From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-450941-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 48903 invoked by alias); 2 Apr 2017 09:24:26 -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 48865 invoked by uid 89); 2 Apr 2017 09:24:23 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=
X-Spam-User: qpsmtpd, 2 recipients
X-HELO: mail-oi0-f52.google.com
Received: from mail-oi0-f52.google.com (HELO mail-oi0-f52.google.com) (209.85.218.52) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Sun, 02 Apr 2017 09:24:22 +0000
Received: by mail-oi0-f52.google.com with SMTP id f193so99240259oib.2;        Sun, 02 Apr 2017 02:24:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;        d=1e100.net; s=20161025;        h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date         :message-id:subject:to:cc;        bh=tkRPrdmrXbH3aURlFCLkryXHhq/THv7cMxq7yvgahT4=;        b=KO6jggESo+6QQq4cfVohrFHrqnHXOmSXxvAhLwvEPAf7gJY+eGQWlyn8RP3/mcziBg         djvhAzmKAbCKG2nFMe0S7HQVUNqgryZmEtN7ToJDySyqLth32Ypy5qYXsUY1cvlAbors         C+5KT1diKojP/B1A/nZtSzXxhDHvvwEwFOsCS3lKbpWMdu4K4yQen1+8WA5ParNlfmbX         3g6qO8l67jd7YYkGSEMVGNy49ES3da/hhujIk0RxDogEvxFpkV9zX4z0wpB3kJ61u88j         i8E6FZbfgya9V+KgL2RZ3RXs3pwS93E63C7tKYnZkGpK8hFxlvm+K5MWteF1nPaBDOJP         jh1w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H2uL/JdsV/dkbs5jC2pvZHtKrW9qER48ciqwaKFk/AW+b0nO9URBSf9IJspmlp/3vKxrVMVh6CsJzE65Q==
X-Received: by 10.157.58.68 with SMTP id j62mr6342580otc.145.1491125057010; Sun, 02 Apr 2017 02:24:17 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.157.42.75 with HTTP; Sun, 2 Apr 2017 02:24:16 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20170402053514.GZ17461@tucnak>
References: <CAFk2RUZzdhAD8gXMFGKL0KKKF1p9Pzr8=+dzBrCfH-astcSKYg@mail.gmail.com> <20170402053514.GZ17461@tucnak>
From: Ville Voutilainen <ville.voutilainen@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2017 09:24:00 -0000
Message-ID: <CAFk2RUbHjgrbYe_EZdjggweS0c=VkC1AGK5NCgh4SosHczVFJA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [v3 PATCH] Implement std::is_aggregate.
To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Cc: "libstdc++" <libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org>, 	"gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-SW-Source: 2017-04/txt/msg00040.txt.bz2

On 2 April 2017 at 08:35, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> wrote:
>> +      remove_cv_t<_Tp>
>> +      )>
>
> Any reason for the wrapping?

No, it's just a result of a nocturnal copy-paste-job of the existing
code for has_unique_object_representations.

> Also, shouldn't there be also:
>
>   /// is_aggregate_v
>   template<typename _Tp>
>     _GLIBCXX17_INLINE constexpr bool is_aggregate_v =
>       is_aggregate<_Tp>::value;
>
> somewhere with appropriate guards (or within the same ones)?

Yes, well spotted. I will add that.

> I'm surprised tests for the is_*_v variable templates are only in
> experimental/type_traits/value.cc when they are now apparently
> part of C++17.


Perhaps 20_util/variable_templates_for_traits.cc ?