You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
At the June 2024 meeting, the following LWG issues were resolved in the C++ Working Paper.
❔ Not yet analyzed
Remaining issues:
All done!
❌ Not applicable
If an issue requires no action from implementers, we mark it as N/A. Categories:
Pure wording clarifications with nothing to implement (these can be changes to non-normative text like examples and informative notes, or wording cleanups to normative text that don't impact observable behavior)
Something that increases the restrictions placed on users, but implementers aren't expected to enforce those restrictions
Fixes for obviously broken wording, where implementers would have done the right thing anyways
😸 Already implemented
Sometimes we cite LWG issues in product code comments as we're implementing their proposed resolutions. When the resolutions are officially accepted, we should remove the citations (as the default assumption is that we're implementing what the Standard says). If something is especially subtle, we can convert the citation to mention the relevant Standard section. Sometimes we should add test coverage - e.g. when the Standard begins requiring something that we were already doing, but weren't explicitly testing for.
Already implemented, comments need to be removed and messages need to cite the Standard
Implemented without comments
🩹 Patches an unimplemented feature
We should record this LWG issue in the GitHub issue tracking the feature. That way, we'll remember to verify it, but it doesn't represent net new work.
LWG-4060submdspan preconditions do not forbid creating invalid pointer
(Previous meta-issue: #4491)
At the June 2024 meeting, the following LWG issues were resolved in the C++ Working Paper.
❔ Not yet analyzed
❌ Not applicable
If an issue requires no action from implementers, we mark it as N/A. Categories:
concat_view
should be freestanding😸 Already implemented
Sometimes we cite LWG issues in product code comments as we're implementing their proposed resolutions. When the resolutions are officially accepted, we should remove the citations (as the default assumption is that we're implementing what the Standard says). If something is especially subtle, we can convert the citation to mention the relevant Standard section. Sometimes we should add test coverage - e.g. when the Standard begins requiring something that we were already doing, but weren't explicitly testing for.
🩹 Patches an unimplemented feature
We should record this LWG issue in the GitHub issue tracking the feature. That way, we'll remember to verify it, but it doesn't represent net new work.
submdspan
preconditions do not forbid creating invalid pointermdspan
Layouts #4516.reference_wrapper
comparisons are not SFINAE-friendlyreference_wrapper
#4522.concat_view::
iterator
's conversion constructorviews::concat
#4514.views::concat(r)
is well-formed whenr
is anoutput_range
views::concat
#4514.🐞 Not yet implemented
char
to sequences ofwchar_t
char
to sequences ofwchar_t
#4760compatible-joinable-ranges
is underconstrainedcompatible-joinable-ranges
is underconstrained #4761views::as_rvalue
should reject non-input rangesviews::as_rvalue
should reject non-input ranges #4762views::iota(views::iota(0))
should be rejectedviews::iota(views::iota(0))
should be rejected #4763views::adjacent<0>
should reject non-forward rangesviews::adjacent<0>
should reject non-forward ranges #4764ranges::ends_with
's Returns misses difference castingranges::ends_with
's Returns misses difference casting #4765std::basic_format_context
be default-constructible/copyable/movable?std::basic_format_context
be default-constructible/copyable/movable? #4758basic_format_args
should not be default-constructiblebasic_format_args
should not be default-constructible #4757The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: