Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update README.md #46

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 11, 2016
Merged

Update README.md #46

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion README.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ Clang 3.2, Clang 3.4, G++ 4.7.2, G++ 4.8.1. Tested only with libstdc++, versions
Known Issues
------------

- Currently, the reference (and the only known) impementation of certain pieces of functionality explore what C++11 identifies as undefined behavior (see national body comment FI 15: http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2013/n3770.html#FI15). This is mostly why Optional was removed from C++14 and put into Library Fundamentals TS. Luckily what the Standard identifies as UB is well defined on all known platforms. We expect that the C++14 wil fix this problem, so that our trick becomes well-defined.
- Currently, the reference (and the only known) implementation of certain pieces of functionality explore what C++11 identifies as undefined behavior (see national body comment FI 15: http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2013/n3770.html#FI15). This is mostly why Optional was removed from C++14 and put into Library Fundamentals TS. Luckily what the Standard identifies as UB is well defined on all known platforms. We expect that the C++14 wil fix this problem, so that our trick becomes well-defined.
- In libstdc++ versions below 20130531 the constructor taking `initializer_list` argument is not `constexpr`. This is because `initializer_list` operations are not `constexpr` in C++11. This works however in version 20130531. It is also not enabled for libc++ because I do not have access to it and do nto know if it provides `constexpr` `initializer_list`.
- In G++ 4.7.2 and 4.8.0 member function `value_or` does not have rvalue reference overload. These compilers do not support rvalue overloding on `*this`.
- In order for the library to work with slightly older compilers, we emulate some missing type traits. On some platforms we cannot correctly detect the available features, and attempts at workarounds for missing type trait definitions can cause compile-time errors. Define macro `TR2_OPTIONAL_DISABLE_EMULATION_OF_TYPE_TRAITS` if you know that all the necessary type traits are defined, and no emulation is required.
Expand Down