[Bug libstdc++/41759] [C++0x] <random> static_assert phrasing should be positive

[paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com]

------- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com  2009-10-20 02:45 -------
In fact, I have only *extended* the existing static_asserts to cover the type
too, not just the bounds, thus avoiding the legacy simulated concept checks. 
In general, I followed the existing practice about negative vs positive.

I think the real confusion is that in general we want to talk about *arguments*
not *parameters*, therefore we want to say "argument substituting _UIntType not
an unsigned integral type", and "template argument substituting __m out of
bounds". I'm in favor of that change.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41759