Subject: [Boost-commit] svn:boost r51629 - sandbox/committee/LWG
From: bdawes_at_[hidden]
Date: 2009-03-05 16:52:11
Author: bemandawes
Date: 2009-03-05 16:52:11 EST (Thu, 05 Mar 2009)
New Revision: 51629
URL: http://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/changeset/51629
Log:
Thursday 4:45 PM
Text files modified:
sandbox/committee/LWG/LWG_0xCD1_status.html | 63 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
1 files changed, 48 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
Modified: sandbox/committee/LWG/LWG_0xCD1_status.html
==============================================================================
--- sandbox/committee/LWG/LWG_0xCD1_status.html (original)
+++ sandbox/committee/LWG/LWG_0xCD1_status.html 2009-03-05 16:52:11 EST (Thu, 05 Mar 2009)
@@ -21,7 +21,7 @@
<h1>Library Working Group<br>
Status of CD1 National Body Comments</h1>
<p>Revised:
-<!--webbot bot="Timestamp" S-Type="EDITED" S-Format="%d %b %Y %I:%M:%S %p %Z" startspan -->04 Mar 2009 05:42:11 PM -0500<!--webbot bot="Timestamp" endspan i-checksum="42359" --></p>
+<!--webbot bot="Timestamp" S-Type="EDITED" S-Format="%d %b %Y %I:%M:%S %p %Z" startspan -->05 Mar 2009 04:34:53 PM -0500<!--webbot bot="Timestamp" endspan i-checksum="42235" --></p>
<p>Disposition [Being reviewed by Editor] has been applied all Type Ed comments
which do not have a specific response from a sub-group.</p>
@@ -82,6 +82,7 @@
<font color="#000080"><u><a href=
"http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html">
http://www.open-std.org/><br>
+
<a href=
"http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html">
jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html</a></u></font>
@@ -3356,7 +3357,14 @@
<p align="left">The statement made in the comment was already aired prior to the last vote.
Without further input, the committee cannot remove a feature that was voted
into the draft. We will look at this comment in the light of N2829, which
- attempts to make scoped allocators less intrusive.<br>
+ attempts to make scoped allocators less intrusive.<p align="left">Later: US
+ 65, remove scoped allocators: straw poll, 4 pro - 9 con - 3 abstain, no
+ consensus for removing scoped allocators.<p align="left">D2840: straw
+ poll, this is the direction we want to go: 11 pro - 0 con - 5 abstain,
+ we have consensus. Straw poll, put on format motions page for this
+ meeting (pro) or review and consider at next meeting (con): 7 pro - 1
+ con - many abstain, consensus for moving as formal motion at this
+ meeting.<br>
<tr valign="top">
<td>
@@ -4376,9 +4384,8 @@
<p>JP 39
<td>
- <p align="left">20.6.16.2
-
- <td>
+ <p align="left">20.6.16.2 [func.<br>
+ wrap.func]<td>
<p align="left"><br>
<td>
@@ -4440,12 +4447,31 @@
<p align="left"><br>
<td>
- <p>
-
- Agree with one correction: <span class="twikiNewLink">CopyConstructible?</span>
- should be <span class="twikiNewLink">ConstructibleWithAllocator?</span>
- . Pablo to supply wording. Also check with Howard that omission was not
- deliberate.<tr valign="top">
+ Agree with one correction: CopyConstructible should be
+ ConstructibleWithAllocator. New proposed resolution:
+ <p>Correct as follows. </p>
+ <pre> template<class F, Allocator A>
+ function(allocator_arg_t, const A&, F);
+ template<class F, Allocator A>
+ function(allocator_arg_t, const A&, F&&);
+</pre>
+ <p>should be </p>
+ <pre> template<class F, Allocator A>
+ requires ConstructibleWithAllocator<F, A>
+ && Callable<F, ArgTypes...>
+ && Convertible<Callable<F, ArgTypes...>
+ ::result_type, R>
+ function(allocator_arg_t, const A&, F);
+
+ template<class F, Allocator A>
+ requires ConstructibleWithAllocator<F,A>
+ && Callable<F, ArgTypes...>
+ && Convertible<Callable<F, ArgTypes...>
+ ::result_type, R>
+ function(allocator_arg_t,
+ const A&, F&&);
+</pre>
+ <tr valign="top">
<td>
<p>JP 40
@@ -5026,7 +5052,8 @@
<td>
<p style=
"margin-top: 0.04in; margin-bottom: 0.04in">See paper:
- http://www.halpernwightsoftware.com/WG21/n2810_allocator_defects.pdf
+ http://www.halpernwightsoftware.com/<br>
+ WG21/n2810_allocator_defects.pdf
<p>
@@ -8236,7 +8263,12 @@
Agree. The proposed wording is forthcoming from Martin. We feel that these
overloads of swap are more important for array than other containers because
- swap is not O(1) for array.<tr valign="top">
+ swap is not O(1) for array.<p>
+
+ <strong>HOWEVER</strong> in a later session discussing D2844, it was decided
+ to remove all the r-value-ref <code>swap</code> overloads from containers.
+ Therefore adding them to <code>array</code> has no benefit. So the final
+ disposition is NAD.<tr valign="top">
<td>
<p>UK<br>
244
@@ -12752,8 +12784,9 @@
<td>
<p>
- Create an issue, together with UK 322. Detlef will write the issue, but not
- proposed wording. Refer also to sections [time.clock.req] and [time.clock.monotonic].<tr valign="top">
+ There is a good definition. NAD. There are other problems here (see issue
+ 859). Create an issue, together with UK 322. Detlef will write the issue,
+ but not proposed wording. Refer also to sections [time.clock.req] and [time.clock.monotonic].<tr valign="top">
<td>
<p>UK<br>
322