On 12/11/15 00:06 +0200, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
--- a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/Wattributes1.C
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/Wattributes1.C
@@ -5,4 +5,4 @@
#include <new>
__attribute__((visibility("hidden")))void*operator new(std::size_t); // { dg-warning 
"visibility attribute ignored" }

-// { dg-message "previous declaration" "" { target *-*-* } 111 }
+// { dg-message "previous declaration" "" { target *-*-* } 116 }
diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/include/experimental/type_traits 
b/libstdc++-v3/include/experimental/type_traits
index b0ed3b0..b7f3bda 100644
--- a/libstdc++-v3/include/experimental/type_traits
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/include/experimental/type_traits
@@ -271,6 +271,28 @@ template<typename _To, template<typename...> class _Op, 
typename... _Args>
  constexpr bool is_detected_convertible_v
    = is_detected_convertible<_To, _Op, _Args...>::value;

+#if __cplusplus > 201402L
+
+#define __cpp_lib_experimental_logical_traits 201511
+
+using std::conjunction;
+using std::disjunction;
+using std::negation;

It's unfortunate if the std::experimental versions are only available
for C++17 mode, because the whole point of putting it into both C++17
and the TS was that users can make us of the std::experimental
versions sooner than they can make use of C++17 version. If both
versions depend on using -std=c++17 then the TS versions are entirely
redundant.

So I think we want to define them again, independently, in
<experimental/type_traits>, even though it might lead to ambiguities
for code that does:

using namespace std;
using namespace std::experimental;

Reply via email to