vsapsai added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D48753#1147500, @Quuxplusone wrote:
> I'm pretty sure that the C++03 standard doesn't permit the implementation to
> call any `construct` method here, even if it wanted to. And this adds a
> couple hundred LOC to get that (non-standard) behavior. Is there a specific
> use-case that you're trying to enable by adding this behavior to libc++?
Only the standard behaviour is required, so I need only
template <class _Tp, class _A0>
static void construct(allocator_type& __a, _Tp* __p, const _A0& __a0);
to call allocator's `construct`. Other `construct` methods with different
number of parameters were changed only for completeness. Also I'm thinking that
using available matching allocator methods is something that developers would
expect. But I don't think this opinion should influence decisions because seems
there is no much use for custom `allocator_type::construct`.
If nobody thinks all variadic cases should be supported, I'll clean that up.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D48753
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
