Boost logo

Boost :

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 and

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 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, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at