Subject: Re: [boost] [type_traits] Big changes in develop
From: John Maddock (jz.maddock_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-05-29 04:01:41
On 28/05/2015 22:14, Peter Dimov wrote:
>> I sketched an implementation along those lines, ...
> It's at
> Take a look and let's see how to proceed from there. I haven't yet
> done the member pointers, which I suspect nobody uses (they aren't
> covered by the existing tests), but I'll add them later for completeness.
> I've applied decay<> up front for simplicity, instead of faithfully
> doing the reference-preserving work and then throwing that away, which
> makes a difference in some corner cases, but I doubt that anybody will
> be able to tell the difference. (Needless to say, those corner cases
> aren't being tested at the moment.) :-)
> Incidentally, why is our decay<> not the same as std::decay? Should it
> be changed to conform?
Yes, I fixed that yesterday, see
Does that render remove_cv_ref more or less redundant?
Also noticed in your code, how easy is it to extend to other built in arithmetic types? We should support __int128 and __float128 when available for example (|BOOST_HAS_INT128, no Config macro for __float128 yet, though Math has it's own one)|.
And while you're on a roll.... can you see how to fix https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/7544? common_type should have member ::type only when such a common type exists.
But this looks to be a much cleaner approach than what we have now, as well as junking those pesky dependencies. Nice work! John.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk