On 06/12/16 06:05 -0500, Tim Song wrote:
On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 6:00 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
Oh, but if you mean what the standard should say, my issue submission
proposed "Throws: Nothing." for the ones with a narrow contract. It
should be in the issue list soon, but I only sent it yesterd
On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 6:00 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> Oh, but if you mean what the standard should say, my issue submission
> proposed "Throws: Nothing." for the ones with a narrow contract. It
> should be in the issue list soon, but I only sent it yesterday.
>
Yes, I was talking about the st
On 06/12/16 10:59 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 06/12/16 05:55 -0500, Tim Song wrote:
On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 5:43 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
None of these functions can throw, so we should mark them as such.
I've reported this as a defect against C++17, because they should have
been made no
On 06/12/16 05:55 -0500, Tim Song wrote:
On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 5:43 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
None of these functions can throw, so we should mark them as such.
I've reported this as a defect against C++17, because they should have
been made noexcept after the application of https://wg21.link
On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 5:43 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> None of these functions can throw, so we should mark them as such.
> I've reported this as a defect against C++17, because they should have
> been made noexcept after the application of https://wg21.link/p0254r2
Surely the const _CharT* var
None of these functions can throw, so we should mark them as such.
I've reported this as a defect against C++17, because they should have
been made noexcept after the application of https://wg21.link/p0254r2
* include/bits/basic_string.h (basic_string::find, basic_string::rfind)
(
