Set 4163 and 4194 to Tentatively NAD

Author: jwakely

xml/issue4163.xml

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 <?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8' standalone='no'?>
 <!DOCTYPE issue SYSTEM "lwg-issue.dtd">
 
-<issue num="4163" status="New">
+<issue num="4163" status="Tentatively NAD">
 <title>Can the overload of <tt>std::num_get::do_get</tt> for <tt>bool</tt> call the overload for <tt>long</tt>?</title>
 <section><sref ref="[facet.num.get.virtuals]"/></section>
 <submitter>Jiang An</submitter>
@@ -25,6 +25,16 @@ Currently, libc++'s version calls that overload, while libstdc++ and MSVC STL's
 <p/>
 As the divergence implementation strategies is observable, perhaps we should clarify on this.
 </p>
+
+<note>2025-02-07; Reflector poll: NAD</note>
+<p>
+I think this is just a libc++ bug.
+The wording says it "proceeds as it would for `long`", which is not the same as
+actually making a virtual call to `do_get` for `long`. It can either duplicate
+the code from `do_get` for `long`, or make a non-virtual (i.e. qualified) call
+to `num_get::do_get`.
+</p>
+
 </discussion>
 
 <resolution>

xml/issue4194.xml

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 <?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8' standalone='no'?>
 <!DOCTYPE issue SYSTEM "lwg-issue.dtd">
 
-<issue num="4194" status="New">
+<issue num="4194" status="Tentatively NAD">
 <title><tt>atomic&lt;void*&gt;</tt> should use generic class template</title>
 <section><sref ref="[atomics.types.pointer]"/></section>
 <submitter>Gonzalo Brito</submitter>
@@ -40,6 +40,14 @@ and the proposed fix would make them compliant: see libstdc++, libc++ and MSVC S
 pointer-to-object type, <tt>atomic&lt;void*&gt;</tt> uses the general template. Therefore, no user 
 code seems to be impacted.
 </p>
+
+<note>2025-02-07; Reflector poll: NAD</note>
+<p>
+The `fetch_OP` members have "<i>Mandates</i>: `T` is a complete object type."
+and a note explaining that this means arithmetic on `void*` is ill-formed.
+So implementations are expected to use the partial specialization for `void*`
+but to reject attempts at arithmetic. They all do this correctly today.
+</p>
 </discussion>
 
 <resolution>