• In vNext we should completely get rid of function.

I think it worth creating vNext issue.

move_only_function might be helpful for vNext implementation.

I think it worth creating vNext issue.

Or maybe TRANSITION, ABI comment(s)

• The involved allocator-extended constructors were removed in C++17 by WG21-P0302R1 and LWG-2921, so this PR cites WG21-N4140 in the C++17-removed constructors.

N.B. I'm proposing to restore packaged_task(allocator_arg_t, const Allocator&, F&&)

N.B. I'm proposing to restore packaged_task(allocator_arg_t, const Allocator&, F&&)

See LWG3003.

And I've just created LWG4158 which is also about packaged_task.

Thanks @jwakely! BTW, in this repo's issues you can say LWG-4158 with a dash to use the autolink syntax we've set up - no need to manually craft hyperlinks. (https://github.com/microsoft/STL/wiki/Custom-Autolinks has the full list.)

Thanks for the extremely careful work! 😻

I'm mirroring this to the MSVC-internal repo - please notify me if any further changes are pushed.

I pushed a commit to perma-workaround VSO-2279389 "/clr C++20 can't handle struct MoveOnlyFunctor defined in a function template, emitting fatal error C1193: an error expected in yyaction.cpp(2899) not reached". Moving it out of the function template is sufficient and reasonable to do permanently.

Thanks for fixing this impossible bug! 🐞 ✅ 😻

I think it worth creating vNext issue.

Or maybe TRANSITION, ABI comment(s)

#5009 is created for tracking.