stdcxx-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Eric Lemings" <Eric.Lemi...@roguewave.com>
Subject RE: Differences between tr1 and c++0x
Date Wed, 21 May 2008 15:37:03 GMT
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin Sebor [mailto:sebor@roguewave.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2008 9:24 AM
> To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Differences between tr1 and c++0x
> 
> Travis Vitek wrote:
> > As most of us know, I've been working on type_traits for the 4.3
> > release. In doing so, I've noticed that there are some pretty
> > significant differences between tr1 and c++0x. My question is what
> > _exactly_ are we wanting to implement here? Do we want to 
> have the tr1
> > stuff as it is documented [in the tr1 final], or do we want the tr1
> > additions as they appear in the c++0x working draft?
> > 
> > Some of the issues...
> > 
> > 	1. The namespace that these features appear in [std::tr1 vs std]
> >       2. Section numbers for test names [4.meta.rel.cpp vs
> > 20.meta.rel.cpp]
> > 	3. Subtle differences between behavior of traits
> > 	4. Deprecated traits like add_reference [now
> > add_lvalue_reference]
> > 
> > I just want to make absolutely sure that I'm working with the same
> > expectations as everyone else and that we are trying to 
> implement the
> > c++0x draft features that were introduced in tr1. I'm 
> currently writing
> > to the c++0x draft, but my tests use old section numbers 
> from the tr1
> > final, and everything I've written is currently in the std::tr1
> > namespace [using a macro _TR1].
> 
> IMO, we should target C++ 0x and forget TR1 even exists ;-)
> That said, all C++ 0x code should be guarded with the same
> macro until the next standard is released. Maybe something
> like _RWSTD_NO_EXT_CXX_0X?

Agreed.  TR1, after all, was published as a draft.  In ISO/IEC
DTR19768 (N1836), Section 1, Paragraph 2 says "Some of these
components in this technical report may never be standardized,
and other may be standardized in a substantially changed form."

Also, we'll need some sort of configure option that defines
(or undefines) the _RWSTD_NO_EXT_CXX_OX macro.

Brad.

Mime
View raw message