erik.pilkington added a comment.
Hi Volodymyr, thanks for working on this!
================
Comment at: libcxx/include/memory:1479
+struct __has_construct_missing
+ : false_type
+{
----------------
Shouldn't this be true_type?
================
Comment at: libcxx/include/memory:1673-1677
+ (is_same
+ <
+ typename _VSTD::remove_const<typename
allocator_type::value_type>::type,
+ typename _VSTD::remove_const<_SourceTp>::type
+ >::value
----------------
I'm not sure if this is correct. Previously, we only selected this overload if
the allocator didn't have a construct() member, or if it was a std::allocator,
in which case we know construct() just called in-place new. With this patch, we
would select this overload for a custom allocator that overrode construct() so
long as the value_types matched. I think the right behaviour for the custom
allocator case would be to use the construct() member instead of memcpying.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D48342
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
