* [Bug libstdc++/52702] [C++11] std::is_trivially_destructible is missing
2012-03-24 17:44 [Bug libstdc++/52702] New: [C++11] std::is_trivially_destructible is missing daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
@ 2012-04-12 12:22 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
2012-04-15 13:44 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
` (6 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: paolo.carlini at oracle dot com @ 2012-04-12 12:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52702
Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed| |2012-04-12
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |paolo.carlini at oracle dot
|gnu.org |com
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> 2012-04-12 12:22:10 UTC ---
Ok, thanks.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/52702] [C++11] std::is_trivially_destructible is missing
2012-03-24 17:44 [Bug libstdc++/52702] New: [C++11] std::is_trivially_destructible is missing daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
2012-04-12 12:22 ` [Bug libstdc++/52702] " paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
@ 2012-04-15 13:44 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
2012-04-15 14:06 ` daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
` (5 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: paolo.carlini at oracle dot com @ 2012-04-15 13:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52702
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> 2012-04-15 13:43:51 UTC ---
Daniel I'm adding this.
By the way, is "is_nothrow_destructible" doable just now or needs compiler
support? Are you willing to give it a try, in case? (or, if necessary, I can do
the compiler bits) It would complete our implementation of the is_nothrow_*
set.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/52702] [C++11] std::is_trivially_destructible is missing
2012-03-24 17:44 [Bug libstdc++/52702] New: [C++11] std::is_trivially_destructible is missing daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
2012-04-12 12:22 ` [Bug libstdc++/52702] " paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
2012-04-15 13:44 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
@ 2012-04-15 14:06 ` daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
2012-04-15 14:30 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
` (4 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com @ 2012-04-15 14:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52702
--- Comment #3 from Daniel Krügler <daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com> 2012-04-15 14:05:43 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Daniel I'm adding this.
>
> By the way, is "is_nothrow_destructible" doable just now or needs compiler
> support? Are you willing to give it a try, in case? (or, if necessary, I can do
> the compiler bits) It would complete our implementation of the is_nothrow_*
> set.
The reason why I did not suggested it for the moment is simply because LWG
issue
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#2049
is still open. Actually, the correct solution for no_throw_destructible depends
on the P/R as well. Of-course one could simply start with a partial solution
(e.g. handle uncontroversial types like reference types, non-function, and
non-abstract types), but I'm not sure whether it is worth the effort. If you
would like to have just an consistent current trait matching to the current
is_destructible implementation, I can work on that. Roughly about the mid of
up-coming week would seem reasonable for me to start on that.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/52702] [C++11] std::is_trivially_destructible is missing
2012-03-24 17:44 [Bug libstdc++/52702] New: [C++11] std::is_trivially_destructible is missing daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2012-04-15 14:06 ` daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
@ 2012-04-15 14:30 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
2012-04-15 17:05 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
` (3 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: paolo.carlini at oracle dot com @ 2012-04-15 14:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52702
--- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> 2012-04-15 14:30:19 UTC ---
Ah, I see, I didn't know about that DR.
Then, sure, whenever you like it would be great if you could contribute
is_nothrow_destructible too: should not be much more controversial than
is_destructible itself (which you contributed already and I'm going to use for
is_trivially_destructible of course)
Let's keep in touch!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/52702] [C++11] std::is_trivially_destructible is missing
2012-03-24 17:44 [Bug libstdc++/52702] New: [C++11] std::is_trivially_destructible is missing daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2012-04-15 14:30 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
@ 2012-04-15 17:05 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
2012-04-15 17:48 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
` (2 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: paolo.carlini at oracle dot com @ 2012-04-15 17:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52702
Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> 2012-04-15 17:05:18 UTC ---
Maybe we can ask here Jason about std::is_trivially_copyable, which he didn't
do at once with std::is_trivial (maybe the concept didn't precisely exist at
the time, I don't remember).
Anyway, I see two options: either "exporting" just now from the front-end an
__is_trivially_copyable (just using trivially_copyable_p); or postpone the task
to when std::is_trivially_constructible and std::is_trivially_assignable will
be available, in turn requiring front-end support, but then useful for all the
missing std::is_trivial* things, if I understand correctly.
The former could make sense per se, could also be immediately exploited to
implement std::is_trivially_default_constructible. At some point, anyway, we'll
have to tackle std::is_trivially_constructible and std::is_trivially_assignable
(the former, in particular, with its variadic parameter, seems non-trivial to
me)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/52702] [C++11] std::is_trivially_destructible is missing
2012-03-24 17:44 [Bug libstdc++/52702] New: [C++11] std::is_trivially_destructible is missing daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2012-04-15 17:05 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
@ 2012-04-15 17:48 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
2012-04-15 23:35 ` paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-22 8:06 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: paolo.carlini at oracle dot com @ 2012-04-15 17:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52702
--- Comment #6 from Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> 2012-04-15 17:48:21 UTC ---
Scratch the std::is_trivially_default_constructible bit, sorry.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/52702] [C++11] std::is_trivially_destructible is missing
2012-03-24 17:44 [Bug libstdc++/52702] New: [C++11] std::is_trivially_destructible is missing daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2012-04-15 17:48 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
@ 2012-04-15 23:35 ` paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-22 8:06 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: paolo at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2012-04-15 23:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52702
--- Comment #7 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org <paolo at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-04-15 23:35:33 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Sun Apr 15 23:35:27 2012
New Revision: 186474
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=186474
Log:
2012-04-15 Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini@oracle.com>
PR libstdc++/52702
* include/std/type_traits (is_trivially_destructible): Add.
(has_trivial_destructor): Remove.
* testsuite/util/testsuite_common_types.h: Adjust.
* testsuite/20_util/tuple/requirements/dr801.cc: Likewise.
* testsuite/20_util/pair/requirements/dr801.cc: Likewise.
* testsuite/20_util/is_trivially_destructible/value.cc: New.
* testsuite/20_util/is_trivially_destructible/requirements/
typedefs.cc: Likewise.
* testsuite/20_util/is_trivially_destructible/requirements/
explicit_instantiation.cc: Likewise.
* testsuite/20_util/make_signed/requirements/typedefs_neg.cc:
Adjust dg-error line numbers.
* testsuite/20_util/make_unsigned/requirements/typedefs_neg.cc:
Likewise.
* testsuite/20_util/declval/requirements/1_neg.cc: Likewise.
Added:
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/20_util/is_trivially_destructible/
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/20_util/is_trivially_destructible/requirements/
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/20_util/is_trivially_destructible/requirements/explicit_instantiation.cc
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/20_util/is_trivially_destructible/requirements/typedefs.cc
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/20_util/is_trivially_destructible/value.cc
Modified:
trunk/libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog
trunk/libstdc++-v3/include/std/type_traits
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/20_util/declval/requirements/1_neg.cc
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/20_util/make_signed/requirements/typedefs_neg.cc
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/20_util/make_unsigned/requirements/typedefs_neg.cc
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/20_util/pair/requirements/dr801.cc
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/20_util/tuple/requirements/dr801.cc
trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/util/testsuite_common_types.h
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/52702] [C++11] std::is_trivially_destructible is missing
2012-03-24 17:44 [Bug libstdc++/52702] New: [C++11] std::is_trivially_destructible is missing daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2012-04-15 23:35 ` paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2012-04-22 8:06 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: paolo.carlini at oracle dot com @ 2012-04-22 8:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52702
Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED
Resolution| |FIXED
--- Comment #8 from Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> 2012-04-22 08:05:18 UTC ---
Done.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread