Does C++11 change the behavior of explicitly calling std::swap to ensure ADL-located swap's are found, like boost::swap?

Question

Background

Consider for this question the following code:

#include 

namespace ns
{
    struct foo
    {
        foo() : i(0) {}
              


        

Answer 1

Here's a proof-of-concept implementation:

#include 

// exposition implementation
namespace std_
{
    namespace detail
    {
        // actual fallback implementation
        template 
        void swap(T& lhs, T& rhs)
        {
            T temp = std::move(lhs);
            lhs = std::move(rhs);
            rhs = std::move(temp);
        }
    }

    template 
    void swap(T& lhs, T& rhs)
    {
        using detail::swap; // shadows std_::swap, stops recursion
        swap(lhs, rhs); // unqualified call, allows ADL
    }
}

namespace ns
{
    struct foo
    {
        foo() : i(0) {}
        int i;

    private:
        foo(const foo&); // not defined,
        foo& operator=(const foo&); // non-copyable
    };

    void swap(foo& lhs, foo& rhs)
    {
        std::swap(lhs.i, rhs.i);
    }
}


int main()
{
    int i = 0, j = 0;
    std_::swap(i, j);

    ns::foo a, b;
    std_::swap(a, b);
}