Re: Editorial notes about the working draft

From:

=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Daniel_Kr=FCgler?= <daniel.kruegler@googlemail.com>

Newsgroups:

comp.lang.c++.moderated

Date:

Mon, 6 Dec 2010 06:23:10 CST

Message-ID:

<idi0ua$28g$1@news.eternal-september.org>

On 11/9/2010 20:44, Nikolay Ivchenkov wrote:

N3126 - 20.3 contains

    template<size_t I, class T1, class T2> const
      typename const tuple_element<I, std::pair<T1, T2> > ::type&
        get(const std::pair<T1, T2>&);

(for original formatting see the working draft). The second 'const'
should be removed. Unnecessary whitespace between closing angle
brackets can be removed.

This is clearly an editorial thing. Please post such a description to

<editorial$at$versatilecoding$dot$com>

[Remove brackets and dollar symbols]

N3126 - 20.7.2 contains

template<std::size_t Len, class... Types> struct aligned_union;

whose meaning, AFACS, never decribed. According to the resolution of
DR 856
(http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#856)
aligned_union should be completely removed from the working draft. In
N2798 it was marked as removed (in all occurrences), but in N2857 and
the next drafts the declaration still exist.

The most recent draft N3225 has provided a new definition for
aligned_union as result of applying

http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3190.htm

HTH & Greetings from Bremen,

Daniel Kr?gler

--
[ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ]
[ comp.lang.c++.moderated. First time posters: Do this! ]