mclow.lists added inline comments.
================
Comment at: include/string:3216
@@ -3668,3 +3215,3 @@
{
- return _VSTD::__str_find_last_not_of<value_type, size_type, traits_type,
npos>
+ return __str_find_last_not_of<value_type, size_type, traits_type, npos>
(data(), size(), __str.data(), __pos, __str.size());
----------------
EricWF wrote:
> Why is this call no longer qualified? It has UDT's that can force ADL.
Because it has a reserved name. Users cannot provide a function with this name
in their programs.
================
Comment at: include/string_view:209
@@ +208,3 @@
+ {
+// _LIBCPP_ASSERT(__len == 0 || __s != nullptr,
"string_view::string_view(_CharT *, size_t): received nullptr");
+ }
----------------
EricWF wrote:
> I think we have two choices for this diagnostic:
>
> 1. Remove it, since it will never work with C++11 constexpr.
> 2. Only expose the assertion in C++14 or newer.
> 3. Only may this constructor constexpr in C++14, and keep the assertion.
>
> (3) seems like a Good option to me since offering string_view in C++11 is an
> extension anyway.
Either #2 or #3 is fine with me.
================
Comment at: include/string_view:331
@@ +330,3 @@
+ {
+// if (__pos > size())
+// throw out_of_range("string_view::substr");
----------------
EricWF wrote:
> These lines should be removed.
Yeah. Frackin' C++11 constexpr.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D21459
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
