https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41759
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon Apr 18 18:03:50 2016
New Revision: 235160
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=235160&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/41759 reword static assertions in
PR libstdc++/417
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41759
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41759
--- Comment #6 from W E Brown ---
I hadn't realized this was still open :)
FWIW, my paper N3846
(http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2014/n3846.pdf) summarizes
on p. 3 my recommended "guidelines for programmers to follow in crafti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41759
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
And we could replace the clunky "template argument substituting _UIntType" with
simply "result_type" e.g.
"result_type must be an unsigned integer type"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41759
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
--- Comment #3 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-30 17:39 ---
Subject: Bug 41759
Author: paolo
Date: Fri Oct 30 17:39:18 2009
New Revision: 153762
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=153762
Log:
2009-10-30 Paolo Carlini
PR libstdc++/41759
*
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-10-20 03:13
---
Or, if we really wants positive forms, I would suggest:
"template parameter _UIntType is an unsigned integral type"
and
"template parameter __m has bounds"
I'm ok with either.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bug
--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-10-20 02:45
---
In fact, I have only *extended* the existing static_asserts to cover the type
too, not just the bounds, thus avoiding the legacy simulated concept checks.
In general, I followed the existing practice about neg
