On 25/09/14 13:14 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
With C++11 allocator semantics the swap() member might also replace
the allocator, which is only allowed in specific circumstances.
Even though the worst that could happen is we replace the allocator
with an equal one, we should avoid using swap an
With C++11 allocator semantics the swap() member might also replace
the allocator, which is only allowed in specific circumstances.
Even though the worst that could happen is we replace the allocator
with an equal one, we should avoid using swap and use the internal
_M_swap_data function instead.