You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Or should "Specializations for pair using piecewise construction" be reworded as a note in the details of method "void construct(pair<T1,T2>* p, piecewise_construct_t, ...)"? That's how we resolved the other incorrect comment "Return a default-constructed allocator (no allocator propagation)" before "select_on_container_copy_construction()". Thoughts on how to word the note?
Activity
jwakely commentedon Apr 14, 2016
They're overloads not specializations, so maybe "Overloads for piecewise construction of pairs." (The term is defined in [pairs.pair]p14).
burblebee commentedon Apr 14, 2016
Or should "
Specializations for pair using piecewise construction
" be reworded as a note in the details of method "void construct(pair<T1,T2>* p, piecewise_construct_t, ...)
"? That's how we resolved the other incorrect comment "Return a default-constructed allocator (no allocator propagation)
" before "select_on_container_copy_construction()
". Thoughts on how to word the note?[memory.polymorphic.allocator] Add references and add/fix comments in…
[memory.polymorphic.allocator] Add references and add/fix comments in…