[numerics.c.ckdint], [charconv.syn] Remove unnecessary "cv-unqualified" #8546
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
Member
Author
|
I think CWG251 should be closed as NAD at this point. We have a gazillion bazillion places where we talk about "signed integer types" or "signed or unsigned integer types", and including cv-qualified types in those sets now would have a blast radius from start to end in library wording. This issue hasn't been resolved for 25 years, so are we seriously going to hold off on a little editorial adjustment because CWG251 could be resolved at any moment? |
jensmaurer
approved these changes
Nov 29, 2025
Member
jensmaurer
left a comment
jensmaurer
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this is a good change.
CWG251 should probably be closed as NAD at this stage.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is a follow-up from #8541 (review)
As Jens pointed out, we have two uses of "cv-unqualified signed or unsigned".
The "cv-unqualified" should be removed because it is redundant. The set of "signed or unsigned" integers doesn't include any cv-qualified types, and having it here misleads the reader into thinking that in other places, cv-qualifications are included in that set.
Note
We have at least 28 uses of
signed (and|or) unsignedin the standard, and other uses don't say "cv-unqualified".I've checked those other uses, and the two addressed in this PR are the only ones that use "cv-unqualified", so we achive global consistency.