Beman Dawes <bdawes <at> acm.org> writes:
Sigh... it depends, as far as TR1 is concerned this started out false, and then changed to true (in the final TR1 draft N1836 anyway). However, the std whitepaper has for the moment anyway changed it back again... well sort of anyway.
John,
Do you have any idea if the change back in the current WP was deliberate or an editing glitch? Also, does your "well sort of anyway" comment mean you think the current WP is unclear?
TR1 says that 'is_base_of<T, U> is true if T and U are the same type'. The WP removes the 'is the same type' bit, but adds an 'a class is considered it's own base'. I read this as: TR1: is_base_of<T, T> is true WP: is_base_of<T, T> is true if T is a class and false otherwise (for int in this example). Is this what you mean? (i don't know what the pre-n1836 spec said, so i'm just guessing here).