[type_traits] A bug in has_nothrow_default_constructor
Hi All, I have submitted a new ticket: https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/11324 Given the information floating around that Boost.TypeTraits are unmaintained and that they are to be replaced with the rewrite, is there any chance that this is fixed, or at least the test case added to regression matrix? BTW, does type_traits v2 handle this case correctly? Regards, &rzej
Hi All, I have submitted a new ticket: https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/11324
Given the information floating around that Boost.TypeTraits are unmaintained and that they are to be replaced with the rewrite, is there any chance that this is fixed, or at least the test case added to regression matrix? They're not unmaintained. However, because of the risk of changes breaking a lot of stuff, we do try to keep the code ultra-stable. "Version2" is perhaps misnamed, as it's a more of a radical face-lift
On 20/05/2015 08:39, Andrzej Krzemienski wrote: than a replacement. Basically remove all the no-longer needed workarounds and simplify as much as possible.
BTW, does type_traits v2 handle this case correctly? There should be no difference in behaviour between the two versions.
BTW your test case works fine for me with MSVC and GCC, so I assume this is an Oracle compiler issue? John.
2015-05-20 19:00 GMT+02:00 John Maddock
On 20/05/2015 08:39, Andrzej Krzemienski wrote:
Hi All, I have submitted a new ticket: https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/11324
Given the information floating around that Boost.TypeTraits are unmaintained and that they are to be replaced with the rewrite, is there any chance that this is fixed, or at least the test case added to regression matrix?
They're not unmaintained. However, because of the risk of changes breaking a lot of stuff, we do try to keep the code ultra-stable. "Version2" is perhaps misnamed, as it's a more of a radical face-lift than a replacement. Basically remove all the no-longer needed workarounds and simplify as much as possible.
BTW, does type_traits v2 handle this case correctly?
There should be no difference in behaviour between the two versions.
BTW your test case works fine for me with MSVC and GCC, so I assume this is an Oracle compiler issue?
Yes, this is only on Oracle Solaris Studio C++ compiler (under development). The developers say it is a known issue with this compiler that they intend to fix. What bugs me is that tests for Boost.Optional fail because of this reason, but tests in TypeTraits all pass. Regards, &rzej
participants (2)
-
Andrzej Krzemienski -
John Maddock