits to <type_traits>, but if we don't do that we should move the macro. In https://lists.isocpp.org/lib-ext/2019/04/11229.php I said "Does anybody want to argue for keeping it in <functional>?" and nobody spoke up. > Assuming no, what should the process of such a change involve? LWG issue? > > I'll try to hijack that issue to move the traits ;-)
-- SG10 mailing list [email protected] https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/sg10
