mclow.lists marked 5 inline comments as done.
mclow.lists added inline comments.
================
Comment at: include/string:836
_LIBCPP_METHOD_TEMPLATE_IMPLICIT_INSTANTIATION_VIS
- basic_string(const _Tp& __t, size_type __pos, size_type __n,
- const allocator_type& __a = allocator_type(),
- typename
enable_if<__can_be_converted_to_string_view<_CharT, _Traits, _Tp>::value,
void>::type* = 0);
- _LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY explicit
- basic_string(__self_view __sv);
- _LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY
- basic_string(__self_view __sv, const _Allocator& __a);
+ explicit basic_string(const _Tp& __t, size_type __pos, size_type __n,
+ const allocator_type& __a = allocator_type());
----------------
ldionne wrote:
> I believe an unwelcome `explicit` snuck in here.
Right.
================
Comment at: include/string:839
+
+// template<class _Tp>
+// _LIBCPP_METHOD_TEMPLATE_IMPLICIT_INSTANTIATION_VIS
----------------
ldionne wrote:
> Did you mean to leave those comments there?
Nope. Thanks.
================
Comment at: include/string:856
+ _LIBCPP_METHOD_TEMPLATE_IMPLICIT_INSTANTIATION_VIS
+ explicit basic_string(const _Tp& __t, const allocator_type& __a);
+
----------------
ldionne wrote:
> tcanens wrote:
> > ldionne wrote:
> > > I think this `explicit` shouldn't be there, too.
> > This one is `explicit` in the standard (because it had a default argument:
> > `template<class T> explicit basic_string(const T& t, const Allocator& a =
> > Allocator());`)
> Ah, you're right. So basically
>
> ```
> template<class T>
> explicit basic_string(const T& t,
> const Allocator& a = Allocator());
> ```
>
> is implemented as two overloads
>
> ```
> template<class T>
> explicit basic_string(const T& t);
> ```
>
> and
>
> ```
> template<class T>
> explicit basic_string(const T& t, const Allocator& a);
> ```
>
Right. We frequently split defaulted allocator ctors.
================
Comment at: include/string:1987
{
__self_view __sv = __self_view(__t).substr(__pos, __n);
----------------
tcanens wrote:
> `__self_view(__t)` is wrong - the wording was intentionally crafted to
> require the conversion to `basic_string_view` to be done using
> copy-initialization. Using direct-initialization can potentially result in
> different overload resolution results.
Nice catch!
https://reviews.llvm.org/D48616
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
