This is the mail archive of the
libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
Re: [Patch] Remove workaround for copy_backward
On Sep 28, 2003, at 10:41 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
Here is my take on the template constructror issue. It is out of
question to add a dummy argument, because:
(1) it an ABI breaking -- I do not have a strong opinion here;
(2) it makes us potentially accept "invalid" constructs -- even though
it may a harmless one. For some reasons, people tend to
use/depend
on things we think harmless; I'm pretty sure we'll get questions
like: "why does not vector<> use by nth argument?".
It think the dispatcher does a pretty good job here, even though I
think it should not depend overload resolution.
There are probably other components that can benefit from enable-if,
though.
The obvious answer to objection #2 is to use enable-if internally. That
makes constructors more of a nuisance, but even then we can use the
same trick we're using already: dispatch to a helper function that does
all the real work.
--Matt