[v3] LWG 2106: move_iterator::reference

[Marc Glisse]

On Wed, 5 Mar 2014, Jonathan Wakely wrote:

> On 5 March 2014 19:36, Marc Glisse wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> this issue got delayed in LWG, apparently because of a failed "improvement"
>> to the wording along the way (happens, that's ok), but there seems to be a
>> consensus on the resolution and I don't really see the point of waiting (it
>> changes code that currently returns a reference to a temporary).
>>
>> Tested on x86_64-linux-gnu. Stage 1?
>
> Yes, OK for Stage 1.  Please put _GLIBCXX_RESOLVE_DEFECTS (or whatever
> it is we use elsewhere) in the comment, rather than just "DR 2106".

r209323
(again, only posting because this was accepted long ago)

-- 
Marc Glisse