From: David Abrahams (david.abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-02-22 07:44:52
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Maddock" <John_Maddock_at_[hidden]>
> >Is this a good idea? Shouldn't we return true for all references? The
> >to ask whether a type has a trivial destructor (it seems to me) is to
> >when you can skip calling it, or more importantly, when you can avoid
> >destroying an array since that's less likely to optimize away. At the
> >least, this behavior should be documented.
> No idea, but is it even relevent? Can you new a reference type, I don't
> think so...
Yes, it's relevant:
template <class T1, class T2>
struct has_trivial_destructor<tuple<T1,T2> >
= has_trivial_destructor<T1>::value &&
Shouldn't that work, even if T1/T2 are references?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk