From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-289442-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 29328 invoked by alias); 14 Apr 2011 08:41:59 -0000
Received: (qmail 29108 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Apr 2011 08:41:57 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from smtp205.alice.it (HELO smtp205.alice.it) (82.57.200.101)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 08:41:51 +0000
Received: from [192.168.1.4] (79.52.240.138) by smtp205.alice.it (8.5.124.08)        id 4D0D00380A1553C4; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:41:46 +0200
Message-ID: <4DA6B342.5080704@oracle.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 08:41:00 -0000
From: Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini@oracle.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.14) Gecko/20110221 SUSE/3.1.8 Thunderbird/3.1.8
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Magnus Fromreide <magfr@lysator.liu.se>
CC: libstdc++ <libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org>,  "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [v3] Re-implement is_constructible, add is_default_constructible, is_destructible, fix PR 48526
References: <4DA62832.6080004@oracle.com> <1302769968.2207.1.camel@sara>
In-Reply-To: <1302769968.2207.1.camel@sara>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2011-04/txt/msg01046.txt.bz2

On 04/14/2011 10:32 AM, Magnus Fromreide wrote:
> This is just a nit, but why do you remove the /// is_function comments?
Because was on the forward declaration, not on the implementation 
itself, where I wanted it.

Paolo.