Re: [wwwdocs] Re: C++ Concepts available in trunk?

2015-09-07 Thread Gerald Pfeifer
On Mon, 7 Sep 2015, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > Nice, I think they are good improvements. Cool. I committed this, only to notice another change. GCC stands for GNU Compiler Collection, to GCC compiler would expand to GNU Compiler Collection compiler, which feels a bit redundant. ;-) I'll wait a bi

Re: [wwwdocs] Re: C++ Concepts available in trunk?

2015-09-07 Thread Jonathan Wakely
On 7 September 2015 at 11:51, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > Jonathan, > > On Thu, 13 Aug 2015, Jonathan Wakely wrote: >> Thanks, I've committed the attached change to the wwwdocs repo. > > looking at this I noticed a reference to "Subversion", when in > general we have tried to minimize references to spe

Re: [wwwdocs] Re: C++ Concepts available in trunk?

2015-09-07 Thread Gerald Pfeifer
Jonathan, On Thu, 13 Aug 2015, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > Thanks, I've committed the attached change to the wwwdocs repo. looking at this I noticed a reference to "Subversion", when in general we have tried to minimize references to specific version control systems. And I noticed we can be a littl

Re: [wwwdocs] Re: C++ Concepts available in trunk?

2015-08-13 Thread Jonathan Wakely
And a small correction. On 13 August 2015 at 10:24, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > Here's the patch for the rest of the C++17 support. > > On 13 August 2015 at 09:58, Jonathan Wakely wrote: >> On 12 August 2015 at 23:54, Dijk, J. van wrote: >>> Thanks for the clarification. I hope the attached patch

Re: [wwwdocs] Re: C++ Concepts available in trunk?

2015-08-13 Thread Jonathan Wakely
Here's the patch for the rest of the C++17 support. On 13 August 2015 at 09:58, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On 12 August 2015 at 23:54, Dijk, J. van wrote: >> Thanks for the clarification. I hope the attached patch against current >> wwwdocs will be of use (only the name of the feature test macro is

[wwwdocs] Re: C++ Concepts available in trunk?

2015-08-13 Thread Jonathan Wakely
On 12 August 2015 at 23:54, Dijk, J. van wrote: > Thanks for the clarification. I hope the attached patch against current > wwwdocs will be of use (only the name of the feature test macro is missing > in the new file cxx1z.html; did not manage to find that.) Thanks, I've committed the attached ch