Try to catch up _GLIBCXX_RESOLVE_LIB_DEFECTS comments and documentation.

[Jonathan Wakely]

On 16 March 2014 16:09, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
> OK, thinking further on it I actually agree with not mentioning DRs on a
> partially baked standard.  We advertise that support for new standards is
> experimental.

I don't think it does any harm to add comments during the C++1y/C++1z
process to note that we've incorporated a particular DR against an
earlier working paper, because it's not always obvious which draft our
work-in-progress follows, but once the standard is finished I'd be in
favour of removing those comments. Implementing those DRs is implied
by implementing the finished standard.