Any objection to this update to make the docs reflect reality? -- >8 --
The macro-based concept checks are unmaintained and do not support C++11 or later, so reject valid code. If nobody plans to update them we should consider removing them. Alternatively, we could ignore the macro for C++11 and later, so they have no effect and don't reject valid code. libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog: * doc/xml/manual/debug.xml: Document that concept checking might be removed in future. * doc/xml/manual/extensions.xml: Likewise. --- libstdc++-v3/doc/xml/manual/debug.xml | 2 ++ libstdc++-v3/doc/xml/manual/extensions.xml | 18 ++++++++++++------ 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/doc/xml/manual/debug.xml b/libstdc++-v3/doc/xml/manual/debug.xml index 42d4d32aa29..7f6d0876fc6 100644 --- a/libstdc++-v3/doc/xml/manual/debug.xml +++ b/libstdc++-v3/doc/xml/manual/debug.xml @@ -351,6 +351,8 @@ <para> The <link linkend="manual.ext.compile_checks">Compile-Time Checks</link> extension has compile-time checks for many algorithms. + These checks were designed for C++98 and have not been updated to work + with C++11 and later standards. They might be removed at a future date. </para> </section> diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/doc/xml/manual/extensions.xml b/libstdc++-v3/doc/xml/manual/extensions.xml index d4fe2f509d4..490a50cc331 100644 --- a/libstdc++-v3/doc/xml/manual/extensions.xml +++ b/libstdc++-v3/doc/xml/manual/extensions.xml @@ -77,8 +77,7 @@ extensions, be aware of two things: object file. The checks are also cleaner and easier to read and understand. </para> - <para>They are off by default for all versions of GCC from 3.0 to 3.4 (the - latest release at the time of writing). + <para>They are off by default for all GCC 3.0 and all later versions. They can be enabled at configure time with <link linkend="manual.intro.setup.configure"><literal>--enable-concept-checks</literal></link>. You can enable them on a per-translation-unit basis with @@ -89,10 +88,17 @@ extensions, be aware of two things: </para> <para>Please note that the concept checks only validate the requirements - of the old C++03 standard. C++11 was expected to have first-class - support for template parameter constraints based on concepts in the core - language. This would have obviated the need for the library-simulated concept - checking described above, but was not part of C++11. + of the old C++03 standard and reject some valid code that meets the relaxed + requirements of C++11 and later standards. + C++11 was expected to have first-class support for template parameter + constraints based on concepts in the core language. + This would have obviated the need for the library-simulated concept checking + described above, but was not part of C++11. + C++20 adds a different model of concepts, which is now used to constrain + some new parts of the C++20 library, e.g. the + <filename><ranges></filename> header and the new overloads in the + <filename><algorithm></filename> header for working with ranges. + The old library-simulated concept checks might be removed at a future date. </para> </chapter> -- 2.43.2