Author: marshall
Date: Tue Feb 23 13:48:09 2016
New Revision: 261676
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=261676&view=rev
Log:
More updates
Modified:
libcxx/trunk/www/upcoming_meeting.html
Modified: libcxx/trunk/www/upcoming_meeting.html
URL:
http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/libcxx/trunk/www/upcoming_meeting.html?rev=261676&r1=261675&r2=261676&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- libcxx/trunk/www/upcoming_meeting.html (original)
+++ libcxx/trunk/www/upcoming_meeting.html Tue Feb 23 13:48:09 2016
@@ -64,18 +64,18 @@
<tr><td><a
href="http://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-defects.html#2450";>2450</a></td><td><tt>(greater|less|greater_equal|less_equal)<void></tt>
do not yield a total order for pointers</td><td>Jacksonville</td><td></td></tr>
<tr><td><a
href="http://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-defects.html#2520";>2520</a></td><td>N4089
broke initializing <tt>unique_ptr<T[]></tt> from a
<tt>nullptr</tt></td><td>Jacksonville</td><td></td></tr>
<tr><td><a
href="http://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-defects.html#2522";>2522</a></td><td>[fund.ts.v2]
Contradiction in <tt>set_default_resource</tt>
specification</td><td>Jacksonville</td><td></td></tr>
- <tr><td><a
href="http://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-defects.html#2523";>2523</a></td><td><tt>std::promise</tt>
synopsis shows two <tt>set_value_at_thread_exit()</tt>'s for no apparent
reason</td><td>Jacksonville</td><td></td></tr>
+ <tr><td><a
href="http://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-defects.html#2523";>2523</a></td><td><tt>std::promise</tt>
synopsis shows two <tt>set_value_at_thread_exit()</tt>'s for no apparent
reason</td><td>Jacksonville</td><td>Complete</td></tr>
<tr><td><a
href="http://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-defects.html#2537";>2537</a></td><td>Constructors
for <code>priority_queue</code> taking allocators should call
<code>make_heap</code></td><td>Jacksonville</td><td></td></tr>
<tr><td><a
href="http://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-defects.html#2539";>2539</a></td><td>[fund.ts.v2]
<tt>invocation_trait</tt> definition definition doesn't work for surrogate
call functions</td><td>Jacksonville</td><td></td></tr>
<tr><td><a
href="http://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-defects.html#2545";>2545</a></td><td>Simplify
wording for <tt>bind</tt> without explicitly specified return
type</td><td>Jacksonville</td><td></td></tr>
<tr><td><a
href="http://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-defects.html#2557";>2557</a></td><td>Logical
operator traits are broken in the zero-argument
case</td><td>Jacksonville</td><td>Complete</td></tr>
<tr><td><a
href="http://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-defects.html#2558";>2558</a></td><td>[fund.ts.v2]
Logical operator traits are broken in the zero-argument
case</td><td>Jacksonville</td><td>Complete</td></tr>
<tr><td><a
href="http://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-defects.html#2559";>2559</a></td><td>Error
in LWG 2234's resolution</td><td>Jacksonville</td><td></td></tr>
- <tr><td><a
href="http://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-defects.html#2560";>2560</a></td><td><tt>is_constructible</tt>
underspecified when applied to a function
type</td><td>Jacksonville</td><td>Complete</td></tr>
+ <tr><td><a
href="http://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-defects.html#2560";>2560</a></td><td><tt>is_constructible</tt>
underspecified when applied to a function
type</td><td>Jacksonville</td><td>Broken in 3.6; See r261653.</td></tr>
<tr><td><a
href="http://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-defects.html#2565";>2565</a></td><td><tt>std::function</tt>'s
move constructor should guarantee nothrow for <tt>reference_wrapper</tt>s and
function pointers</td><td>Jacksonville</td><td></td></tr>
<tr><td><a
href="http://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-defects.html#2566";>2566</a></td><td>Requirements
on the first template parameter of container
adaptors</td><td>Jacksonville</td><td></td></tr>
<tr><td><a
href="http://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-defects.html#2571";>2571</a></td><td>§[map.modifiers]/2
imposes nonsensical requirement on <tt>insert(InputIterator,
InputIterator)</tt></td><td>Jacksonville</td><td>Complete</td></tr>
- <tr><td><a
href="http://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-defects.html#2572";>2572</a></td><td>The
remarks for <tt>shared_ptr::operator*</tt> should apply to <i>cv</i>-qualified
<tt>void</tt> as well</td><td>Jacksonville</td><td></td></tr>
+ <tr><td><a
href="http://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-defects.html#2572";>2572</a></td><td>The
remarks for <tt>shared_ptr::operator*</tt> should apply to <i>cv</i>-qualified
<tt>void</tt> as well</td><td>Jacksonville</td><td>Complete</td></tr>
<tr><td><a
href="http://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-defects.html#2574";>2574</a></td><td>[fund.ts.v2]
<tt>std::experimental::function::operator=(F&&)</tt> should be
constrained</td><td>Jacksonville</td><td></td></tr>
<tr><td><a
href="http://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-defects.html#2575";>2575</a></td><td>[fund.ts.v2]
<tt>experimental::function::assign</tt> should be
removed</td><td>Jacksonville</td><td></td></tr>
<tr><td><a
href="http://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-defects.html#2576";>2576</a></td><td><tt>istream_iterator</tt>
and <tt>ostream_iterator</tt> should use
<tt>std::addressof</tt></td><td>Jacksonville</td><td>Patch done; needs
tests</td></tr>
@@ -96,20 +96,20 @@
<li>2255 - Arrays.ts is moribund. No action needed.</li>
<li>2276 - </li>
<li>2450 - </li>
-<li>2520 - </li>
-<li>2522 - </li>
-<li>2523 - </li>
+<li>2520 - We need to implement N4089 before doing this.</li>
+<li>2522 - I don't think we have a PMR implementation yet.</li>
+<li>2523 - Cleaning up wording; no code change required.</li>
<li>2537 - </li>
<li>2539 - </li>
<li>2545 - </li>
<li>2557 - Cleaning up wording; no code change required.</li>
<li>2558 - Cleaning up wording; no code change required.</li>
<li>2559 - </li>
-<li>2560 - We already do this; added tests in r261653.</li>
+<li>2560 - We already do this; added tests in r261653. <i>More: the new tests
fail on green-dragon-09, so I reverted it. Will recommit after green-dragon
bots are updated. Probably need to XFAIL for clang3-6 as well (arm bots)</li>
<li>2565 - </li>
<li>2566 - </li>
<li>2571 - Cleaning up wording; no code change required.</li>
-<li>2572 - I don't think that there's anything that needs to be done here.</li>
+<li>2572 - We already do this.</li>
<li>2574 - </li>
<li>2575 - I don't think we ever implemented this; so 'removing' it is
trivial</li>
<li>2576 - This one is simple, but testing it will be hard. I tried making a
sublass of istringstream, but it got sliced.</li>
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
