Skip to content

Commit a3bbb4d

Browse files
committed
Updates from LEWG
1 parent e9613d4 commit a3bbb4d

File tree

3 files changed

+17
-2
lines changed

3 files changed

+17
-2
lines changed

xml/issue2991.xml

Lines changed: 9 additions & 1 deletion
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
11
<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8' standalone='no'?>
22
<!DOCTYPE issue SYSTEM "lwg-issue.dtd">
33

4-
<issue num="2991" status="LEWG">
4+
<issue num="2991" status="Open">
55
<title><tt>variant</tt> copy constructor missing <tt>noexcept(<i>see below</i>)</tt></title>
66
<section><sref ref="[variant.ctor]"/></section>
77
<submitter>Peter Dimov</submitter>
@@ -30,6 +30,14 @@ it's inconsistent for it to take a stance against it.
3030

3131
<note>2017-07 Toronto Tuesday PM issue prioritization</note>
3232
<p>Status to LEWG</p>
33+
34+
<note>Wrocław 2024-11-18; LEWG approves the direction</note>
35+
<p>
36+
In <paper num="P0088R1"/> the copy constructor was conditionally noexcept
37+
in the synopsis, but not the detailed description. This was pointed out
38+
during LWG review in Jacksonville.
39+
The approved paper, <paper num="P008R3"/>, doesn't have it in either place.
40+
</p>
3341
</discussion>
3442

3543
<resolution>

xml/issue3003.xml

Lines changed: 2 additions & 0 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -117,6 +117,8 @@ fix `reset()` as discussed in issue <iref ref="2245"/>.
117117
</ul>
118118
</p>
119119

120+
<note>Wrocław 2024-11-18; LEWG would prefer a paper for this</note>
121+
120122
</discussion>
121123

122124
<resolution>

xml/issue3454.xml

Lines changed: 6 additions & 1 deletion
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
11
<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8' standalone='no'?>
22
<!DOCTYPE issue SYSTEM "lwg-issue.dtd">
33

4-
<issue num="3454" status="LEWG">
4+
<issue num="3454" status="Open">
55
<title><tt>pointer_traits::pointer_to</tt> should be <tt>constexpr</tt></title>
66
<section><sref ref="[pointer.traits]"/></section>
77
<submitter>Alisdair Meredith</submitter>
@@ -37,6 +37,11 @@ nodes, and stored as <tt>end</tt> sentinel directly in the <tt>list</tt> object)
3737
<tt>constexpr basic_string</tt> can support fancy pointers <em>or</em> SSO,
3838
but not both.
3939
</p>
40+
<note>Wrocław 2024-11-18; LEWG approves the direction</note>
41+
<p>
42+
Should there be an Annex C entry noting that program-defined specializations
43+
need to add `constexpr` to be conforming?
44+
</p>
4045
</discussion>
4146

4247
<resolution>

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)