C++ Logo


Advanced search

Re: [SG10] Comments from Alisdair

From: Richard Smith <richard_at_[hidden]>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 16:19:18 -0700
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 4:13 PM, Nelson, Clark <clark.nelson_at_[hidden]>wrote:

> I got a few comments today about SD-6 from Alisdair Meredith. Most of them
> were just pointing out that it needs to be updated, which we already knew,
> and which is in progress. But there are a few I thought I should pass
> along.
> > We added an 'is_final' type-trait at the last meeting too, not
> > sure what name to recommend (issue 2112) and 'is_null_pointer' at
> > Chicago (issue 2247)
> >
> > We added 'make_reverse_iterator' to the <iterator> header (issue
> > 2285)
> It came as news to me that we, as a committee, have added features to the
> standard in response to issues (a.k.a. defect reports). Obviously, those of
> us who feel that's a bad idea in general might want to suggest that we be
> more careful to avoid that in the future. :-(
> But apparently we have some water under the bridge, and SG10 needs to
> decide
> whether these should have macros.

I think an is_final feature-detection macro makes a lot of sense. Libraries
that want to do EBO could reasonably want to use is_final && is_empty if
is_final exists, and fall back to just using is_empty otherwise.

> > Finally, do we want a feature to detect that 'gets' has finally
> > been removed? (NB comment GB 9 in N3733)
> I'm not even going to try to frame this question. :-/ (This is library
> issue
> 2249, for anyone who wants more information.)

I don't see any value in a macro for gets. Code that doesn't use gets
doesn't need the macro, and code that uses it is neither portable to C++14
nor correct :-)

> > Oh, and as a point of curiosity, it turned out that there is no
> > feature-detect macro for the C++11 feature I am trying to detect,
> > alias templates! I am surprised at just how useful I am finding
> > this feature at the moment, but mostly as a porting aid, saying
> > "this old code is now implemented using that new more
> > general/standard feature over there" (plus implementing the few
> > places that standard library mandates them).
> Is there anyone who thinks that this would not be a good idea? (This was
> adopted from N2258.)

SGTM. __cpp_alias_templates?

Received on 2014-05-16 01:19:19