https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107361
Peter Kasting changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pkasting at google dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113074
--- Comment #17 from Peter Kasting ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #15)
> (In reply to Peter Kasting from comment #14)
> > And you are right, it's possible to reimplement concepts around "is this
> > even legal to pass to to_addres
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113074
--- Comment #14 from Peter Kasting ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #13)
> As I said in comment 7, LWG considered this case and it was pointed out that
> the problem described can only occur if a type defines iterator_concept =
> co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113074
--- Comment #10 from Peter Kasting ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #9)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> > Created attachment 56905 [details]
> > testcase which shows libc++ and libstdc++ difference
> >
> > with libs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113074
Peter Kasting changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pkasting at google dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109242
--- Comment #2 from Peter Kasting ---
(In reply to TC from comment #1)
> The missing remove_cv_t is real, but this example is invalid. As the linked
> cppreference page notes, you cannot pass a PMD to transform.
Ah, true! How about this then: h
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: pkasting at google dot com
Target Milestone: ---
The implementation of C++2b's std::optional::transform() on HEAD omits a call
to std::remove_cv_t
--- Comment #16 from pkasting at google dot com 2006-08-22 20:31 ---
Comment 4 seems to make it clear that GCC's current behavior differs from past
behavior that was legal under the spec. I fail to see the utility of the
current behavior or why it would be objectionable to appl
