User talk:Korval

noexcept

Hi. I've noticed you've added noexcept to several function definitions. There are several problems with noexcept, as it is not present in C++03 and we want to have a reference of both versions of the standard. Could you not add noexcept for now, until we figure out a sensible way to specify it? I am thinking about putting the noexcept specification into a separate section (or maybe into Exceptions), as, for example, in std::array::swap case there's quite a lot of code involved with the noexcept specification. This code reduces readability a lot while being non-essential information. Thanks! P12 14:29, 14 August 2011 (PDT)

I noticed the problem with std::array::swap (the large size of its header broke the layout), but I wasn't sure what to do about it. However, std::array is not part of C++03, so specifying noexcept should be perfectly valid. Where it gets specified is up to you, but it should be there. Korval 15:12, 14 August 2011 (PDT)

I agree with both points. Still, the problem with noexcept specification exists, e.g. as in generic std::swap.P12 15:46, 14 August 2011 (PDT)

Hi again. IMO the issue with noexcept is fixed now, see e.g. Template:cpp/ltt. Maybe you have any further suggestions?P12 14:36, 15 August 2011 (PDT)