tuple move constructor

[Ville Voutilainen]

On 7 May 2016 at 00:39, Marc Glisse <marc.glisse@inria.fr> wrote:
> Assuming we want the copy constructor to be defaulted, I think we still
> could with concepts:
>
> tuple(tuple const&)
> requires(__and_<is_copy_constructible<_Elements>...>::value)
> = default;
>
> While there is precedent for enabling C++11 features in C++03 mode inside
> system headers, I guess maintainers might be more reluctant for something
> that is only heading for a TS for now.

Much as I'd like to go towards that direction, I don't think we can,
yet, at least not as our default
implementation, because front-ends like clang wouldn't be able to
compile our library.

>> I think the patch is ok, but I think it would be a good idea to have a
>> comment on the added tag type and its purpose.
> Indeed. I wasn't sure if people preferred more tags or more enable_if...

I don't have a strong opinion if there's implementation choice between those.