https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120397
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #0) > We could either stop using std::_Destroy(first, cur) in the uninitialized > algos (no thanks), or make std::_Destroy(first, cur) handle arrays, or make > std::_Destroy(*first) handle arrays. > > The latter would be consistent with std::destroy_at, and would mean that > std::_Destroy_n(first, n) would also work for arrays. But to make the code > above (and all similar cases?) work it's sufficient to handle it in > std::_Destroy(first, last). All the uninitialized algos use that. Hmm, but std::destroy(first, last) and std::destroy_n(first, n) in C++17 do not support arrays, and we implement them by calling std::_Destroy(first, last) and std::_Destroy_n(first, n) respectively. So if _Destroy is "fixed" to handle arrays, then it would affect std::destroy.
