On Sun, 1 Dec 2019 at 04:10, Barry Revzin via Lib <lib@lists.isocpp.org> 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 ;-)