Eric Lemings wrote:
>
>
>From $TOPDIR/include/rw/_pair.h:
>
> 64 // 20.2.2, p2
> 65 pair ()
> 66 #ifndef _RWSTD_NO_EMPTY_MEM_INITIALIZER
> 67 : first (/* lwg issue 265 */), second () { }
> 68 #else
> 69 // assumes types satisfy the CopyConstructible
requirements
> 70 : first (first_type ()), second (second_type ()) { }
> 71 #endif // _RWSTD_NO_EMPTY_MEM_INITIALIZER
>
>Are empty member initializers something we still need to concern
>ourselves with? Is LWG issue 265 still pertinent?
>
According to the defect, the resolution is in the current working paper,
so I don't think you need to worry about it changing. I don't know of
any modern compilers for which the EMPTY_MEM_INITIALIZER.cpp test would
fail.
This all gets back to the discussion we were having a few weeks ago
about which compiler features we should expect the compiler support for
4.3.x.
>Thanks,
>Brad.
>
