Author: marshall
Date: Mon Feb  5 17:59:28 2018
New Revision: 324307

URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=324307&view=rev
Log:
More patches ready

Modified:
    libcxx/trunk/www/upcoming_meeting.html

Modified: libcxx/trunk/www/upcoming_meeting.html
URL: 
http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/libcxx/trunk/www/upcoming_meeting.html?rev=324307&r1=324306&r2=324307&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- libcxx/trunk/www/upcoming_meeting.html (original)
+++ libcxx/trunk/www/upcoming_meeting.html Mon Feb  5 17:59:28 2018
@@ -63,8 +63,8 @@
 <tr><td><a 
href="https://wg21.link/LWG2243";>2243</a></td><td><tt>istream::putback</tt> 
problem</td><td>Jacksonville</td><td>Complete</td></tr>
 <tr><td><a 
href="https://wg21.link/LWG2816";>2816</a></td><td><tt>resize_file</tt> has 
impossible postcondition</td><td>Jacksonville</td><td><i>Nothing to 
do</i></td></tr>
 <tr><td><a href="https://wg21.link/LWG2843";>2843</a></td><td>Unclear behavior 
of 
<tt>std::pmr::memory_resource::do_allocate()</tt></td><td>Jacksonville</td><td></td></tr>
-<tr><td><a href="https://wg21.link/LWG2849";>2849</a></td><td>Why does 
<tt>!is_regular_file(from)</tt> cause <tt>copy_file</tt> to report a "file 
already exists" error?</td><td>Jacksonville</td><td>Nothing to do</td></tr>
-<tr><td><a 
href="https://wg21.link/LWG2851";>2851</a></td><td><tt>std::filesystem</tt> enum 
classes are now underspecified</td><td>Jacksonville</td><td>Nothing to 
do</td></tr>
+<tr><td><a href="https://wg21.link/LWG2849";>2849</a></td><td>Why does 
<tt>!is_regular_file(from)</tt> cause <tt>copy_file</tt> to report a "file 
already exists" error?</td><td>Jacksonville</td><td><i>Nothing to 
do</i></td></tr>
+<tr><td><a 
href="https://wg21.link/LWG2851";>2851</a></td><td><tt>std::filesystem</tt> enum 
classes are now underspecified</td><td>Jacksonville</td><td><i>Nothing to 
do</i></td></tr>
 <tr><td><a 
href="https://wg21.link/LWG2969";>2969</a></td><td><tt>polymorphic_allocator::construct()</tt>
 shouldn't pass <tt>resource()</tt></td><td>Jacksonville</td><td></td></tr>
 <tr><td><a href="https://wg21.link/LWG2975";>2975</a></td><td>Missing case for 
<tt>pair</tt> construction in scoped and polymorphic 
allocators</td><td>Jacksonville</td><td></td></tr>
 <tr><td><a href="https://wg21.link/LWG2989";>2989</a></td><td><tt>path</tt>'s 
stream insertion operator lets you insert everything under the 
sun</td><td>Jacksonville</td><td>Completed</td></tr>
@@ -77,15 +77,15 @@
 <tr><td><a href="https://wg21.link/LWG3010";>3010</a></td><td>[networking.ts] 
<tt>uses_executor</tt> says "if a type <tt>T::executor_type</tt> 
exists"</td><td>Jacksonville</td><td></td></tr>
 <tr><td><a 
href="https://wg21.link/LWG3013";>3013</a></td><td><tt>(recursive_)directory_iterator</tt>
 construction and traversal should not be 
<tt>noexcept</tt></td><td>Jacksonville</td><td>Complete</td></tr>
 <tr><td><a href="https://wg21.link/LWG3014";>3014</a></td><td>More 
<tt>noexcept</tt> issues with filesystem 
operations</td><td>Jacksonville</td><td>Complete</td></tr>
-      <tr><td><a 
href="https://wg21.link/LWG3015";>3015</a></td><td><tt>copy_options::<i>unspecified</i></tt>
 underspecified</td><td>Jacksonville</td><td><i>Nothing to do</i></td></tr>
+<tr><td><a 
href="https://wg21.link/LWG3015";>3015</a></td><td><tt>copy_options::<i>unspecified</i></tt>
 underspecified</td><td>Jacksonville</td><td><i>Nothing to do</i></td></tr>
 <tr><td><a href="https://wg21.link/LWG3017";>3017</a></td><td><tt>list 
splice</tt> functions should use 
<tt>addressof</tt></td><td>Jacksonville</td><td></td></tr>
 <tr><td><a href="https://wg21.link/LWG3020";>3020</a></td><td>[networking.ts] 
Remove spurious nested <tt>value_type</tt> buffer sequence 
requirement</td><td>Jacksonville</td><td></td></tr>
 <tr><td><a 
href="https://wg21.link/LWG3026";>3026</a></td><td><tt>filesystem::weakly_canonical</tt>
 still defined in terms of <tt>canonical(p, 
base)</tt></td><td>Jacksonville</td><td></td></tr>
 <tr><td><a href="https://wg21.link/LWG3030";>3030</a></td><td>Who shall meet 
the requirements of <tt>try_lock</tt>?</td><td>Jacksonville</td><td></td></tr>
 <tr><td><a href="https://wg21.link/LWG3034";>3034</a></td><td>P0767R1 breaks 
previously-standard-layout types</td><td>Jacksonville</td><td></td></tr>
-<tr><td><a 
href="https://wg21.link/LWG3035";>3035</a></td><td><tt>std::allocator</tt>'s 
constructors should be 
<tt>constexpr</tt></td><td>Jacksonville</td><td></td></tr>
-<tr><td><a href="https://wg21.link/LWG3039";>3039</a></td><td>Unnecessary 
<tt>decay</tt> in <tt>thread</tt> and 
<tt>packaged_task</tt></td><td>Jacksonville</td><td></td></tr>
-<tr><td><a href="https://wg21.link/LWG3041";>3041</a></td><td>Unnecessary 
<tt>decay</tt> in 
<tt>reference_wrapper</tt></td><td>Jacksonville</td><td></td></tr>
+<tr><td><a 
href="https://wg21.link/LWG3035";>3035</a></td><td><tt>std::allocator</tt>'s 
constructors should be <tt>constexpr</tt></td><td>Jacksonville</td><td><i>Patch 
Ready</i></td></tr>
+<tr><td><a href="https://wg21.link/LWG3039";>3039</a></td><td>Unnecessary 
<tt>decay</tt> in <tt>thread</tt> and 
<tt>packaged_task</tt></td><td>Jacksonville</td><td><i>Patch Ready</i></td></tr>
+<tr><td><a href="https://wg21.link/LWG3041";>3041</a></td><td>Unnecessary 
<tt>decay</tt> in 
<tt>reference_wrapper</tt></td><td>Jacksonville</td><td><i>Patch 
Ready</i></td></tr>
 <tr><td><a 
href="https://wg21.link/LWG3042";>3042</a></td><td><tt>is_literal_type_v</tt> 
should be inline</td><td>Jacksonville</td><td>Complete</td></tr>
 <tr><td><a href="https://wg21.link/LWG3043";>3043</a></td><td>Bogus 
postcondition for <tt>filesystem_error</tt> 
constructor</td><td>Jacksonville</td><td></td></tr>
 <tr><td><a 
href="https://wg21.link/LWG3045";>3045</a></td><td><tt>atomic&lt;<i>floating-point</i>&gt;</tt>
 doesn't have <tt>value_type</tt> or 
<tt>difference_type</tt></td><td>Jacksonville</td><td></td></tr>
@@ -131,7 +131,7 @@
 <li> 3026 - I think this is just wording cleanup - Eric?</li>
 <li> 3030 - Wording changes only?? Do we handle exceptions correctly here?</li>
 <li> 3034 - Need to check if our tests are correct.</li>
-<li> 3035 - <i>Easy to do</i></li>
+<li> 3035 - <i>Patch Ready</i></li>
 <li> 3039 - <i>Patch Ready</i></li>
 <li> 3041 - <i>Patch Ready</i></li>
 <li> 3042 - We already do this.</li>


_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to