testing techniques for verifying includes in std:: namespace

[Benjamin Kosnik]

>     - The "archetypes" part, which tests that an algorithm does not try 
> to use any operations on its input types that aren't stated in the 
> concept requirements. For example, this would detect a "for (; first < 
> last; ++first)" error in an algorithm that is meant to take input 
> iterators. This kind of checking is unnecessary in ConceptGCC, because 
> the compiler itself will diagnose the error when the template is parsed.
> 
>     - The "concept checks" part, which tests that the user has provided 
> types that meet the minimum stated requirements of the algorithm. For 
> example, this would detect an attempt to use adjacent_find on an input 
> iterator. This kind of checking is unnecessary in ConceptGCC, because 
> the compiler checks that the user-provided types meet the stated 
> requirements of the algorithm before the algorithm is instantiated.

Thanks for the clarification.

I was thinking that eventually, there would be negative tests to verify
these two parts.

No?

>     - The other "concept checks" part, which tests that the data 
> structures provided by a library meet the requirements of its concepts. 
> For example, this would check that vector<int> is actually a model of 
> the Sequence concept. This kind of checking is unnecessary in 
> ConceptGCC, because the library contains "concept maps" stating that 
> vector<T> is a model of Sequence, and the compiler checks the 
> correctness of concept maps when they are defined.
> 
> Unless there are other concept-related checks that I'm not thinking of, 
> concept checking doesn't really have a place in a concept-enabled 
> library. We've provided language features that do all of that checking 
> for us, automatically, without the need for the techniques used in 
> today's concept checkers. In ConceptGCC, I've just stripped out all of 
> the existing concept-checking code.

Ooops. Yes, I noticed that you stripped out all the old-style concept 
checking code, which is a good thing IMHO as concept gcc has better 
techniques for this.

best,
benjamin