Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[utility,iterator] Apply p0174r2 deprecating vestigial library compon… #773

Closed

Conversation

AlisdairM
Copy link
Contributor

…ents

Moves text (with minor tweaks, per p0174r2) to Annex D
for deprecation, and updates the indices accordingly.

A drive-by fix in allocator so that operator==/!= in
the synopsis use the same parameter names in the
definition.

Fix use of 'reference' with 'T&' in std::allocator as an
editorial fix missed by the original paper.

@tkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor

tkoeppe commented Jun 27, 2016

@zygoloid, @burblebee: Just a heads up that Alisdair has provided a PR to apply one of the motions.

T* address(T& x) const noexcept;
const T* address(const T& x) const noexcept;

T* allocate(size_t, const void* hint);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Should the first parameter get a name here?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good catch - this error was present in the original standard too. FIXED

…ents

Moves text (with minor tweaks, per p0174r2) to Annex D
for deprecation, and updates the indices accordingly.

A drive-by fix in allocator so that operator==/!= in
the synopsis use the same parameter names in the
definition.
@AlisdairM
Copy link
Contributor Author

Force-pushed an amended branch to address Tim's comments, and apply with a clean history.
The missing parameter name was a problem in the original standard, and has been corrected in both utility and the deprecated annex.

@tkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor

tkoeppe commented Jun 28, 2016

@zygoloid, @burblebee, @jwakely: Until now, motion applications had commits titled PnnnnRk Title of paper here. Should we stick to that, or should the commit messages follow the pattern of editorial changes the way Alisdair has done here?

@jwakely
Copy link
Member

jwakely commented Jun 28, 2016

My preference would be without the [stable.name] for non-editorial changes. The point of putting that in the commit message is to know where changes happened, but with a paper number the paper provides that info. Not my call though.

@tkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor

tkoeppe commented Jun 28, 2016

I absorbed this into a branch on cplusplus/draft as commit b086b8a.

@tkoeppe tkoeppe closed this Jun 28, 2016
@burblebee
Copy link
Contributor

Motions get commit messages like:

PnnnnRk Title of paper

Editorial changes made to wording (if any).

LWG/CWG issues get commit messages like:

LWG2130 Title of issue

Editorial changes made to wording (if any).

Editorial issues get commit messages like:

[section] Title/description of issue/fix (#nnn)

Fixes #nnn.

Editorial changes get commit messages like:

[section] Description of change

@tkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor

tkoeppe commented Jul 11, 2016

@burblebee Nice summary - that should go on the wiki!

@AlisdairM AlisdairM deleted the apply_p0174r2_deprecations branch July 11, 2016 20:11
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants