[Bug c++/46497] [C++0x] Defaulted vs declared move constructor vs is_convertible

2010-11-16 Thread paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46497 --- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini 2010-11-16 10:56:07 UTC --- And for the record what I'm doing for the time being in the actual std::pair is: // XXX FIXME: should be defaulted per N3140. See c++/46497. pair(pair&& __p) : first

[Bug c++/46497] [C++0x] Defaulted vs declared move constructor vs is_convertible

2010-11-16 Thread jason at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46497 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/46497] [C++0x] Defaulted vs declared move constructor vs is_convertible

2010-11-16 Thread jason at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46497 --- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill 2010-11-17 01:43:13 UTC --- Author: jason Date: Wed Nov 17 01:43:10 2010 New Revision: 166851 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166851 Log: PR c++/46497 * call.c (build_over_call): Ch

[Bug c++/46497] [C++0x] Defaulted vs declared move constructor vs is_convertible

2010-11-16 Thread paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46497 --- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini 2010-11-17 02:02:25 UTC --- Jason, I'm sorry, I don't understand what's going on here: apparently nothing changed for my original testcase: the assert still triggers, and it doesn't for the non-defaulted variant?

[Bug c++/46497] [C++0x] Defaulted vs declared move constructor vs is_convertible

2010-11-17 Thread jason at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46497 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug c++/46497] [C++0x] Defaulted vs declared move constructor vs is_convertible

2010-11-17 Thread paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46497 --- Comment #7 from Paolo Carlini 2010-11-17 16:44:21 UTC --- Ok, I'm still digesting all of this (and in the meanwhile we also realized that likely we have problems in the specs of std::is_convertible itself, in the library). Something still puz