From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-499802-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 113208 invoked by alias); 28 Apr 2019 21:19:04 -0000
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
Received: (qmail 113195 invoked by uid 89); 28 Apr 2019 21:19:04 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=HX-Languages-Length:437, LWG, lwg, 2899
X-HELO: mail-oi1-f176.google.com
Received: from mail-oi1-f176.google.com (HELO mail-oi1-f176.google.com) (209.85.167.176) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Sun, 28 Apr 2019 21:19:03 +0000
Received: by mail-oi1-f176.google.com with SMTP id t81so6832279oig.10;        Sun, 28 Apr 2019 14:19:03 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;        d=gmail.com; s=20161025;        h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to         :cc;        bh=VJIRe2ljSXpHz+wqga+Jdt635cAdHKCRYcy7EK7vEsA=;        b=sE7xILOKvYNi8hT0u/YC9lEnr3MsceL2WXwIq9iQvRhwg5z0Owx9egxUiP68cd3xYr         JVhJk2SNMMrBEHiw5SP6WUcIi6eumKLw1n6giolzvN8QabzNL6iE/8kyf/wEtTmxtCDx         bHyARF//4BgWR2wp7AjZr31nKmezyXb2kSNdOVECNK0n/Hancf0jMWvjVp7/R2ZerhxM         S1Cuocb6k/SXEAP5Es1OhWGsSO7P4E0+qaqWub4PvMjfCY1lBOfrBFfWrOBVyVpgzFIz         aHoUGCqudlobvBkRSQFHXmGc93QGBhl+43WsVWe18V+9yVf/I4iHk75qpMJ2D4E5osOq         gFYQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAAcHv8cCgCNCcVzvoW4gPT=nz=Ue55Hq9KT_1rTvnL2BLVHXMg@mail.gmail.com> <20190416141819.GU943@redhat.com> <CAAcHv8fg-GgBWRzCLFBNVHU268y9eHUxQ+5E+9uchTFUYubLNw@mail.gmail.com> <20190418203543.GB943@redhat.com> <CAAcHv8dhwP+sThM07qrDOFgZ9AMHuSspOegg3NWSOrrLrO_FNg@mail.gmail.com> <20190423202817.GJ943@redhat.com> <CAAcHv8ez+7j=3mD8_-VmJgEAccokdvD0_bT8FqEVk=viUqQu4w@mail.gmail.com> <20190424115304.GN943@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20190424115304.GN943@redhat.com>
From: Ville Voutilainen <ville.voutilainen@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2019 21:21:00 -0000
Message-ID: <CAFk2RUYy_53QmL-d2fp7BuQPfFJ0Oo_GXhDkSe4iEB+z89xRBg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Adding noexcept-specification on tuple constructors (LWG 2899)
To: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely@redhat.com>
Cc: Nina Dinka Ranns <dinka.ranns@gmail.com>, gcc-patches List <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>, 	"libstdc++" <libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-SW-Source: 2019-04/txt/msg01126.txt.bz2

On Wed, 24 Apr 2019 at 14:53, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On 24/04/19 11:21 +0100, Nina Dinka Ranns wrote:
> >New diff attached.
>
> Thanks, this looks great. I think we can apply this as soon as stage 1
> begins (which should be Real Soon Now).

Tested on Linux-PPC64, committed to trunk. Congrats, Nina, first patch
in, let there be many more. :)