incubator-stdcxx-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Martin Sebor <se...@roguewave.com>
Subject Re: error on tuple copy ctor
Date Wed, 02 Jul 2008 21:54:37 GMT
Eric Lemings wrote:
>  
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Martin Sebor [mailto:msebor@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 3:18 PM
>> To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: error on tuple copy ctor
>>
> ...
>>> Should we add the ctor even if the standard does not 
>> (currently) specify it?
>>
>> I don't think it's needed or desirable. In the test case I
>> posted, we want to call the const T& overload.
> 
> That's the only workaround I can think of.  You have another one in
> mind?

A workaround for what? This is a valid definition of
a CopyConstructible and MoveConstructible class (like tuple):

     struct S {
         S (const S&);
         S (S&&);
     };

I don't see why S would need another copy ctor with the signature
of S(S&). I realize tuple is quite a bit more complicated than S,
too complicated for me to understand why the ctor might be
necessary if, if fact, it really is. Could you show in a small
isolated example the problem that this ctor works around?

Martin

Mime
View raw message