This page is a snapshot from the LWG issues list, see the Library Active Issues List for more information and the meaning of C++20 status.
3208.Boolean's expression requirements are ordered inconsistently
Section: 24.7 [iterator.range] Status: C++20 Submitter: Casey Carter Opened: 2019-06-06 Last modified: 2021-02-25
Priority: 0
View other active issues in [iterator.range].
View all other issues in [iterator.range].
View all issues with C++20 status.
Discussion:
For consistency of presentation, we should group and order the && and || expression requirements similarly to the == and != expression requirements. Note that the suggested change is not quite editorial: evaluation of requirements for satisfaction has short-circuiting behavior, so the declaration order of requirements is normatively significant in general.
[2019-06-13; Priority to 0 and Status to Tentatively Ready after seven positive votes on the reflector.]
Proposed resolution:
This wording is relative to N4810.
Modify [concept.boolean] as indicated:
[…]
{ b1 } -> ConvertibleTo<bool>;
{ !b1 } -> ConvertibleTo<bool>;
{ b1 && a } -> Same<bool>;
{ b1 || a } -> Same<bool>;
{ b1 && b2 } -> Same<bool>;
{ b1 && a } -> Same<bool>;
{ a && b2 } -> Same<bool>;
{ b1 || b2 } -> Same<bool>;
{ b1 || a } -> Same<bool>;
{ a || b2 } -> Same<bool>;
{ b1 == b2 } -> ConvertibleTo<bool>;
{ b1 == a } -> ConvertibleTo<bool>;
{ a == b2 } -> ConvertibleTo<bool>;
{ b1 != b2 } -> ConvertibleTo<bool>;
{ b1 != a } -> ConvertibleTo<bool>;
{ a != b2 } -> ConvertibleTo<bool>;
};
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4