From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28787 invoked by alias); 14 Oct 2016 16:11:04 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 28762 invoked by uid 89); 14 Oct 2016 16:11:03 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 14 Oct 2016 16:11:02 +0000 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 54801C0528AB; Fri, 14 Oct 2016 16:11:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u9EGB02S000406; Fri, 14 Oct 2016 12:11:00 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] Introduce gdb::unique_ptr To: Simon Marchi References: <1476448162-20203-1-git-send-email-palves@redhat.com> <209d21ef-f3cb-6188-8654-943b2254c9b3@redhat.com> <4c97e05492f34198bb6cafc860bbdbc8@simark.ca> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: <09c955e2-8c9c-8dd7-67fe-cbc83c3cfa2e@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2016 16:11:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4c97e05492f34198bb6cafc860bbdbc8@simark.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2016-10/txt/msg00452.txt.bz2 On 10/14/2016 05:07 PM, Simon Marchi wrote: > On 2016-10-14 08:50, Pedro Alves wrote: >> +struct unique_ptr_nullptr_t >> +{ >> +private: >> + struct private_type; >> +public: >> + /* Since null_type is private, the only way to construct this class > > null_type, or private_type? Whoops, yes, private_type. Used to be called null_type, but then I renamed it thinking that it'd be clearer. Thanks, Pedro Alves