diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'libstdc++-v3/doc/html/ext/lwg-defects.html')
| -rw-r--r-- | libstdc++-v3/doc/html/ext/lwg-defects.html | 83797 |
1 files changed, 83797 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/doc/html/ext/lwg-defects.html b/libstdc++-v3/doc/html/ext/lwg-defects.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..c1a3c780b --- /dev/null +++ b/libstdc++-v3/doc/html/ext/lwg-defects.html @@ -0,0 +1,83797 @@ +<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd"> +<!-- saved from url=(0060)http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html --> +<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"> +<title>C++ Standard Library Defect Report List</title> +<style type="text/css"> + p {text-align:justify} + li {text-align:justify} + blockquote.note + { + background-color:#E0E0E0; + padding-left: 15px; + padding-right: 15px; + padding-top: 1px; + padding-bottom: 1px; + } + ins {background-color:#A0FFA0} + del {background-color:#FFA0A0} +</style> +</head> +<body> +<table> +<tbody><tr> + <td align="left">Doc. no.</td> + <td align="left">D3182=10-0172</td> +</tr> +<tr> + <td align="left">Date:</td> + <td align="left">2010-11-29</td> +</tr> +<tr> + <td align="left">Project:</td> + <td align="left">Programming Language C++</td> +</tr> +<tr> + <td align="left">Reply to:</td> + <td align="left">Alisdair Meredith <<a href="mailto:lwgchair@gmail.com">lwgchair@gmail.com</a>></td> +</tr> +</tbody></table> +<h1>C++ Standard Library Defect Report List (Revision D73)</h1> +<p>Revised 2010-11-29 at 10:11:56 UTC</p> + + <p>Reference ISO/IEC IS 14882:2003(E)</p> + <p>Also see:</p> + <ul> + <li><a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-toc.html">Table of Contents</a> for all library issues.</li> + <li><a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html">Index by Section</a> for all library issues.</li> + <li><a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html">Index by Status</a> for all library issues.</li> + <li><a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html">Library Active Issues List</a></li> + <li><a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html">Library Closed Issues List</a></li> + </ul> + <p>This document contains only library issues which have been closed + by the Library Working Group (LWG) after being found to be defects + in the standard. That is, issues which have a status of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#DR">DR</a>, + <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC">TC</a>, or <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#RR">RR</a>. See the + <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html">Library Closed Issues List</a> for issues closed as non-defects. See the + <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html">Library Active Issues List</a> for active issues and more information. The + introductory material in that document also applies to this + document.</p> + +<h2>Revision History</h2> +<ul> +<li>D73: Batavia meeting preview<ul> +<li><b>Summary:</b><ul> +<li>80 open issues, down by 126.</li> +<li>1459 closed issues, up by 145.</li> +<li>1539 issues total, up by 19.</li> +</ul></li> +<li><b>Details:</b><ul> +<li>Added the following 11 New issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1521">1521</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1523">1523</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#2008">2008</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#2012">2012</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#2013">2013</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#2014">2014</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#2015">2015</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#2016">2016</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#2017">2017</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#2018">2018</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#2019">2019</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following 5 Open issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#2001">2001</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#2003">2003</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#2005">2005</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#2010">2010</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#2011">2011</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following Resolved issue: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#2002">2002</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following Review issue: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#2009">2009</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following Tentatively NAD issue: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#2006">2006</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following 3 Tentatively Ready issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#2000">2000</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#2004">2004</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#2007">2007</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following WP issue: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1522">1522</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following 3 issues from New to Deferred: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1213">1213</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1214">1214</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1330">1330</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issue from Open to Deferred: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1450">1450</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following 14 issues from Open to Dup: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1350">1350</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1351">1351</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1352">1352</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1375">1375</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1411">1411</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1443">1443</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1451">1451</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1454">1454</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1458">1458</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1463">1463</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1470">1470</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1475">1475</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1476">1476</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1477">1477</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issue from New to NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1331">1331</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following 8 issues from Open to NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#579">579</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1359">1359</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1361">1361</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1373">1373</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1376">1376</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1398">1398</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1446">1446</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1473">1473</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following 2 issues from Tentatively NAD to NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1190">1190</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1200">1200</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issue from WP to NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#822">822</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following 11 issues from Open to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1395">1395</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1442">1442</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1471">1471</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1472">1472</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1489">1489</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1495">1495</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1496">1496</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1509">1509</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1510">1510</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1511">1511</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1512">1512</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issue from Review to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1281">1281</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issue from New to NAD Future: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1289">1289</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following 6 issues from Open to NAD Future: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1406">1406</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1422">1422</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1484">1484</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1488">1488</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1493">1493</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1499">1499</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following 2 issues from Tentatively NAD Future to NAD Future: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1173">1173</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1188">1188</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following 2 issues from New to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1252">1252</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1297">1297</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following 3 issues from New to Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1279">1279</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1318">1318</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1332">1332</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following 6 issues from Open to Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1385">1385</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1401">1401</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1408">1408</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1418">1418</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1420">1420</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1438">1438</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following 42 issues from NAD Editorial to Resolved: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#353">353</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#431">431</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#482">482</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#525">525</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#594">594</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#625">625</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#635">635</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#658">658</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#697">697</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#719">719</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#742">742</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#786">786</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#815">815</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#816">816</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#823">823</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#827">827</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#834">834</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#884">884</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#932">932</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#947">947</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#950">950</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#953">953</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#983">983</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1054">1054</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1055">1055</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1075">1075</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1100">1100</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1116">1116</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1117">1117</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1122">1122</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1135">1135</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1151">1151</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1174">1174</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1258">1258</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1260">1260</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1283">1283</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1293">1293</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1307">1307</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1321">1321</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1394">1394</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1405">1405</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1407">1407</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following 5 issues from New to Resolved: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1290">1290</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1322">1322</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1324">1324</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1326">1326</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1328">1328</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following 46 issues from Open to Resolved: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#801">801</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1268">1268</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1327">1327</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1344">1344</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1346">1346</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1347">1347</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1355">1355</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1356">1356</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1357">1357</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1365">1365</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1366">1366</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1377">1377</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1378">1378</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1379">1379</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1380">1380</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1382">1382</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1383">1383</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1389">1389</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1390">1390</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1391">1391</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1392">1392</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1393">1393</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1397">1397</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1409">1409</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1410">1410</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1412">1412</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1445">1445</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1447">1447</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1453">1453</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1455">1455</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1462">1462</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1464">1464</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1465">1465</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1466">1466</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1467">1467</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1468">1468</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1469">1469</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1481">1481</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1482">1482</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1490">1490</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1491">1491</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1492">1492</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1498">1498</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1501">1501</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1508">1508</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1513">1513</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issue from Open to Review: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1480">1480</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following 2 issues from Open to Tentatively NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1371">1371</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1413">1413</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issue from New to Tentatively NAD Future: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1320">1320</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following 3 issues from New to Tentatively Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1215">1215</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1253">1253</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1310">1310</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issue from Open to Tentatively Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1497">1497</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following 24 issues from NAD Editorial to WP: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1360">1360</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1363">1363</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1367">1367</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1372">1372</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1381">1381</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1384">1384</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1386">1386</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1387">1387</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1388">1388</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1399">1399</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1400">1400</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1402">1402</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1403">1403</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1416">1416</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1417">1417</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1423">1423</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1424">1424</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1425">1425</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1426">1426</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1427">1427</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1429">1429</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1430">1430</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1431">1431</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1441">1441</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issue from New to WP: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1294">1294</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following 10 issues from Open to WP: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1354">1354</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1362">1362</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1368">1368</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1370">1370</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1428">1428</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1435">1435</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1436">1436</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1437">1437</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1439">1439</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1440">1440</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following 2 issues from Ready to WP: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#868">868</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#951">951</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following 33 issues from Tentatively Ready to WP: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#956">956</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1118">1118</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1171">1171</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1181">1181</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1183">1183</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1191">1191</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1198">1198</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1207">1207</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1234">1234</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1240">1240</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1249">1249</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1292">1292</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1295">1295</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1316">1316</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1319">1319</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1323">1323</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1325">1325</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1333">1333</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1334">1334</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1335">1335</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1337">1337</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1338">1338</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1339">1339</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1340">1340</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1404">1404</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1414">1414</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1432">1432</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1449">1449</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1516">1516</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1517">1517</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1518">1518</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1519">1519</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1520">1520</a>.</li> +</ul></li> +</ul> +</li> +<li>R72: +2010-10-18 pre-Batavia mailing. +<ul> +<li><b>Summary:</b><ul> +<li>206 open issues, up by 141.</li> +<li>1314 closed issues, up by 36.</li> +<li>1520 issues total, up by 177.</li> +</ul></li> +<li><b>Details:</b><ul> +<li>Added the following Dup issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1433">1433</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1444">1444</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following NAD Editorial issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1360">1360</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1363">1363</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1367">1367</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1372">1372</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1381">1381</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1384">1384</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1386">1386</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1387">1387</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1388">1388</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1394">1394</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1399">1399</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1400">1400</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1402">1402</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1403">1403</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1405">1405</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1407">1407</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1415">1415</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1416">1416</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1417">1417</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1419">1419</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1423">1423</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1424">1424</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1425">1425</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1426">1426</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1427">1427</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1429">1429</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1430">1430</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1431">1431</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1434">1434</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1441">1441</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1483">1483</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1500">1500</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1506">1506</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following Open issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1344">1344</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1345">1345</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1346">1346</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1347">1347</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1348">1348</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1349">1349</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1350">1350</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1351">1351</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1352">1352</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1353">1353</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1354">1354</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1355">1355</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1356">1356</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1357">1357</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1358">1358</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1359">1359</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1361">1361</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1362">1362</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1364">1364</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1365">1365</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1366">1366</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1368">1368</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1369">1369</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1370">1370</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1371">1371</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1373">1373</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1374">1374</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1375">1375</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1376">1376</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1377">1377</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1378">1378</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1379">1379</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1380">1380</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1382">1382</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1383">1383</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1385">1385</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1389">1389</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1390">1390</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1391">1391</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1392">1392</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1393">1393</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1395">1395</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1396">1396</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1397">1397</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1398">1398</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1401">1401</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1406">1406</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1408">1408</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1409">1409</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1410">1410</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1411">1411</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1412">1412</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1413">1413</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1418">1418</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1420">1420</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1421">1421</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1422">1422</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1428">1428</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1435">1435</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1436">1436</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1437">1437</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1438">1438</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1439">1439</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1440">1440</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1442">1442</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1443">1443</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1445">1445</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1446">1446</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1447">1447</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1448">1448</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1450">1450</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1451">1451</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1452">1452</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1453">1453</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1454">1454</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1455">1455</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1456">1456</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1457">1457</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1458">1458</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1459">1459</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1460">1460</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1461">1461</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1462">1462</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1463">1463</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1464">1464</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1465">1465</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1466">1466</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1467">1467</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1468">1468</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1469">1469</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1470">1470</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1471">1471</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1472">1472</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1473">1473</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1474">1474</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1475">1475</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1476">1476</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1477">1477</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1478">1478</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1479">1479</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1480">1480</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1481">1481</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1482">1482</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1484">1484</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1485">1485</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1486">1486</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1487">1487</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1488">1488</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1489">1489</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1490">1490</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1491">1491</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1492">1492</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1493">1493</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1494">1494</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1495">1495</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1496">1496</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1497">1497</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1498">1498</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1499">1499</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1501">1501</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1502">1502</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1503">1503</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1504">1504</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1505">1505</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1507">1507</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1508">1508</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1509">1509</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1510">1510</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1511">1511</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1512">1512</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1513">1513</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1514">1514</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1515">1515</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following Tentatively Ready issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1404">1404</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1414">1414</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1432">1432</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1449">1449</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1516">1516</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1517">1517</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1518">1518</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1519">1519</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1520">1520</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1260">1260</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Tentatively Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1181">1181</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1240">1240</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1249">1249</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1292">1292</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1295">1295</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1316">1316</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1319">1319</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1323">1323</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1325">1325</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1333">1333</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1334">1334</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1335">1335</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1337">1337</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1338">1338</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1339">1339</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1340">1340</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Tentatively Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#956">956</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1118">1118</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1183">1183</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1234">1234</a>.</li> +</ul></li> +</ul> +</li> +<li>R71: +2010-08-25 post-Rapperswil mailing. +<ul> +<li><b>Summary:</b><ul> +<li>65 open issues, up by 2.</li> +<li>1278 closed issues, up by 7.</li> +<li>1343 issues total, up by 9.</li> +</ul></li> +<li><b>Details:</b><ul> +<li>Added the following New issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1335">1335</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#2008">2008</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1337">1337</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1338">1338</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1339">1339</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1340">1340</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#2009">2009</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#2010">2010</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#2011">2011</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#996">996</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1119">1119</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to NAD Concepts: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1076">1076</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#953">953</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1169">1169</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1175">1175</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#951">951</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Review to Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#868">868</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Tentatively NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1190">1190</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1200">1200</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Tentatively NAD Future: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1188">1188</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Tentatively NAD Future: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1173">1173</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Tentatively Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1198">1198</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Tentatively Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1171">1171</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1191">1191</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1207">1207</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Ready to WP: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1187">1187</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1206">1206</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1278">1278</a>.</li> +</ul></li> +</ul> +</li> +<li>R70: +2010-03-26 post-Pittsburgh mailing. +<ul> +<li><b>Summary:</b><ul> +<li>63 open issues, down by 203.</li> +<li>1271 closed issues, up by 219.</li> +<li>1334 issues total, up by 16.</li> +</ul></li> +<li><b>Details:</b><ul> +<li>Added the following NAD Editorial issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1321">1321</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1329">1329</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following New issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1319">1319</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1320">1320</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1322">1322</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1323">1323</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1324">1324</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1325">1325</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1326">1326</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1328">1328</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1330">1330</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1331">1331</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1332">1332</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1333">1333</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1334">1334</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following Open issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1327">1327</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Tentatively Dup to Dup: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1219">1219</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1302">1302</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1308">1308</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1313">1313</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1314">1314</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#887">887</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1008">1008</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1068">1068</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1069">1069</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1153">1153</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1156">1156</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1228">1228</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Tentatively NAD to NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#631">631</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#726">726</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#959">959</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1056">1056</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1099">1099</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1125">1125</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1176">1176</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1202">1202</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1223">1223</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1224">1224</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1246">1246</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1251">1251</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1259">1259</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1263">1263</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1265">1265</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1296">1296</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Tentatively NAD Concepts to NAD Concepts: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#910">910</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1186">1186</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1185">1185</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1210">1210</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1212">1212</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1225">1225</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1244">1244</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1266">1266</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1269">1269</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1272">1272</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1275">1275</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1291">1291</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1305">1305</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1307">1307</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1311">1311</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#299">299</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#397">397</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#408">408</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#446">446</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#594">594</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#625">625</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#742">742</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#834">834</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#915">915</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1093">1093</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1151">1151</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1211">1211</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1248">1248</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Ready to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#485">485</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#932">932</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#940">940</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#950">950</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#983">983</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1100">1100</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1135">1135</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Tentatively NAD Editorial to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#815">815</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#816">816</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#889">889</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1106">1106</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1115">1115</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1233">1233</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1239">1239</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1258">1258</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1283">1283</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1301">1301</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Tentatively Ready to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1090">1090</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1226">1226</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1273">1273</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1274">1274</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1293">1293</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1300">1300</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1304">1304</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1315">1315</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to NAD Future: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1154">1154</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1317">1317</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Ready to NAD Future: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1052">1052</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Tentatively NAD Future to NAD Future: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1112">1112</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1121">1121</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1201">1201</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1238">1238</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1282">1282</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1234">1234</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1268">1268</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Tentatively Ready to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#579">579</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1187">1187</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1206">1206</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1278">1278</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Review: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1281">1281</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Ready to Review: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#868">868</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to WP: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1159">1159</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to WP: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#427">427</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#430">430</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#774">774</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#819">819</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#835">835</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#861">861</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#885">885</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#896">896</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#900">900</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#911">911</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1079">1079</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Ready to WP: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#296">296</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#471">471</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#473">473</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#539">539</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#671">671</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#836">836</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#854">854</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#860">860</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#865">865</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#871">871</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#872">872</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#920">920</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#921">921</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#939">939</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#954">954</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#957">957</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#960">960</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#962">962</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#963">963</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#967">967</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#968">968</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#974">974</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1011">1011</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1030">1030</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1094">1094</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1095">1095</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1097">1097</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1098">1098</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1104">1104</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1123">1123</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1134">1134</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1136">1136</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1144">1144</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1157">1157</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1194">1194</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1204">1204</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1216">1216</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1227">1227</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1237">1237</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Tentatively Ready to WP: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#556">556</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#676">676</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#704">704</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#724">724</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#727">727</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#780">780</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#811">811</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#817">817</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#870">870</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#891">891</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#893">893</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#929">929</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#978">978</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#987">987</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#999">999</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1033">1033</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1034">1034</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1071">1071</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1089">1089</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1108">1108</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1110">1110</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1113">1113</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1114">1114</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1126">1126</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1130">1130</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1131">1131</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1133">1133</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1137">1137</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1138">1138</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1152">1152</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1158">1158</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1170">1170</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1177">1177</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1180">1180</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1182">1182</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1189">1189</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1192">1192</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1193">1193</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1195">1195</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1197">1197</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1199">1199</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1205">1205</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1208">1208</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1209">1209</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1218">1218</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1220">1220</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1221">1221</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1222">1222</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1231">1231</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1241">1241</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1245">1245</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1247">1247</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1250">1250</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1254">1254</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1255">1255</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1256">1256</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1257">1257</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1261">1261</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1262">1262</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1264">1264</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1267">1267</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1270">1270</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1271">1271</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1276">1276</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1277">1277</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1280">1280</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1284">1284</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1285">1285</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1286">1286</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1287">1287</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1288">1288</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1298">1298</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1299">1299</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1303">1303</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1306">1306</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1309">1309</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1312">1312</a>.</li> +</ul></li> +</ul> +</li> +<li>R69: +2010-02-12 pre-Pittsburgh mailing. +<ul> +<li><b>Summary:</b><ul> +<li>266 open issues, up by 61.</li> +<li>1052 closed issues, down by 3.</li> +<li>1318 issues total, up by 58.</li> +</ul></li> +<li><b>Details:</b><ul> +<li>Added the following New issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1266">1266</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1268">1268</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1269">1269</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1272">1272</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1275">1275</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1278">1278</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1279">1279</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1281">1281</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1289">1289</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1290">1290</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1291">1291</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1292">1292</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1294">1294</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1295">1295</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1297">1297</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1302">1302</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1305">1305</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1307">1307</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1308">1308</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1310">1310</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1311">1311</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1313">1313</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1314">1314</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1316">1316</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1317">1317</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1318">1318</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following Tentatively NAD issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1263">1263</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1265">1265</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1296">1296</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following Tentatively NAD Editorial issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1283">1283</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1301">1301</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following Tentatively NAD Future issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1282">1282</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following Tentatively Ready issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1261">1261</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1262">1262</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1264">1264</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1267">1267</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1270">1270</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1271">1271</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1273">1273</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1274">1274</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1276">1276</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1277">1277</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1280">1280</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1284">1284</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1285">1285</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1286">1286</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1287">1287</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1288">1288</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1293">1293</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1298">1298</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1299">1299</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1300">1300</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1303">1303</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1304">1304</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1306">1306</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1309">1309</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1312">1312</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1315">1315</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from NAD to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#101">101</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from NAD Future to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1248">1248</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1207">1207</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Ready to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1079">1079</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Tentatively Dup: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1219">1219</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Tentatively NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1125">1125</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1176">1176</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1202">1202</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1223">1223</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1224">1224</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1246">1246</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1251">1251</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1259">1259</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Tentatively NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#726">726</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#959">959</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Review to Tentatively NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#631">631</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Tentatively NAD Concepts: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#910">910</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Tentatively NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1258">1258</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Tentatively NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#815">815</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1106">1106</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Ready to Tentatively NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#816">816</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#889">889</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from NAD to Tentatively Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#579">579</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from NAD Editorial to Tentatively Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1195">1195</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Tentatively Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1131">1131</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1133">1133</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1137">1137</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1170">1170</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1180">1180</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1182">1182</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1193">1193</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1197">1197</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1199">1199</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1205">1205</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1209">1209</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1218">1218</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1221">1221</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1222">1222</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1245">1245</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1250">1250</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1254">1254</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1255">1255</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1256">1256</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1257">1257</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Tentatively Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#704">704</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#724">724</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#811">811</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#817">817</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#870">870</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#891">891</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1033">1033</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1034">1034</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1089">1089</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1110">1110</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Ready to Tentatively Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#893">893</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#978">978</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1177">1177</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Review to Tentatively Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#556">556</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#676">676</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#727">727</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#780">780</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#929">929</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1130">1130</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1247">1247</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Pending WP to WP: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#970">970</a>.</li> +</ul></li> +</ul> +</li> +<li>R68: +2009-11-06 post-Santa Cruz mailing. +<ul> +<li><b>Summary:</b><ul> +<li>205 open issues, down by 77.</li> +<li>1055 closed issues, up by 120.</li> +<li>1260 issues total, up by 43.</li> +</ul></li> +<li><b>Details:</b><ul> +<li>Added the following Dup issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1230">1230</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following NAD issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1229">1229</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1236">1236</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1243">1243</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following NAD Editorial issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1232">1232</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following NAD Future issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1235">1235</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1242">1242</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1248">1248</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following New issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1218">1218</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1219">1219</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1221">1221</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1222">1222</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1223">1223</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1224">1224</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1225">1225</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1234">1234</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1240">1240</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1244">1244</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1245">1245</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1246">1246</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1249">1249</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1250">1250</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1251">1251</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1252">1252</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1253">1253</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1254">1254</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1255">1255</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1256">1256</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1257">1257</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1258">1258</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1259">1259</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1260">1260</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following Open issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1228">1228</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following Ready issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1227">1227</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1237">1237</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following Review issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1247">1247</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following Tentatively NAD Editorial issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1233">1233</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1239">1239</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following Tentatively NAD Future issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1238">1238</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following Tentatively Ready issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1220">1220</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1226">1226</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1231">1231</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1241">1241</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1132">1132</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1148">1148</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#96">96</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#458">458</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#463">463</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#916">916</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#917">917</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#919">919</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#955">955</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#977">977</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1009">1009</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1020">1020</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1035">1035</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1042">1042</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1051">1051</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1064">1064</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Review to NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#668">668</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#930">930</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1091">1091</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1102">1102</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Tentatively NAD to NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#588">588</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#617">617</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#971">971</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Tentatively NAD Future to NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1062">1062</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from NAD Concepts to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1143">1143</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1116">1116</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1117">1117</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1122">1122</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1129">1129</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1145">1145</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1146">1146</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1147">1147</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1155">1155</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1166">1166</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1172">1172</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1174">1174</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1179">1179</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1195">1195</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1196">1196</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#431">431</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#580">580</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#635">635</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#719">719</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#823">823</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#827">827</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#879">879</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#880">880</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#908">908</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#923">923</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#924">924</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#926">926</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#944">944</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#947">947</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#958">958</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1046">1046</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1048">1048</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1054">1054</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1055">1055</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1075">1075</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1088">1088</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1160">1160</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1161">1161</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1162">1162</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1163">1163</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1165">1165</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Review to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#828">828</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#897">897</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#976">976</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1043">1043</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1047">1047</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1049">1049</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1050">1050</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to NAD Future: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1120">1120</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1150">1150</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1184">1184</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1203">1203</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1217">1217</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to NAD Future: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#484">484</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#532">532</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#851">851</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#933">933</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#935">935</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#936">936</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#961">961</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1041">1041</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1053">1053</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Tentatively NAD Future to NAD Future: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1031">1031</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1118">1118</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1119">1119</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1151">1151</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1153">1153</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1156">1156</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1171">1171</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1173">1173</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1183">1183</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1191">1191</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1211">1211</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Ready to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#430">430</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#834">834</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Review to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#397">397</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#408">408</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#835">835</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Tentatively NAD to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#625">625</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1123">1123</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1134">1134</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1135">1135</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1136">1136</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1144">1144</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1177">1177</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1194">1194</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1204">1204</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1216">1216</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#296">296</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#471">471</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#485">485</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#539">539</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#816">816</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#860">860</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#865">865</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#872">872</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#920">920</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#932">932</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#939">939</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#940">940</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#960">960</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#963">963</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#974">974</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#978">978</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1011">1011</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1030">1030</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1079">1079</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1098">1098</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Review to Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#473">473</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#671">671</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#836">836</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#854">854</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#868">868</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#871">871</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#889">889</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#893">893</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#921">921</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#950">950</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#954">954</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#957">957</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#962">962</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#967">967</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#968">968</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#983">983</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1052">1052</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1094">1094</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1095">1095</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1097">1097</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1100">1100</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1104">1104</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1157">1157</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Review: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1130">1130</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Review: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#556">556</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#631">631</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#676">676</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#727">727</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#929">929</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Tentatively NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1056">1056</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1099">1099</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Tentatively NAD Concepts: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1186">1186</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Tentatively NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1115">1115</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Tentatively NAD Future: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1121">1121</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1201">1201</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Tentatively NAD Future: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1112">1112</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Tentatively Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1126">1126</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1138">1138</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1152">1152</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1158">1158</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1189">1189</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1192">1192</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1208">1208</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Tentatively Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#987">987</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#999">999</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1071">1071</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1090">1090</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1108">1108</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1113">1113</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1114">1114</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Ready to WP: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#149">149</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#419">419</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#498">498</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#564">564</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#565">565</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#630">630</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#659">659</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#696">696</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#711">711</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#716">716</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#723">723</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#788">788</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#822">822</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#838">838</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#847">847</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#857">857</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#859">859</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#876">876</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#881">881</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#883">883</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#886">886</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#934">934</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1004">1004</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1178">1178</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Tentatively Ready to WP: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1012">1012</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1019">1019</a>.</li> +</ul></li> +</ul> +</li> +<li>R67: +2009-09-25 pre-Santa Cruz mailing. +<ul> +<li><b>Summary:</b><ul> +<li>282 open issues, up by 32.</li> +<li>935 closed issues, down by 1.</li> +<li>1217 issues total, up by 31.</li> +</ul></li> +<li><b>Details:</b><ul> +<li>Added the following New issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1187">1187</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1188">1188</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1189">1189</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1190">1190</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1191">1191</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1192">1192</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1193">1193</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1194">1194</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1195">1195</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1196">1196</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1197">1197</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1198">1198</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1199">1199</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1200">1200</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1201">1201</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1202">1202</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1203">1203</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1204">1204</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1205">1205</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1206">1206</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1207">1207</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1208">1208</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1209">1209</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1210">1210</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1211">1211</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1212">1212</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1213">1213</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1214">1214</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1215">1215</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1216">1216</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1217">1217</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from NAD to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#296">296</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from WP to Pending WP: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#970">970</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Review: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#976">976</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1052">1052</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Ready to Review: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#780">780</a>.</li> +</ul></li> +</ul> +</li> +<li>R66: +2009-07-31 post-Frankfurt mailing. +<ul> +<li><b>Summary:</b><ul> +<li>250 open issues, down by 128.</li> +<li>936 closed issues, up by 171.</li> +<li>1186 issues total, up by 43.</li> +</ul></li> +<li><b>Details:</b><ul> +<li>Added the following NAD issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1164">1164</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following NAD Concepts issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1149">1149</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1167">1167</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following NAD Editorial issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1168">1168</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following New issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1144">1144</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1145">1145</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1146">1146</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1147">1147</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1148">1148</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1150">1150</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1151">1151</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1152">1152</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1153">1153</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1154">1154</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1155">1155</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1156">1156</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1158">1158</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1159">1159</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1166">1166</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1169">1169</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1170">1170</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1171">1171</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1172">1172</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1173">1173</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1174">1174</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1175">1175</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1176">1176</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1177">1177</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1179">1179</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1180">1180</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1181">1181</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1182">1182</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1183">1183</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1184">1184</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1185">1185</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1186">1186</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following Open issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1160">1160</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1161">1161</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1162">1162</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1163">1163</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1165">1165</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following Ready issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1178">1178</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following Review issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1157">1157</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Dup: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#750">750</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#895">895</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#111">111</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#128">128</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#138">138</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#190">190</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#219">219</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#290">290</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#309">309</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#342">342</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#343">343</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#382">382</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#394">394</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#398">398</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#417">417</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#418">418</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#421">421</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#459">459</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#466">466</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#492">492</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#502">502</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#503">503</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#546">546</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#573">573</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#582">582</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#585">585</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#597">597</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#606">606</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#614">614</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#632">632</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#721">721</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#747">747</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#751">751</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#833">833</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#941">941</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#992">992</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Review to NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1003">1003</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Tentatively NAD to NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#568">568</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#644">644</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#667">667</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#669">669</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#701">701</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#702">702</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#785">785</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#863">863</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#901">901</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#903">903</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#946">946</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#988">988</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#995">995</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Tentatively Ready to NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1002">1002</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to NAD Concepts: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1124">1124</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1127">1127</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1128">1128</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1139">1139</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1140">1140</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1141">1141</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1142">1142</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1143">1143</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to NAD Concepts: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#902">902</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#989">989</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1000">1000</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1007">1007</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1010">1010</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1015">1015</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1016">1016</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1017">1017</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1018">1018</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1026">1026</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1027">1027</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1028">1028</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1029">1029</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1032">1032</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1036">1036</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1057">1057</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1059">1059</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1072">1072</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1078">1078</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1081">1081</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1082">1082</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1083">1083</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1084">1084</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1085">1085</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1086">1086</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1092">1092</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1096">1096</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1105">1105</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Review to NAD Concepts: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1001">1001</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1005">1005</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1080">1080</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1087">1087</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1111">1111</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Tentatively NAD to NAD Concepts: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#912">912</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#918">918</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1074">1074</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Tentatively NAD Editorial to NAD Concepts: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#927">927</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1109">1109</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Tentatively Ready to NAD Concepts: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#906">906</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#913">913</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#914">914</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#928">928</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1024">1024</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1063">1063</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1067">1067</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#718">718</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#873">873</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Tentatively NAD Editorial to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#424">424</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#825">825</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#830">830</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#837">837</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#862">862</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#867">867</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#884">884</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#945">945</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#952">952</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#969">969</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#972">972</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#973">973</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#979">979</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1023">1023</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1058">1058</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1060">1060</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1061">1061</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1077">1077</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1101">1101</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Tentatively Ready to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1013">1013</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1107">1107</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to NAD Future: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#255">255</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#423">423</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#523">523</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#708">708</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#760">760</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#839">839</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#877">877</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from CD1 to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#823">823</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from NAD Editorial to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#299">299</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#484">484</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#532">532</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#556">556</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#594">594</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#631">631</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#676">676</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#704">704</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#724">724</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#742">742</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#811">811</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#870">870</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#872">872</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Review to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#879">879</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#919">919</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#929">929</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#939">939</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#987">987</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1009">1009</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1093">1093</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Tentatively NAD to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#458">458</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Tentatively NAD Future to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#96">96</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Tentatively Ready to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#910">910</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#915">915</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#932">932</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#940">940</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#974">974</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#976">976</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#999">999</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1011">1011</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#149">149</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#419">419</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#430">430</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#498">498</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#564">564</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#565">565</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#630">630</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#659">659</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#696">696</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#711">711</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#716">716</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#723">723</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#788">788</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#834">834</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#838">838</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#847">847</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#857">857</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#859">859</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#876">876</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#881">881</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#883">883</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#886">886</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1004">1004</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Review to Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#780">780</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Tentatively NAD to Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#822">822</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Tentatively Ready to Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#934">934</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from NAD to Review: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#871">871</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Review: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#397">397</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#408">408</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#473">473</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#671">671</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#836">836</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#868">868</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#889">889</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#893">893</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#930">930</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#954">954</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#962">962</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#967">967</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#968">968</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Tentatively NAD to Review: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#668">668</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Tentatively Ready to Review: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#950">950</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1100">1100</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Tentatively NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#588">588</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#617">617</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#625">625</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#971">971</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Tentatively NAD Future: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1031">1031</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1062">1062</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Tentatively Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1012">1012</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1019">1019</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Tentatively Ready to WP: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#688">688</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#765">765</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#810">810</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#814">814</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#853">853</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#869">869</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#878">878</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#888">888</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#890">890</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#898">898</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#899">899</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#904">904</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#907">907</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#909">909</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#922">922</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#925">925</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#931">931</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#938">938</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#943">943</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#948">948</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#949">949</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#965">965</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#970">970</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#975">975</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#981">981</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#982">982</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#984">984</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#986">986</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#990">990</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#991">991</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#993">993</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#994">994</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#997">997</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#998">998</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1006">1006</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1014">1014</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1021">1021</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1037">1037</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1038">1038</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1039">1039</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1040">1040</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1044">1044</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1045">1045</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1065">1065</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1066">1066</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1070">1070</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1073">1073</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1103">1103</a>.</li> +</ul></li> +</ul> +</li> +<li>R65: +2009-06-19 pre-Frankfurt mailing. +<ul> +<li><b>Summary:</b><ul> +<li>378 open issues, up by 32.</li> +<li>765 closed issues, up by 0.</li> +<li>1143 issues total, up by 32.</li> +</ul></li> +<li><b>Details:</b><ul> +<li>Added the following New issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1115">1115</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1116">1116</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1117">1117</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1118">1118</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1119">1119</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1120">1120</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1121">1121</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1122">1122</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1123">1123</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1124">1124</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1125">1125</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1126">1126</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1127">1127</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1128">1128</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1129">1129</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1130">1130</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1131">1131</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1132">1132</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1133">1133</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1134">1134</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1135">1135</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1136">1136</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1137">1137</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1138">1138</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1139">1139</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1140">1140</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1141">1141</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1142">1142</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1143">1143</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following Open issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1112">1112</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1113">1113</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1114">1114</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Pending NAD Editorial to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#937">937</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#696">696</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#716">716</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#727">727</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#865">865</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#900">900</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#911">911</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#916">916</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#917">917</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#920">920</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#933">933</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#935">935</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#941">941</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#947">947</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#951">951</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#953">953</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#954">954</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#955">955</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#956">956</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#977">977</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#978">978</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#985">985</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#989">989</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#996">996</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1033">1033</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1054">1054</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1056">1056</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1057">1057</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1059">1059</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1062">1062</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1068">1068</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1069">1069</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1071">1071</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1072">1072</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1076">1076</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1090">1090</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1092">1092</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1096">1096</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1098">1098</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1099">1099</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1105">1105</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1106">1106</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1108">1108</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1110">1110</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Review to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#817">817</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#971">971</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#992">992</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1004">1004</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1010">1010</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1012">1012</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1015">1015</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1019">1019</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Review: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#780">780</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#835">835</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#897">897</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#919">919</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#939">939</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#957">957</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#983">983</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1001">1001</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1080">1080</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1091">1091</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1093">1093</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1094">1094</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1095">1095</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1097">1097</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1102">1102</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1104">1104</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1111">1111</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Review: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#921">921</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#987">987</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1087">1087</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Tentatively NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#568">568</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#701">701</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#702">702</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#785">785</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#863">863</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#903">903</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#912">912</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#918">918</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#946">946</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#995">995</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1074">1074</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Tentatively NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#458">458</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#644">644</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#667">667</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#668">668</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#669">669</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Review to Tentatively NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#901">901</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Tentatively Ready to Tentatively NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#822">822</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#988">988</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Tentatively NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#837">837</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#862">862</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#867">867</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#927">927</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#945">945</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#952">952</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#969">969</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#972">972</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#973">973</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#979">979</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1058">1058</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1060">1060</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1061">1061</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1077">1077</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1101">1101</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1109">1109</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Tentatively NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#424">424</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#825">825</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#830">830</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#884">884</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Review to Tentatively NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1023">1023</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Tentatively NAD Future: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#96">96</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Tentatively Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#810">810</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#898">898</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#906">906</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#910">910</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#913">913</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#914">914</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#915">915</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#925">925</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#974">974</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#976">976</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#981">981</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#982">982</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#984">984</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#990">990</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#998">998</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#999">999</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1063">1063</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1067">1067</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1070">1070</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1073">1073</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1100">1100</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1103">1103</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1107">1107</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Tentatively Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#688">688</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#814">814</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Review to Tentatively Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#899">899</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#907">907</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#909">909</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#934">934</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#938">938</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#940">940</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#943">943</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#950">950</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#965">965</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#970">970</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#975">975</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#986">986</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#991">991</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#993">993</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#994">994</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#997">997</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1002">1002</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1006">1006</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1011">1011</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1013">1013</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1014">1014</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1021">1021</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1024">1024</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1037">1037</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1038">1038</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1039">1039</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1040">1040</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1044">1044</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1045">1045</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1065">1065</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1066">1066</a>.</li> +</ul></li> +</ul> +</li> +<li>R64: +2009-05-01 mid-term mailing. +<ul> +<li><b>Summary:</b><ul> +<li>346 open issues, up by 19.</li> +<li>765 closed issues, up by 0.</li> +<li>1111 issues total, up by 19.</li> +</ul></li> +<li><b>Details:</b><ul> +<li>Added the following New issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1093">1093</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1094">1094</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1095">1095</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1096">1096</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1097">1097</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1098">1098</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1099">1099</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1100">1100</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1101">1101</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1102">1102</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1103">1103</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1104">1104</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1105">1105</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1106">1106</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1107">1107</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1108">1108</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1109">1109</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1110">1110</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1111">1111</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from DR to CD1: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#130">130</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#386">386</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#406">406</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#409">409</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#413">413</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#434">434</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#438">438</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#444">444</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#445">445</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#455">455</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#457">457</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#460">460</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#469">469</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#533">533</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Review to New: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1070">1070</a>.</li> +</ul></li> +</ul> +</li> +<li>R63: +2009-03-20 post-Summit mailing. +<ul> +<li><b>Summary:</b><ul> +<li>327 open issues, up by 96.</li> +<li>765 closed issues, up by 14.</li> +<li>1092 issues total, up by 110.</li> +</ul></li> +<li><b>Details:</b><ul> +<li>Added the following NAD Editorial issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1022">1022</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following NAD Future issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1025">1025</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following New issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#983">983</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#984">984</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#985">985</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#989">989</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#990">990</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#995">995</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#996">996</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#998">998</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#999">999</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1001">1001</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1033">1033</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1054">1054</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1056">1056</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1057">1057</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1058">1058</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1059">1059</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1060">1060</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1061">1061</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1062">1062</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1063">1063</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1067">1067</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1068">1068</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1069">1069</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1071">1071</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1072">1072</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1073">1073</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1074">1074</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1076">1076</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1077">1077</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1080">1080</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1090">1090</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1091">1091</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1092">1092</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following Open issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#987">987</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1000">1000</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1007">1007</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1008">1008</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1016">1016</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1017">1017</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1018">1018</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1020">1020</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1026">1026</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1027">1027</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1028">1028</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1029">1029</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1030">1030</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1031">1031</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1032">1032</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1034">1034</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1035">1035</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1036">1036</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1041">1041</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1042">1042</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1046">1046</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1048">1048</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1051">1051</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1052">1052</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1053">1053</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1055">1055</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1064">1064</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1075">1075</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1078">1078</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1079">1079</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1081">1081</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1082">1082</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1083">1083</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1084">1084</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1085">1085</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1086">1086</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1087">1087</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1088">1088</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1089">1089</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following Review issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#986">986</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#991">991</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#992">992</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#993">993</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#994">994</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#997">997</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1002">1002</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1003">1003</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1004">1004</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1005">1005</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1006">1006</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1009">1009</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1010">1010</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1011">1011</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1012">1012</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1013">1013</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1014">1014</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1015">1015</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1019">1019</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1021">1021</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1023">1023</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1024">1024</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1037">1037</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1038">1038</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1039">1039</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1040">1040</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1043">1043</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1044">1044</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1045">1045</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1047">1047</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1049">1049</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1050">1050</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1065">1065</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1066">1066</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1070">1070</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following Tentatively Ready issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#988">988</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Dup: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#905">905</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#942">942</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#980">980</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#874">874</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#875">875</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#732">732</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#793">793</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#794">794</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#800">800</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Pending NAD Editorial to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#683">683</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#892">892</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Ready to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#803">803</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from NAD to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#466">466</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from NAD Future to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#111">111</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#138">138</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#149">149</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#219">219</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#880">880</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#891">891</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#893">893</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#902">902</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#908">908</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#921">921</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#923">923</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#924">924</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#926">926</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#930">930</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#936">936</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#944">944</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#958">958</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#959">959</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#960">960</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#961">961</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#962">962</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#963">963</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#964">964</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#966">966</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#967">967</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#968">968</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Ready to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#788">788</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Pending NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#937">937</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Review: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#879">879</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#899">899</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#901">901</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#907">907</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#909">909</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#929">929</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#934">934</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#938">938</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#940">940</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#943">943</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#950">950</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#965">965</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#970">970</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#971">971</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#975">975</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Review: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#817">817</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Tentatively Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#904">904</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#922">922</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#928">928</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#931">931</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#932">932</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#948">948</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#949">949</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Tentatively Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#890">890</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Review to Tentatively Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#765">765</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#822">822</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#853">853</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#869">869</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#878">878</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#888">888</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Ready to WP: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#752">752</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#753">753</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#758">758</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#821">821</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#866">866</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#894">894</a>.</li> +</ul></li> +</ul> +</li> +<li>R62: +2009-02-06 pre-Summit mailing. +<ul> +<li><b>Summary:</b><ul> +<li>231 open issues, up by 44.</li> +<li>751 closed issues, up by 0.</li> +<li>982 issues total, up by 44.</li> +</ul></li> +<li><b>Details:</b><ul> +<li>Added the following New issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#939">939</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#940">940</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#941">941</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#942">942</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#943">943</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#944">944</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#945">945</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#946">946</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#947">947</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#948">948</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#949">949</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#950">950</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#951">951</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#952">952</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#953">953</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#954">954</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#955">955</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#956">956</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#957">957</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#958">958</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#959">959</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#960">960</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#961">961</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#962">962</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#963">963</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#964">964</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#965">965</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#966">966</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#967">967</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#968">968</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#969">969</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#970">970</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#971">971</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#972">972</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#973">973</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#974">974</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#975">975</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#976">976</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#977">977</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#978">978</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#979">979</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#980">980</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#981">981</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#982">982</a>.</li> +</ul></li> +</ul> +</li> +<li>R61: +2008-12-05 mid-term mailing. +<ul> +<li><b>Summary:</b><ul> +<li>187 open issues, up by 20.</li> +<li>751 closed issues, up by 0.</li> +<li>938 issues total, up by 20.</li> +</ul></li> +<li><b>Details:</b><ul> +<li>Added the following New issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#919">919</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#920">920</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#921">921</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#922">922</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#923">923</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#924">924</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#925">925</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#926">926</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#927">927</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#928">928</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#929">929</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#930">930</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#931">931</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#932">932</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#933">933</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#934">934</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#935">935</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#936">936</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#937">937</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#938">938</a>.</li> +</ul></li> +</ul> +</li> +<li>R60: +2008-10-03 post-San Francisco mailing. +<ul> +<li><b>Summary:</b><ul> +<li>167 open issues, down by 25.</li> +<li>751 closed issues, up by 65.</li> +<li>918 issues total, up by 40.</li> +</ul></li> +<li><b>Details:</b><ul> +<li>Added the following CD1 issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#882">882</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following New issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#879">879</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#880">880</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#891">891</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#893">893</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#897">897</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#898">898</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#899">899</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#900">900</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#901">901</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#902">902</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#903">903</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#904">904</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#905">905</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#906">906</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#907">907</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#908">908</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#909">909</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#910">910</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#911">911</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#912">912</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#913">913</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#914">914</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#915">915</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#916">916</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#917">917</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#918">918</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following Open issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#881">881</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#883">883</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#884">884</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#885">885</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#886">886</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#887">887</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#889">889</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#890">890</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#895">895</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#896">896</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following Pending NAD Editorial issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#892">892</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following Ready issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#894">894</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following Review issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#888">888</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to CD1: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#818">818</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#820">820</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#843">843</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#845">845</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#846">846</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#856">856</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#858">858</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Ready to CD1: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#180">180</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#387">387</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#396">396</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#522">522</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#629">629</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#691">691</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#713">713</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#714">714</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#720">720</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#728">728</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#762">762</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#769">769</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#771">771</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#772">772</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#776">776</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#779">779</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#787">787</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#805">805</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#806">806</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#807">807</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#808">808</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#809">809</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#813">813</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#824">824</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#829">829</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#842">842</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#844">844</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#848">848</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#850">850</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#852">852</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Review to CD1: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#23">23</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#675">675</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#692">692</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#698">698</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#709">709</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#734">734</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#804">804</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#823">823</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from WP to CD1: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#44">44</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#49">49</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#76">76</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#91">91</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#92">92</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#98">98</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#103">103</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#109">109</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#117">117</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#118">118</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#120">120</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#123">123</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#136">136</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#153">153</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#165">165</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#167">167</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#171">171</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#179">179</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#182">182</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#183">183</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#184">184</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#185">185</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#186">186</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#187">187</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#198">198</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#200">200</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#201">201</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#202">202</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#206">206</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#214">214</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#221">221</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#225">225</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#226">226</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#228">228</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#229">229</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#230">230</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#231">231</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#232">232</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#233">233</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#234">234</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#235">235</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#237">237</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#238">238</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#239">239</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#240">240</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#241">241</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#242">242</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#243">243</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#247">247</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#248">248</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#250">250</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#251">251</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#252">252</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#253">253</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#254">254</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#256">256</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#258">258</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#259">259</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#260">260</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#261">261</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#262">262</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#263">263</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#264">264</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#265">265</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#266">266</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#268">268</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#270">270</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#271">271</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#272">272</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#273">273</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#274">274</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#275">275</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#276">276</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#278">278</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#280">280</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#281">281</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#282">282</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#283">283</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#284">284</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#285">285</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#286">286</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#288">288</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#291">291</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#292">292</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#294">294</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#295">295</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#297">297</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#298">298</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#300">300</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#301">301</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#303">303</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#305">305</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#306">306</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#307">307</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#308">308</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#310">310</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#311">311</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#312">312</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#315">315</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#316">316</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#317">317</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#318">318</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#319">319</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#320">320</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#321">321</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#322">322</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#324">324</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#325">325</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#327">327</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#328">328</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#329">329</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#331">331</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#333">333</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#334">334</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#335">335</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#336">336</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#337">337</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#338">338</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#339">339</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#340">340</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#341">341</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#345">345</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#346">346</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#347">347</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#349">349</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#352">352</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#354">354</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#355">355</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#358">358</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#359">359</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#360">360</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#362">362</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#363">363</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#364">364</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#365">365</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#369">369</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#370">370</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#371">371</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#373">373</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#375">375</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#376">376</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#379">379</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#380">380</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#381">381</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#383">383</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#384">384</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#389">389</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#391">391</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#395">395</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#400">400</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#401">401</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#402">402</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#403">403</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#404">404</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#405">405</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#407">407</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#410">410</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#411">411</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#412">412</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#414">414</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#415">415</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#416">416</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#420">420</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#422">422</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#425">425</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#426">426</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#428">428</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#432">432</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#435">435</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#436">436</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#441">441</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#442">442</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#443">443</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#448">448</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#449">449</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#453">453</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#456">456</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#461">461</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#464">464</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#465">465</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#467">467</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#468">468</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#474">474</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#475">475</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#478">478</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#488">488</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#495">495</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#496">496</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#497">497</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#505">505</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#507">507</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#508">508</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#518">518</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#519">519</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#520">520</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#521">521</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#524">524</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#527">527</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#530">530</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#531">531</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#534">534</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#535">535</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#537">537</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#538">538</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#540">540</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#541">541</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#542">542</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#543">543</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#545">545</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#550">550</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#551">551</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#552">552</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#559">559</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#561">561</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#562">562</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#563">563</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#566">566</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#567">567</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#574">574</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#575">575</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#576">576</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#577">577</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#578">578</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#581">581</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#586">586</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#589">589</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#593">593</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#595">595</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#596">596</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#607">607</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#608">608</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#609">609</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#610">610</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#611">611</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#612">612</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#613">613</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#616">616</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#618">618</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#619">619</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#620">620</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#621">621</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#622">622</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#623">623</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#624">624</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#628">628</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#634">634</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#638">638</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#640">640</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#643">643</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#646">646</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#650">650</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#651">651</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#652">652</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#654">654</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#655">655</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#660">660</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#661">661</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#664">664</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#665">665</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#666">666</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#672">672</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#673">673</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#674">674</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#677">677</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#678">678</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#679">679</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#680">680</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#681">681</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#682">682</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#685">685</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#687">687</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#689">689</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#693">693</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#694">694</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#695">695</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#699">699</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#700">700</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#703">703</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#705">705</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#706">706</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#710">710</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#712">712</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#715">715</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#722">722</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#740">740</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#743">743</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#744">744</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#746">746</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#749">749</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#755">755</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#759">759</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#761">761</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#766">766</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#768">768</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#770">770</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#775">775</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#777">777</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#778">778</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#781">781</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#782">782</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#783">783</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#789">789</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#792">792</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#798">798</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Dup: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#670">670</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#849">849</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#855">855</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#871">871</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#454">454</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#832">832</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#811">811</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#812">812</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#841">841</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#864">864</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#870">870</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#872">872</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#299">299</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#484">484</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#556">556</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#631">631</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#676">676</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#704">704</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#724">724</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#742">742</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Pending NAD Editorial to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#532">532</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#594">594</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#717">717</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#725">725</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#738">738</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#721">721</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#751">751</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#814">814</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#816">816</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#817">817</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#819">819</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#827">827</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#836">836</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#838">838</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#847">847</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#857">857</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#859">859</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#860">860</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#861">861</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#868">868</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#873">873</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#876">876</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#877">877</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Pending NAD Editorial to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#424">424</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#625">625</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Review to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#851">851</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#788">788</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#821">821</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#866">866</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#753">753</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Review to Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#752">752</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#758">758</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#803">803</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Review: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#765">765</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#822">822</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#853">853</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#854">854</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#869">869</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#878">878</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from TC to TC1: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1">1</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#3">3</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#5">5</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#7">7</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#8">8</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#9">9</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#11">11</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#13">13</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#14">14</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#15">15</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#16">16</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#17">17</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#18">18</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#19">19</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#20">20</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#21">21</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#22">22</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#24">24</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#25">25</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#26">26</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#27">27</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#28">28</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#29">29</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#30">30</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#31">31</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#32">32</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#33">33</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#34">34</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#35">35</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#36">36</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#37">37</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#38">38</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#39">39</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#40">40</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#41">41</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#42">42</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#46">46</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#47">47</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#48">48</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#50">50</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#51">51</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#52">52</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#53">53</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#54">54</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#55">55</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#56">56</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#57">57</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#59">59</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#60">60</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#61">61</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#62">62</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#63">63</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#64">64</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#66">66</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#68">68</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#69">69</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#70">70</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#71">71</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#74">74</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#75">75</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#78">78</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#79">79</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#80">80</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#83">83</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#86">86</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#90">90</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#106">106</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#108">108</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#110">110</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#112">112</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#114">114</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#115">115</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#119">119</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#122">122</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#124">124</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#125">125</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#126">126</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#127">127</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#129">129</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#132">132</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#133">133</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#134">134</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#137">137</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#139">139</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#141">141</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#142">142</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#144">144</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#146">146</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#147">147</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#148">148</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#150">150</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#151">151</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#152">152</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#154">154</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#155">155</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#156">156</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#158">158</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#159">159</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#160">160</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#161">161</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#164">164</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#168">168</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#169">169</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#170">170</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#172">172</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#173">173</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#174">174</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#175">175</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#176">176</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#181">181</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#189">189</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#193">193</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#195">195</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#199">199</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#208">208</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#209">209</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#210">210</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#211">211</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#212">212</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#217">217</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#220">220</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#222">222</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#223">223</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#224">224</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#227">227</a>.</li> +</ul></li> +</ul> +</li> +<li>R59: +2008-08-22 pre-San Francisco mailing. +<ul> +<li><b>Summary:</b><ul> +<li>192 open issues, up by 9.</li> +<li>686 closed issues, up by 0.</li> +<li>878 issues total, up by 9.</li> +</ul></li> +<li><b>Details:</b><ul> +<li>Added the following New issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#870">870</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#871">871</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#872">872</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#873">873</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#874">874</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#875">875</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#876">876</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#877">877</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#878">878</a>.</li> +</ul></li> +</ul> +</li> +<li>R58: +2008-07-28 mid-term mailing. +<ul> +<li><b>Summary:</b><ul> +<li>183 open issues, up by 12.</li> +<li>686 closed issues, down by 4.</li> +<li>869 issues total, up by 8.</li> +</ul></li> +<li><b>Details:</b><ul> +<li>Added the following New issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#862">862</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#863">863</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#864">864</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#865">865</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#866">866</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#867">867</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#868">868</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#869">869</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Pending NAD Editorial to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#393">393</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#557">557</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#592">592</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#754">754</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#757">757</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Pending WP to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#644">644</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from WP to Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#387">387</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#629">629</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Pending NAD Editorial to Review: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#709">709</a>.</li> +</ul></li> +</ul> +</li> +<li>R57: +2008-06-27 post-Sophia Antipolis mailing. +<ul> +<li><b>Summary:</b><ul> +<li>171 open issues, down by 20.</li> +<li>690 closed issues, up by 43.</li> +<li>861 issues total, up by 23.</li> +</ul></li> +<li><b>Details:</b><ul> +<li>Added the following NAD issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#840">840</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following New issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#841">841</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#843">843</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#845">845</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#846">846</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#847">847</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#849">849</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#853">853</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#854">854</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#855">855</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#856">856</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#857">857</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#858">858</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#859">859</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#860">860</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#861">861</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following Open issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#839">839</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following Ready issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#842">842</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#844">844</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#848">848</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#850">850</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#852">852</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following Review issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#851">851</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#826">826</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#570">570</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#786">786</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#831">831</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#756">756</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#767">767</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#723">723</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#726">726</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#794">794</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#815">815</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#825">825</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#830">830</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#833">833</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#834">834</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Ready to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#471">471</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Review to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#539">539</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#711">711</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#713">713</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#714">714</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#769">769</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#772">772</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#779">779</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#787">787</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#805">805</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#806">806</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#807">807</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#808">808</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#809">809</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#813">813</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#824">824</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#829">829</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#180">180</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#396">396</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#522">522</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#720">720</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#762">762</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Review to Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#691">691</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#728">728</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#771">771</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#776">776</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Review: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#692">692</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#698">698</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#752">752</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#804">804</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#823">823</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#828">828</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#832">832</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Review: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#23">23</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#675">675</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#734">734</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#803">803</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Ready to Review: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#758">758</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Ready to WP: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#387">387</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#518">518</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#550">550</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#574">574</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#595">595</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#596">596</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#612">612</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#618">618</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#629">629</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#638">638</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#672">672</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#673">673</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#685">685</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#710">710</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#715">715</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#722">722</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#740">740</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#743">743</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#744">744</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#746">746</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#749">749</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#755">755</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#759">759</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#761">761</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#766">766</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#768">768</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#770">770</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#775">775</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#777">777</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#778">778</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#781">781</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#782">782</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#783">783</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#789">789</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#792">792</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#798">798</a>.</li> +</ul></li> +</ul> +</li> +<li>R56: +2008-05-16 pre-Sophia Antipolis mailing. +<ul> +<li><b>Summary:</b><ul> +<li>191 open issues, up by 24.</li> +<li>647 closed issues, up by 1.</li> +<li>838 issues total, up by 25.</li> +</ul></li> +<li><b>Details:</b><ul> +<li>Added the following New issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#814">814</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#815">815</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#816">816</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#817">817</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#818">818</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#819">819</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#820">820</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#821">821</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#822">822</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#823">823</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#824">824</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#825">825</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#826">826</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#827">827</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#828">828</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#829">829</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#830">830</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#831">831</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#832">832</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#833">833</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#834">834</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#835">835</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#836">836</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#837">837</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#838">838</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#802">802</a>.</li> +</ul></li> +</ul> +</li> +<li>R55: +2008-03-14 post-Bellevue mailing. +<ul> +<li><b>Summary:</b><ul> +<li>167 open issues, down by 39.</li> +<li>646 closed issues, up by 65.</li> +<li>813 issues total, up by 26.</li> +</ul></li> +<li><b>Details:</b><ul> +<li>Added the following Dup issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#795">795</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following NAD issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#790">790</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#791">791</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#796">796</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#797">797</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#799">799</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following New issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#788">788</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#794">794</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#802">802</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#804">804</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#805">805</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#806">806</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#807">807</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#808">808</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#809">809</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#810">810</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#811">811</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#812">812</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#813">813</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following Open issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#793">793</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#800">800</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#801">801</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#803">803</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following Ready issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#789">789</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#792">792</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#798">798</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from NAD Future to Dup: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#116">116</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from NAD Future to NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#188">188</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#323">323</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#729">729</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#730">730</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#731">731</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#733">733</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#735">735</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#736">736</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#737">737</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#739">739</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#741">741</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#745">745</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#748">748</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#763">763</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#764">764</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#773">773</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#784">784</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#388">388</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#462">462</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#579">579</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#627">627</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#653">653</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#686">686</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#707">707</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from NAD Future to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#140">140</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#390">390</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#529">529</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#626">626</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Review to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#645">645</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#684">684</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from NAD Future to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#128">128</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#180">180</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#190">190</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#617">617</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#718">718</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#719">719</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#720">720</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#724">724</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#732">732</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#734">734</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#742">742</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#747">747</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#750">750</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#753">753</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#756">756</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#760">760</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#762">762</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#767">767</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#774">774</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Ready to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#675">675</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#676">676</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#688">688</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Pending NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#709">709</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#717">717</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#725">725</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#738">738</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#754">754</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#757">757</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Pending NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#424">424</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#557">557</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#625">625</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#710">710</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#715">715</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#722">722</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#740">740</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#743">743</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#744">744</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#746">746</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#749">749</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#755">755</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#758">758</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#759">759</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#761">761</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#766">766</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#768">768</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#770">770</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#775">775</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#777">777</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#778">778</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#781">781</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#782">782</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#783">783</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#387">387</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#471">471</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#550">550</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#612">612</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#629">629</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#673">673</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Review to Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#518">518</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#574">574</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#596">596</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#618">618</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#638">638</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#672">672</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#685">685</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Review: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#711">711</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#728">728</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#771">771</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#776">776</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Review: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#539">539</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Ready to WP: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#561">561</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#562">562</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#563">563</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#567">567</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#581">581</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#620">620</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#621">621</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#622">622</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#623">623</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#624">624</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#661">661</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#664">664</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#665">665</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#666">666</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#674">674</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#679">679</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#680">680</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#687">687</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#689">689</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#693">693</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#694">694</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#695">695</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#700">700</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#703">703</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#705">705</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#706">706</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Tentatively Ready to WP: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#527">527</a>.</li> +</ul></li> +</ul> +</li> +<li>R54: +2008-02-01 pre-Bellevue mailing. +<ul> +<li><b>Summary:</b><ul> +<li>206 open issues, up by 23.</li> +<li>581 closed issues, up by 0.</li> +<li>787 issues total, up by 23.</li> +</ul></li> +<li><b>Details:</b><ul> +<li>Added the following New issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#765">765</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#766">766</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#767">767</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#768">768</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#769">769</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#770">770</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#771">771</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#772">772</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#773">773</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#774">774</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#775">775</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#776">776</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#777">777</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#778">778</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#779">779</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#780">780</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#781">781</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#782">782</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#783">783</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#784">784</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#785">785</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#786">786</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#787">787</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from NAD Future to Dup: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#105">105</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#348">348</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from NAD Future to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#353">353</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#697">697</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from NAD Future to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#388">388</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Tentatively Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#527">527</a>.</li> +</ul></li> +</ul> +</li> +<li>R53: +2007-12-09 mid-term mailing. +<ul> +<li><b>Summary:</b><ul> +<li>183 open issues, up by 11.</li> +<li>581 closed issues, down by 1.</li> +<li>764 issues total, up by 10.</li> +</ul></li> +<li><b>Details:</b><ul> +<li>Added the following New issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#755">755</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#756">756</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#757">757</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#758">758</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#759">759</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#760">760</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#761">761</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#762">762</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#763">763</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#764">764</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from NAD to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#463">463</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Pending WP to WP: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#607">607</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#608">608</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#654">654</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#655">655</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#677">677</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#682">682</a>.</li> +</ul></li> +</ul> +</li> +<li>R52: +2007-10-19 post-Kona mailing. +<ul> +<li><b>Summary:</b><ul> +<li>172 open issues, up by 4.</li> +<li>582 closed issues, up by 27.</li> +<li>754 issues total, up by 31.</li> +</ul></li> +<li><b>Details:</b><ul> +<li>Added the following New issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#724">724</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#725">725</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#726">726</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#727">727</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#728">728</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#729">729</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#730">730</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#731">731</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#732">732</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#733">733</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#734">734</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#735">735</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#736">736</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#737">737</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#738">738</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#739">739</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#740">740</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#741">741</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#742">742</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#743">743</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#744">744</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#745">745</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#746">746</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#747">747</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#748">748</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#749">749</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#750">750</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#751">751</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#752">752</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#753">753</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#754">754</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from NAD Future to Dup: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#77">77</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#350">350</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#639">639</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#657">657</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#663">663</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#548">548</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#546">546</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#550">550</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#564">564</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#565">565</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#573">573</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#585">585</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#588">588</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#627">627</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#629">629</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#630">630</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#632">632</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#635">635</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#653">653</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#659">659</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#667">667</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#668">668</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#669">669</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#670">670</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#671">671</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#673">673</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#686">686</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#704">704</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#707">707</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#708">708</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Pending NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#393">393</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#592">592</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Pending WP: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#607">607</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#608">608</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#654">654</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#655">655</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#677">677</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#682">682</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#561">561</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#562">562</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#563">563</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#567">567</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#581">581</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#595">595</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#620">620</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#621">621</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#622">622</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#623">623</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#624">624</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#661">661</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#664">664</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#665">665</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#666">666</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#674">674</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#675">675</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#676">676</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#679">679</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#687">687</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#688">688</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#689">689</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#693">693</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#694">694</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#695">695</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#700">700</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#703">703</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#705">705</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#706">706</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#680">680</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Review: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#574">574</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#596">596</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#618">618</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#638">638</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#645">645</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#672">672</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#684">684</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#685">685</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#691">691</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to WP: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#552">552</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#634">634</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#650">650</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#651">651</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#652">652</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#678">678</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#681">681</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#699">699</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#712">712</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to WP: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#258">258</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#401">401</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#524">524</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Ready to WP: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#488">488</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#577">577</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#660">660</a>.</li> +</ul></li> +</ul> +</li> +<li>R51: +2007-09-09 pre-Kona mailing. +<ul> +<li><b>Summary:</b><ul> +<li>168 open issues, up by 15.</li> +<li>555 closed issues, up by 0.</li> +<li>723 issues total, up by 15.</li> +</ul></li> +<li><b>Details:</b><ul> +<li>Added the following New issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#709">709</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#710">710</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#711">711</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#712">712</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#713">713</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#714">714</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#715">715</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#716">716</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#717">717</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#718">718</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#719">719</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#720">720</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#721">721</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#722">722</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#723">723</a>.</li> +</ul></li> +</ul> +</li> +<li>R50: +2007-08-05 post-Toronto mailing. +<ul> +<li><b>Summary:</b><ul> +<li>153 open issues, down by 5.</li> +<li>555 closed issues, up by 17.</li> +<li>708 issues total, up by 12.</li> +</ul></li> +<li><b>Details:</b><ul> +<li>Added the following New issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#697">697</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#698">698</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#699">699</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#700">700</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#701">701</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#702">702</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#703">703</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#704">704</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#705">705</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#706">706</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#707">707</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#708">708</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#583">583</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#584">584</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#662">662</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#528">528</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#637">637</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#647">647</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#658">658</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#690">690</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#525">525</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Pending NAD Editorial to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#553">553</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#571">571</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#591">591</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#633">633</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#636">636</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#641">641</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#642">642</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#648">648</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#649">649</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#656">656</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#579">579</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#631">631</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#680">680</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Pending WP to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#258">258</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Ready to Pending WP: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#644">644</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#577">577</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#660">660</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#488">488</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Review: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#518">518</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Ready to TRDec: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#604">604</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from DR to WP: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#453">453</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Ready to WP: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#531">531</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#551">551</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#566">566</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#628">628</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#640">640</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#643">643</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#646">646</a>.</li> +</ul></li> +</ul> +</li> +<li>R49: +2007-06-23 pre-Toronto mailing. +<ul> +<li><b>Summary:</b><ul> +<li>158 open issues, up by 13.</li> +<li>538 closed issues, up by 7.</li> +<li>696 issues total, up by 20.</li> +</ul></li> +<li><b>Details:</b><ul> +<li>Added the following New issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#677">677</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#678">678</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#679">679</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#680">680</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#681">681</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#682">682</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#684">684</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#685">685</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#686">686</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#687">687</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#688">688</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#689">689</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#690">690</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#691">691</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#692">692</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#693">693</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#694">694</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#695">695</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#696">696</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following Pending NAD Editorial issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#683">683</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#587">587</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#590">590</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Pending NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#636">636</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#642">642</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#648">648</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#649">649</a>.</li> +</ul></li> +</ul> +</li> +<li>R48: +2007-05-06 post-Oxford mailing. +<ul> +<li><b>Summary:</b><ul> +<li>145 open issues, down by 33.</li> +<li>531 closed issues, up by 53.</li> +<li>676 issues total, up by 20.</li> +</ul></li> +<li><b>Details:</b><ul> +<li>Added the following New issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#657">657</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#658">658</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#659">659</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#660">660</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#661">661</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#662">662</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#663">663</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#664">664</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#665">665</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#666">666</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#667">667</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#668">668</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#669">669</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#670">670</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#671">671</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#672">672</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#673">673</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#674">674</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#675">675</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#676">676</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Tentatively Ready to Dup: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#479">479</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#536">536</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Tentatively Ready to NAD: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#385">385</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#463">463</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#466">466</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#470">470</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#515">515</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#526">526</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#547">547</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#560">560</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#572">572</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from NAD to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#351">351</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#357">357</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#368">368</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#499">499</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#504">504</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#512">512</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#513">513</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#514">514</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#516">516</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#544">544</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#549">549</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#555">555</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#558">558</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Tentatively Ready to NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#482">482</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#615">615</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from NAD_Future to NAD Future: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#77">77</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#105">105</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#111">111</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#116">116</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#128">128</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#138">138</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#140">140</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#149">149</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#180">180</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#188">188</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#190">190</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#219">219</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#323">323</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#348">348</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#350">350</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#353">353</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#388">388</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#390">390</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Tentatively Ready to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#471">471</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Pending NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#633">633</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#641">641</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#656">656</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Tentatively Ready to Pending NAD Editorial: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#532">532</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#553">553</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#571">571</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#591">591</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#594">594</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Tentatively Ready to Pending WP: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#258">258</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#566">566</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#628">628</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#640">640</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#643">643</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#644">644</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#646">646</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Review to Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#531">531</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#551">551</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#604">604</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Ready to TRDec: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#598">598</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#599">599</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#600">600</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#601">601</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#602">602</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#603">603</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#605">605</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Ready to WP: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#543">543</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#545">545</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Tentatively Ready to WP: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#201">201</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#206">206</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#233">233</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#254">254</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#416">416</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#422">422</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#456">456</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#534">534</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#542">542</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#559">559</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#575">575</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#576">576</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#578">578</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#586">586</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#589">589</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#593">593</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#609">609</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#610">610</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#611">611</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#613">613</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#616">616</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#619">619</a>.</li> +</ul></li> +</ul> +</li> +<li>R47: +2007-03-09 pre-Oxford mailing. +<ul> +<li><b>Summary:</b><ul> +<li>178 open issues, up by 37.</li> +<li>478 closed issues, up by 0.</li> +<li>656 issues total, up by 37.</li> +</ul></li> +<li><b>Details:</b><ul> +<li>Added the following New issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#620">620</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#621">621</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#622">622</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#623">623</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#624">624</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#627">627</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#628">628</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#629">629</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#630">630</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#631">631</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#632">632</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#633">633</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#634">634</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#635">635</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#636">636</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#637">637</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#638">638</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#639">639</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#640">640</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#641">641</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#642">642</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#643">643</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#644">644</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#645">645</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#646">646</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#647">647</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#648">648</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#649">649</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#650">650</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#651">651</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#652">652</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#653">653</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#654">654</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#655">655</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#656">656</a>.</li> +<li>Added the following Open issues: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#625">625</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#626">626</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Open: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#570">570</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#580">580</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#582">582</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#590">590</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#612">612</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#614">614</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from New to Tentatively Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#547">547</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#553">553</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#560">560</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#571">571</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#572">572</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#575">575</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#576">576</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#578">578</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#586">586</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#589">589</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#591">591</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#593">593</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#594">594</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#609">609</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#610">610</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#611">611</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#613">613</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#615">615</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#616">616</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#619">619</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Open to Tentatively Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#201">201</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#206">206</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#233">233</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#254">254</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#258">258</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#385">385</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#416">416</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#422">422</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#456">456</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#463">463</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#466">466</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#470">470</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#471">471</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#479">479</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#482">482</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#515">515</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#526">526</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#532">532</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#536">536</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#542">542</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#559">559</a>.</li> +<li>Changed the following issues from Review to Tentatively Ready: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#534">534</a>.</li> +</ul></li> +</ul> +</li> +<li>R46: +2007-01-12 mid-term mailing. +<ul> +<li><b>Summary:</b><ul> +<li>141 open issues, up by 11.</li> +<li>478 closed issues, down by 1.</li> +<li>619 issues total, up by 10.</li> +</ul></li> +<li><b>Details:</b><ul> +<li>Added new issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#610">610</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#611">611</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#612">612</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#613">613</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#614">614</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#615">615</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#616">616</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#617">617</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#618">618</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#619">619</a>.</li> +</ul></li> +</ul> +</li> +<li>R45: +2006-11-03 post-Portland mailing. +<ul> +<li><b>Summary:</b><ul> +<li>130 open issues, up by 0.</li> +<li>479 closed issues, up by 17.</li> +<li>609 issues total, up by 17.</li> +</ul></li> +<li><b>Details:</b><ul> +<li>Moved issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#520">520</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#521">521</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#530">530</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#535">535</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#537">537</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#538">538</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#540">540</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#541">541</a> to WP.</li> +<li>Moved issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#504">504</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#512">512</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#516">516</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#544">544</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#549">549</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#554">554</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#555">555</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#558">558</a> to NAD.</li> +<li>Moved issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#569">569</a> to Dup.</li> +<li>Moved issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#518">518</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#523">523</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#524">524</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#542">542</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#556">556</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#557">557</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#559">559</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#597">597</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#606">606</a> to Open.</li> +<li>Moved issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#543">543</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#545">545</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#549">549</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#549">549</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#598">598</a> - <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#603">603</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#605">605</a> to Ready.</li> +<li>Moved issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#531">531</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#551">551</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#604">604</a> to Review.</li> +<li>Added new issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#593">593</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#594">594</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#595">595</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#596">596</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#597">597</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#598">598</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#599">599</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#600">600</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#601">601</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#602">602</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#603">603</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#604">604</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#605">605</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#606">606</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#607">607</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#608">608</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#609">609</a>.</li> +</ul></li> +</ul> +</li> +<li>R44: +2006-09-08 pre-Portland mailing. +<ul> +<li><b>Summary:</b><ul> +<li>130 open issues, up by 6.</li> +<li>462 closed issues, down by 1.</li> +<li>592 issues total, up by 5.</li> +</ul></li> +<li><b>Details:</b><ul> +<li>Added new issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#583">583</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#584">584</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#585">585</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#586">586</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#587">587</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#588">588</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#589">589</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#590">590</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#591">591</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#592">592</a>.</li> +</ul></li> +</ul> +</li> +<li>R43: +2006-06-23 mid-term mailing. +<ul> +<li><b>Summary:</b><ul> +<li>124 open issues, up by 14.</li> +<li>463 closed issues, down by 1.</li> +<li>587 issues total, up by 13.</li> +</ul></li> +<li><b>Details:</b><ul> +<li>Added new issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#575">575</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#576">576</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#577">577</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#578">578</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#579">579</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#580">580</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#581">581</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#582">582</a>.</li> +<li>Reopened <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#255">255</a>.</li> +<li>Moved issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#520">520</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#541">541</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#544">544</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#569">569</a> to Tentatively Ready.</li> +</ul></li> +</ul> +</li> +<li>R42: +2006-04-21 post-Berlin mailing. +<ul> +<li><b>Summary:</b><ul> +<li>110 open issues, down by 16.</li> +<li>464 closed issues, up by 24.</li> +<li>574 issues total, up by 8.</li> +</ul></li> +<li><b>Details:</b><ul> +<li>Added new issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#567">567</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#568">568</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#569">569</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#570">570</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#571">571</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#572">572</a>.</li> +<li>Moved issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#499">499</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#501">501</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#506">506</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#509">509</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#510">510</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#511">511</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#513">513</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#514">514</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#517">517</a> to NAD.</li> +<li>Moved issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#502">502</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#503">503</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#515">515</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#516">516</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#522">522</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#525">525</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#526">526</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#527">527</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#528">528</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#529">529</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#532">532</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#536">536</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#539">539</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#548">548</a> to Open.</li> +<li>Moved issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#504">504</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#512">512</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#521">521</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#530">530</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#531">531</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#535">535</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#537">537</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#538">538</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#540">540</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#549">549</a> to Ready.</li> +<li>Moved issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#247">247</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#294">294</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#362">362</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#369">369</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#371">371</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#376">376</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#384">384</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#475">475</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#478">478</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#495">495</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#497">497</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#505">505</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#507">507</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#508">508</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#519">519</a> to WP.</li> +<li>Moved issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#534">534</a> to Review.</li> +</ul></li> +</ul> +</li> +<li>R41: +2006-02-24 pre-Berlin mailing. +<ul> +<li><b>Summary:</b><ul> +<li>126 open issues, up by 31.</li> +<li>440 closed issues, up by 0.</li> +<li>566 issues total, up by 31.</li> +</ul></li> +<li><b>Details:</b><ul> +<li>Added new issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#536">536</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#537">537</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#538">538</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#539">539</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#540">540</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#541">541</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#542">542</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#543">543</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#544">544</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#545">545</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#546">546</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#547">547</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#548">548</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#549">549</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#550">550</a> ,<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#551">551</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#552">552</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#553">553</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#554">554</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#555">555</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#556">556</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#557">557</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#558">558</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#559">559</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#560">560</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#561">561</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#562">562</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#563">563</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#564">564</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#565">565</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#566">566</a>.</li> +<li>Moved <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#342">342</a> from Ready to Open.</li> +<li>Reopened <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#309">309</a>.</li> +</ul></li> +</ul> +</li> +<li>R40: +2005-12-16 mid-term mailing. +<ul> +<li><b>Summary:</b><ul> +<li>95 open issues.</li> +<li>440 closed issues.</li> +<li>535 issues total.</li> +</ul></li> +<li><b>Details:</b><ul> +<li>Added new issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#529">529</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#530">530</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#531">531</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#532">532</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#533">533</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#534">534</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#535">535</a>.</li> +</ul></li> +</ul> +</li> +<li>R39: +2005-10-14 post-Mont Tremblant mailing. +Added new issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#526">526</a>-<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#528">528</a>. +Moved issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#280">280</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#461">461</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#464">464</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#465">465</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#467">467</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#468">468</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#474">474</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#496">496</a> from Ready to WP as per the vote from Mont Tremblant. +Moved issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#247">247</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#294">294</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#342">342</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#362">362</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#369">369</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#371">371</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#376">376</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#384">384</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#475">475</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#478">478</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#495">495</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#497">497</a> from Review to Ready. +Moved issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#498">498</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#504">504</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#506">506</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#509">509</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#510">510</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#511">511</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#512">512</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#513">513</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#514">514</a> from New to Open. +Moved issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#505">505</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#507">507</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#508">508</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#519">519</a> from New to Ready. +Moved issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#500">500</a> from New to NAD. +Moved issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#518">518</a> from New to Review. +</li> +<li>R38: +2005-07-03 pre-Mont Tremblant mailing. +Merged open TR1 issues in <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#504">504</a>-<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#522">522</a>. +Added new issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#523">523</a>-<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#523">523</a> +</li> +<li>R37: +2005-06 mid-term mailing. +Added new issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#498">498</a>-<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#503">503</a>. +</li> +<li>R36: +2005-04 post-Lillehammer mailing. All issues in "ready" status except +for <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#454">454</a> were moved to "DR" status, and all issues +previously in "DR" status were moved to "WP". +</li> +<li>R35: +2005-03 pre-Lillehammer mailing. +</li> +<li>R34: +2005-01 mid-term mailing. Added new issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#488">488</a>-<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#494">494</a>. +</li> +<li>R33: +2004-11 post-Redmond mailing. Reflects actions taken in Redmond. +</li> +<li>R32: +2004-09 pre-Redmond mailing: reflects new proposed resolutions and +new issues received after the 2004-07 mailing. Added +new issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#479">479</a>-<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#481">481</a>. +</li> +<li>R31: +2004-07 mid-term mailing: reflects new proposed resolutions and +new issues received after the post-Sydney mailing. Added +new issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#463">463</a>-<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#478">478</a>. +</li> +<li>R30: +Post-Sydney mailing: reflects decisions made at the Sydney meeting. +Voted all "Ready" issues from R29 into the working paper. +Added new issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#460">460</a>-<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#462">462</a>. +</li> +<li>R29: +Pre-Sydney mailing. Added new issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#441">441</a>-<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#457">457</a>. +</li> +<li>R28: +Post-Kona mailing: reflects decisions made at the Kona meeting. +Added new issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#432">432</a>-<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#440">440</a>. +</li> +<li>R27: +Pre-Kona mailing. Added new issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#404">404</a>-<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#431">431</a>. +</li> +<li>R26: +Post-Oxford mailing: reflects decisions made at the Oxford meeting. +All issues in Ready status were voted into DR status. All issues in +DR status were voted into WP status. +</li> +<li>R25: +Pre-Oxford mailing. Added new issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#390">390</a>-<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#402">402</a>. +</li> +<li>R24: +Post-Santa Cruz mailing: reflects decisions made at the Santa Cruz +meeting. All Ready issues from R23 with the exception of <iref ref="253">, which has been given a new proposed resolution, were +moved to DR status. Added new issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#383">383</a>-<iref ref="389">. (Issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#387">387</a>-<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#389">389</a> were discussed +at the meeting.) Made progress on issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#225">225</a>, <iref ref="226">, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#229">229</a>: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#225">225</a> and <iref ref="229"> have been moved to Ready status, and the only remaining +concerns with <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#226">226</a> involve wording. +</iref></iref></iref></iref></li> +<li>R23: +Pre-Santa Cruz mailing. Added new issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#367">367</a>-<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#382">382</a>. +Moved issues in the TC to TC status. +</li> +<li>R22: +Post-Curaçao mailing. Added new issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#362">362</a>-<iref ref="366">. +</iref></li> +<li>R21: +Pre-Curaçao mailing. Added new issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#351">351</a>-<iref ref="361">. +</iref></li> +<li>R20: +Post-Redmond mailing; reflects actions taken in Redmond. Added +new issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#336">336</a>-<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#350">350</a>, of which issues +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#347">347</a>-<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#350">350</a> were added since Redmond, hence +not discussed at the meeting. + +All Ready issues were moved to DR status, with the exception of issues +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#284">284</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#241">241</a>, and <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#267">267</a>. + +Noteworthy issues discussed at Redmond include +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#120">120</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#202">202</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#226">226</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#233">233</a>, +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#270">270</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#253">253</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#254">254</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#323">323</a>. +</li> +<li>R19: +Pre-Redmond mailing. Added new issues +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#323">323</a>-<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#335">335</a>. +</li> +<li>R18: +Post-Copenhagen mailing; reflects actions taken in Copenhagen. +Added new issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#312">312</a>-<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#317">317</a>, and discussed +new issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#271">271</a>-<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#314">314</a>. + +Changed status of issues +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#103">103</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#118">118</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#136">136</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#153">153</a> +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#165">165</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#171">171</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#183">183</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#184">184</a> +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#185">185</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#186">186</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#214">214</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#221">221</a> +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#234">234</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#237">237</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#243">243</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#248">248</a> +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#251">251</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#252">252</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#256">256</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#260">260</a> +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#261">261</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#262">262</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#263">263</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#265">265</a> +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#268">268</a> +to DR. + +Changed status of issues +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#49">49</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#109">109</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#117">117</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#182">182</a> +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#228">228</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#230">230</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#232">232</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#235">235</a> +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#238">238</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#241">241</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#242">242</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#250">250</a> +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#259">259</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#264">264</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#266">266</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#267">267</a> +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#271">271</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#272">272</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#273">273</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#275">275</a> +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#281">281</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#284">284</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#285">285</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#286">286</a> +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#288">288</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#292">292</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#295">295</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#297">297</a> +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#298">298</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#301">301</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#303">303</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#306">306</a> +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#307">307</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#308">308</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#312">312</a> +to Ready. + +Closed issues +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#111">111</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#277">277</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#279">279</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#287">287</a> +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#289">289</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#293">293</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#302">302</a> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#313">313</a> +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#314">314</a> +as NAD. + +</li> +<li>R17: +Pre-Copenhagen mailing. Converted issues list to XML. Added proposed +resolutions for issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#49">49</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#76">76</a>, <iref ref="91">, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#235">235</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#250">250</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#267">267</a>. +Added new issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#278">278</a>-<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#311">311</a>. +</iref></li> +<li>R16: +post-Toronto mailing; reflects actions taken in Toronto. Added new +issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#265">265</a>-<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#277">277</a>. Changed status of issues +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#3">3</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#8">8</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#9">9</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#19">19</a>, +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#26">26</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#31">31</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#61">61</a>, +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#63">63</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#86">86</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#108">108</a>, +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#112">112</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#114">114</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#115">115</a>, +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#122">122</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#127">127</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#129">129</a>, +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#134">134</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#137">137</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#142">142</a>, +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#144">144</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#146">146</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#147">147</a>, +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#159">159</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#164">164</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#170">170</a>, +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#181">181</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#199">199</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#208">208</a>, +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#209">209</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#210">210</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#211">211</a>, +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#212">212</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#217">217</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#220">220</a>, +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#222">222</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#223">223</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#224">224</a>, +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#227">227</a> to "DR". Reopened issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#23">23</a>. Reopened +issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#187">187</a>. Changed issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#2">2</a> and +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#4">4</a> to NAD. Fixed a typo in issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#17">17</a>. Fixed +issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#70">70</a>: signature should be changed both places it +appears. Fixed issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#160">160</a>: previous version didn't fix +the bug in enough places. +</li> +<li>R15: +pre-Toronto mailing. Added issues +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#233">233</a>-<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#264">264</a>. Some small HTML formatting +changes so that we pass Weblint tests. +</li> +<li>R14: +post-Tokyo II mailing; reflects committee actions taken in +Tokyo. Added issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#228">228</a> to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#232">232</a>. (00-0019R1/N1242) +</li> +<li>R13: +pre-Tokyo II updated: Added issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#212">212</a> to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#227">227</a>. +</li> +<li>R12: +pre-Tokyo II mailing: Added issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#199">199</a> to +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#211">211</a>. Added "and paragraph 5" to the proposed resolution +of issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#29">29</a>. Add further rationale to issue +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#178">178</a>. +</li> +<li>R11: +post-Kona mailing: Updated to reflect LWG and full committee actions +in Kona (99-0048/N1224). Note changed resolution of issues +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#4">4</a> and <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#38">38</a>. Added issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#196">196</a> +to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#198">198</a>. Closed issues list split into "defects" and +"closed" documents. Changed the proposed resolution of issue +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#4">4</a> to NAD, and changed the wording of proposed resolution +of issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#38">38</a>. +</li> +<li>R10: +pre-Kona updated. Added proposed resolutions <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#83">83</a>, +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#86">86</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#91">91</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#92">92</a>, +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#109">109</a>. Added issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#190">190</a> to +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#195">195</a>. (99-0033/D1209, 14 Oct 99) +</li> +<li>R9: +pre-Kona mailing. Added issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#140">140</a> to +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#189">189</a>. Issues list split into separate "active" and +"closed" documents. (99-0030/N1206, 25 Aug 99) +</li> +<li>R8: +post-Dublin mailing. Updated to reflect LWG and full committee actions +in Dublin. (99-0016/N1193, 21 Apr 99) +</li> +<li>R7: +pre-Dublin updated: Added issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#130">130</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#131">131</a>, +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#132">132</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#133">133</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#134">134</a>, +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#135">135</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#136">136</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#137">137</a>, +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#138">138</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#139">139</a> (31 Mar 99) +</li> +<li>R6: +pre-Dublin mailing. Added issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#127">127</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#128">128</a>, +and <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#129">129</a>. (99-0007/N1194, 22 Feb 99) +</li> +<li>R5: +update issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#103">103</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#112">112</a>; added issues +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#114">114</a> to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#126">126</a>. Format revisions to prepare +for making list public. (30 Dec 98) +</li> +<li>R4: +post-Santa Cruz II updated: Issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#110">110</a>, +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#111">111</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#112">112</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#113">113</a> added, several +issues corrected. (22 Oct 98) +</li> +<li>R3: +post-Santa Cruz II: Issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#94">94</a> to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#109">109</a> +added, many issues updated to reflect LWG consensus (12 Oct 98) +</li> +<li>R2: +pre-Santa Cruz II: Issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#73">73</a> to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#93">93</a> added, +issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#17">17</a> updated. (29 Sep 98) +</li> +<li>R1: +Correction to issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#55">55</a> resolution, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#60">60</a> code +format, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#64">64</a> title. (17 Sep 98) +</li> +</ul> + +<h2>Defect Reports</h2> +<hr> +<h3><a name="1"></a>1. C library linkage editing oversight</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17.6.2.3 [using.linkage] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Beman Dawes <b>Opened:</b> 1997-11-16 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The change specified in the proposed resolution below did not make +it into the Standard. This change was accepted in principle at the +London meeting, and the exact wording below was accepted at the +Morristown meeting.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change 17.6.2.3 [using.linkage] paragraph 2 +from:</p> + +<blockquote> + <p>It is unspecified whether a name from the Standard C library + declared with external linkage has either extern "C" or + extern "C++" linkage.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>to:</p> + +<blockquote> + <p>Whether a name from the Standard C library declared with external + linkage has extern "C" or extern "C++" linkage + is implementation defined. It is recommended that an implementation + use extern "C++" linkage for this purpose.</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="3"></a>3. Atexit registration during atexit() call is not described</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.5 [support.start.term] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Steve Clamage <b>Opened:</b> 1997-12-12 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#support.start.term">issues</a> in [support.start.term].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>We appear not to have covered all the possibilities of + exit processing with respect to +atexit registration. <br> +<br> +Example 1: (C and C++)</p> + +<pre> #include <stdlib.h> + void f1() { } + void f2() { atexit(f1); } + + int main() + { + atexit(f2); // the only use of f2 + return 0; // for C compatibility + }</pre> + +<p>At program exit, f2 gets called due to its registration in +main. Running f2 causes f1 to be newly registered during the exit +processing. Is this a valid program? If so, what are its +semantics?</p> + +<p> +Interestingly, neither the C standard, nor the C++ draft standard nor +the forthcoming C9X Committee Draft says directly whether you can +register a function with atexit during exit processing.</p> + +<p> +All 3 standards say that functions are run in reverse order of their +registration. Since f1 is registered last, it ought to be run first, +but by the time it is registered, it is too late to be first.</p> + +<p>If the program is valid, the standards are self-contradictory about +its semantics.</p> + +<p>Example 2: (C++ only)</p> + +<pre> + void F() { static T t; } // type T has a destructor + + int main() + { + atexit(F); // the only use of F + } +</pre> + +<p>Function F registered with atexit has a local static variable t, +and F is called for the first time during exit processing. A local +static object is initialized the first time control flow passes +through its definition, and all static objects are destroyed during +exit processing. Is the code valid? If so, what are its semantics?</p> + +<p> +Section 18.3 "Start and termination" says that if a function +F is registered with atexit before a static object t is initialized, F +will not be called until after t's destructor completes.</p> + +<p> +In example 2, function F is registered with atexit before its local +static object O could possibly be initialized. On that basis, it must +not be called by exit processing until after O's destructor +completes. But the destructor cannot be run until after F is called, +since otherwise the object could not be constructed in the first +place.</p> + +<p>If the program is valid, the standard is self-contradictory about +its semantics.</p> + +<p>I plan to submit Example 1 as a public comment on the C9X CD, with +a recommendation that the results be undefined. (Alternative: make it +unspecified. I don't think it is worthwhile to specify the case where +f1 itself registers additional functions, each of which registers +still more functions.)</p> + +<p>I think we should resolve the situation in the whatever way the C +committee decides. </p> + +<p>For Example 2, I recommend we declare the results undefined.</p> + +<p><i>[See reflector message lib-6500 for further discussion.]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change section 18.3/8 from:</p> +<blockquote><p> + First, objects with static storage duration are destroyed and + functions registered by calling atexit are called. Objects with + static storage duration are destroyed in the reverse order of the + completion of their constructor. (Automatic objects are not + destroyed as a result of calling exit().) Functions registered with + atexit are called in the reverse order of their registration. A + function registered with atexit before an object obj1 of static + storage duration is initialized will not be called until obj1's + destruction has completed. A function registered with atexit after + an object obj2 of static storage duration is initialized will be + called before obj2's destruction starts. +</p></blockquote> +<p>to:</p> +<blockquote><p> + First, objects with static storage duration are destroyed and + functions registered by calling atexit are called. Non-local objects + with static storage duration are destroyed in the reverse order of + the completion of their constructor. (Automatic objects are not + destroyed as a result of calling exit().) Functions registered with + atexit are called in the reverse order of their registration, except + that a function is called after any previously registered functions + that had already been called at the time it was registered. A + function registered with atexit before a non-local object obj1 of + static storage duration is initialized will not be called until + obj1's destruction has completed. A function registered with atexit + after a non-local object obj2 of static storage duration is + initialized will be called before obj2's destruction starts. A local + static object obj3 is destroyed at the same time it would be if a + function calling the obj3 destructor were registered with atexit at + the completion of the obj3 constructor. +</p></blockquote> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>See 99-0039/N1215, October 22, 1999, by Stephen D. Clamage for the analysis +supporting to the proposed resolution.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="5"></a>5. String::compare specification questionable</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.4.6.8 [string::swap] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Jack Reeves <b>Opened:</b> 1997-12-11 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#string::swap">issues</a> in [string::swap].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#87">87</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>At the very end of the basic_string class definition is the signature: int +compare(size_type pos1, size_type n1, const charT* s, size_type n2 = npos) const; In the +following text this is defined as: returns +basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>(*this,pos1,n1).compare( +basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>(s,n2); </p> + +<p>Since the constructor basic_string(const charT* s, size_type n, const Allocator& a += Allocator()) clearly requires that s != NULL and n < npos and further states that it +throws length_error if n == npos, it appears the compare() signature above should always +throw length error if invoked like so: str.compare(1, str.size()-1, s); where 's' is some +null terminated character array. </p> + +<p>This appears to be a typo since the obvious intent is to allow either the call above or +something like: str.compare(1, str.size()-1, s, strlen(s)-1); </p> + +<p>This would imply that what was really intended was two signatures int compare(size_type +pos1, size_type n1, const charT* s) const int compare(size_type pos1, size_type n1, const +charT* s, size_type n2) const; each defined in terms of the corresponding constructor. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Replace the compare signature in 21.4 [basic.string] +(at the very end of the basic_string synopsis) which reads:</p> + +<blockquote> + <p><tt>int compare(size_type pos1, size_type n1,<br> + const charT* s, + size_type n2 = npos) const;</tt></p> +</blockquote> + +<p>with:</p> + +<blockquote> + <p><tt>int compare(size_type pos1, size_type n1,<br> + const charT* s) const;<br> + int compare(size_type pos1, size_type n1,<br> + const charT* s, + size_type n2) const;</tt></p> +</blockquote> + +<p>Replace the portion of 21.4.6.8 [string::swap] +paragraphs 5 and 6 which read:</p> + +<blockquote> + <p><tt>int compare(size_type pos, size_type n1,<br> + charT * s, size_type n2 + = npos) const;<br> + </tt>Returns:<tt><br> + basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>(*this, pos, n1).compare(<br> + + basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>( s, n2))</tt></p> +</blockquote> + +<p>with:</p> + +<blockquote> + <p><tt>int compare(size_type pos, size_type n1,<br> + const charT * s) const;<br> + </tt>Returns:<tt><br> + basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>(*this, pos, n1).compare(<br> + + basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>( s ))<br> + <br> + int compare(size_type pos, size_type n1,<br> + const charT * s, + size_type n2) const;<br> + </tt>Returns:<tt><br> + basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>(*this, pos, n1).compare(<br> + + basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>( s, n2))</tt></p> +</blockquote> + +<p>Editors please note that in addition to splitting the signature, the third argument +becomes const, matching the existing synopsis.</p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>While the LWG dislikes adding signatures, this is a clear defect in +the Standard which must be fixed. The same problem was also +identified in issues 7 (item 5) and 87.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="7"></a>7. String clause minor problems</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21 [strings] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 1997-12-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#strings">issues</a> in [strings].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>(1) In 21.4.6.4 [string::insert], the description of template +<class InputIterator> insert(iterator, InputIterator, +InputIterator) makes no sense. It refers to a member function that +doesn't exist. It also talks about the return value of a void +function. </p> + +<p>(2) Several versions of basic_string::replace don't appear in the +class synopsis. </p> + +<p>(3) basic_string::push_back appears in the synopsis, but is never +described elsewhere. In the synopsis its argument is const charT, +which doesn't makes much sense; it should probably be charT, or +possible const charT&. </p> + +<p>(4) basic_string::pop_back is missing. </p> + +<p>(5) int compare(size_type pos, size_type n1, charT* s, size_type n2 += npos) make no sense. First, it's const charT* in the synopsis and +charT* in the description. Second, given what it says in RETURNS, +leaving out the final argument will always result in an exception +getting thrown. This is paragraphs 5 and 6 of +21.4.6.8 [string::swap]</p> + +<p>(6) In table 37, in section 21.2.1 [char.traits.require], +there's a note for X::move(s, p, n). It says "Copies correctly +even where p is in [s, s+n)". This is correct as far as it goes, +but it doesn't go far enough; it should also guarantee that the copy +is correct even where s in in [p, p+n). These are two orthogonal +guarantees, and neither one follows from the other. Both guarantees +are necessary if X::move is supposed to have the same sort of +semantics as memmove (which was clearly the intent), and both +guarantees are necessary if X::move is actually supposed to be +useful. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>ITEM 1: In 21.3.5.4 [lib.string::insert], change paragraph 16 to <br> +<br> + EFFECTS: Equivalent to insert(p - begin(), basic_string(first, last)).<br> +<br> +ITEM 2: Not a defect; the Standard is clear.. There are ten versions of replace() in +the synopsis, and ten versions in 21.3.5.6 [lib.string::replace].<br> +<br> +ITEM 3: Change the declaration of push_back in the string synopsis (21.3, +[lib.basic.string]) from:</p> + +<p> void push_back(const charT)<br> +<br> +to<br> +<br> + void push_back(charT)<br> +<br> +Add the following text immediately after 21.3.5.2 [lib.string::append], paragraph 10.<br> +<br> + void basic_string::push_back(charT c);<br> + EFFECTS: Equivalent to append(static_cast<size_type>(1), c);<br> +<br> +ITEM 4: Not a defect. The omission appears to have been deliberate.<br> +<br> +ITEM 5: Duplicate; see issue 5 (and 87).<br> +<br> +ITEM 6: In table 37, Replace:<br> +<br> + "Copies correctly even where p is in [s, s+n)."<br> +<br> +with:<br> +<br> + "Copies correctly even where the ranges [p, p+n) and [s, +s+n) overlap."</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="8"></a>8. Locale::global lacks guarantee</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.3.1.5 [locale.statics] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 1997-12-24 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>It appears there's an important guarantee missing from clause +22. We're told that invoking locale::global(L) sets the C locale if L +has a name. However, we're not told whether or not invoking +setlocale(s) sets the global C++ locale. </p> + +<p>The intent, I think, is that it should not, but I can't find any +such words anywhere. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Add a sentence at the end of 22.3.1.5 [locale.statics], +paragraph 2: </p> + +<blockquote> + <p>No library function other than <tt>locale::global()</tt> shall affect + the value returned by <tt>locale()</tt>. </p> + +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="9"></a>9. Operator new(0) calls should not yield the same pointer</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.6.1 [new.delete] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Steve Clamage <b>Opened:</b> 1998-01-04 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#new.delete">issues</a> in [new.delete].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Scott Meyers, in a comp.std.c++ posting: I just noticed that +section 3.7.3.1 of CD2 seems to allow for the possibility that all +calls to operator new(0) yield the same pointer, an implementation +technique specifically prohibited by ARM 5.3.3.Was this prohibition +really lifted? Does the FDIS agree with CD2 in the regard? [Issues +list maintainer's note: the IS is the same.]</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change the last paragraph of 3.7.3 from:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>Any allocation and/or deallocation functions defined in a C++ program shall + conform to the semantics specified in 3.7.3.1 and 3.7.3.2.</p> +</blockquote> +<p>to:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>Any allocation and/or deallocation functions defined in a C++ program, + including the default versions in the library, shall conform to the semantics + specified in 3.7.3.1 and 3.7.3.2.</p> +</blockquote> +<p>Change 3.7.3.1/2, next-to-last sentence, from :</p> +<blockquote> + <p>If the size of the space requested is zero, the value returned shall not be + a null pointer value (4.10).</p> +</blockquote> +<p>to:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>Even if the size of the space requested is zero, the request can fail. If + the request succeeds, the value returned shall be a non-null pointer value + (4.10) p0 different from any previously returned value p1, unless that value + p1 was since passed to an operator delete.</p> +</blockquote> +<p>5.3.4/7 currently reads:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>When the value of the expression in a direct-new-declarator is zero, the + allocation function is called to allocate an array with no elements. The + pointer returned by the new-expression is non-null. [Note: If the library + allocation function is called, the pointer returned is distinct from the + pointer to any other object.]</p> +</blockquote> +<p>Retain the first sentence, and delete the remainder.</p> +<p>18.5.1 currently has no text. Add the following:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>Except where otherwise specified, the provisions of 3.7.3 apply to the + library versions of operator new and operator delete.</p> +</blockquote> +<p>To 18.5.1.3, add the following text:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>The provisions of 3.7.3 do not apply to these reserved placement forms of + operator new and operator delete.</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>See 99-0040/N1216, October 22, 1999, by Stephen D. Clamage for the analysis +supporting to the proposed resolution.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="11"></a>11. Bitset minor problems</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.5 [template.bitset] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 1998-01-22 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#template.bitset">issues</a> in [template.bitset].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>(1) bitset<>::operator[] is mentioned in the class synopsis (23.3.5), but it is +not documented in 23.3.5.2. </p> + +<p>(2) The class synopsis only gives a single signature for bitset<>::operator[], +reference operator[](size_t pos). This doesn't make much sense. It ought to be overloaded +on const. reference operator[](size_t pos); bool operator[](size_t pos) const. </p> + +<p>(3) Bitset's stream input function (23.3.5.3) ought to skip all whitespace before +trying to extract 0s and 1s. The standard doesn't explicitly say that, though. This should +go in the Effects clause.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>ITEMS 1 AND 2:<br> +<br> +In the bitset synopsis (20.5 [template.bitset]), +replace the member function <br> +<br> +<tt> reference operator[](size_t pos);<br> +</tt><br> +with the two member functions<br> +<br> +<tt> bool operator[](size_t pos) const; <br> + reference operator[](size_t pos); <br> +</tt><br> +Add the following text at the end of 20.5.2 [bitset.members], +immediately after paragraph 45:</p> + +<blockquote> + <p><tt>bool operator[](size_t pos) const;</tt><br> + Requires: pos is valid<br> + Throws: nothing<br> + Returns: <tt>test(pos)</tt><br> + <br> + <tt>bitset<N>::reference operator[](size_t pos);</tt> <br> + Requires: pos is valid<br> + Throws: nothing<br> + Returns: An object of type <tt>bitset<N>::reference</tt> such that <tt>(*this)[pos] + == this->test(pos)</tt>, and such that <tt>(*this)[pos] = val</tt> is equivalent to <tt>this->set(pos, + val);</tt></p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The LWG believes Item 3 is not a defect. "Formatted +input" implies the desired semantics. See 27.7.1.2 [istream.formatted]. +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="13"></a>13. Eos refuses to die</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.1.2.3 [istream::extractors] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> William M. Miller <b>Opened:</b> 1998-03-03 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#istream::extractors">issues</a> in [istream::extractors].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>In 27.6.1.2.3, there is a reference to "eos", which is +the only one in the whole draft (at least using Acrobat search), so +it's undefined. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 27.7.1.2.3 [istream::extractors], replace "eos" with +"charT()"</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="14"></a>14. Locale::combine should be const</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.3.1.3 [locale.members] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#locale.members">issues</a> in [locale.members].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>locale::combine is the only member function of locale (other than constructors and +destructor) that is not const. There is no reason for it not to be const, and good reasons +why it should have been const. Furthermore, leaving it non-const conflicts with 22.1.1 +paragraph 6: "An instance of a locale is immutable." </p> + +<p>History: this member function originally was a constructor. it happened that the +interface it specified had no corresponding language syntax, so it was changed to a member +function. As constructors are never const, there was no "const" in the interface +which was transformed into member "combine". It should have been added at that +time, but the omission was not noticed. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 22.3.1 [locale] and also in 22.3.1.3 [locale.members], add +"const" to the declaration of member combine: </p> +<blockquote> + <pre>template <class Facet> locale combine(const locale& other) const; </pre> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="15"></a>15. Locale::name requirement inconsistent</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.3.1.3 [locale.members] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#locale.members">issues</a> in [locale.members].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>locale::name() is described as returning a string that can be passed to a locale +constructor, but there is no matching constructor. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 22.3.1.3 [locale.members], paragraph 5, replace +"<tt>locale(name())</tt>" with +"<tt>locale(name().c_str())</tt>". +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="16"></a>16. Bad ctype_byname<char> decl</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.1.4 [locale.codecvt] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#locale.codecvt">issues</a> in [locale.codecvt].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The new virtual members ctype_byname<char>::do_widen and do_narrow did not get +edited in properly. Instead, the member do_widen appears four times, with wrong argument +lists. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>The correct declarations for the overloaded members +<tt>do_narrow</tt> and <tt>do_widen</tt> should be copied +from 22.4.1.3 [facet.ctype.special].</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="17"></a>17. Bad bool parsing</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.2.1.2 [facet.num.get.virtuals] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#facet.num.get.virtuals">issues</a> in [facet.num.get.virtuals].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>This section describes the process of parsing a text boolean value from the input +stream. It does not say it recognizes either of the sequences "true" or +"false" and returns the corresponding bool value; instead, it says it recognizes +only one of those sequences, and chooses which according to the received value of a +reference argument intended for returning the result, and reports an error if the other +sequence is found. (!) Furthermore, it claims to get the names from the ctype<> +facet rather than the numpunct<> facet, and it examines the "boolalpha" +flag wrongly; it doesn't define the value "loc"; and finally, it computes +wrongly whether to use numeric or "alpha" parsing.<br> +<br> +I believe the correct algorithm is "as if": </p> + +<pre> // in, err, val, and str are arguments. + err = 0; + const numpunct<charT>& np = use_facet<numpunct<charT> >(str.getloc()); + const string_type t = np.truename(), f = np.falsename(); + bool tm = true, fm = true; + size_t pos = 0; + while (tm && pos < t.size() || fm && pos < f.size()) { + if (in == end) { err = str.eofbit; } + bool matched = false; + if (tm && pos < t.size()) { + if (!err && t[pos] == *in) matched = true; + else tm = false; + } + if (fm && pos < f.size()) { + if (!err && f[pos] == *in) matched = true; + else fm = false; + } + if (matched) { ++in; ++pos; } + if (pos > t.size()) tm = false; + if (pos > f.size()) fm = false; + } + if (tm == fm || pos == 0) { err |= str.failbit; } + else { val = tm; } + return in;</pre> + +<p>Notice this works reasonably when the candidate strings are both empty, or equal, or +when one is a substring of the other. The proposed text below captures the logic of the +code above.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 22.4.2.1.2 [facet.num.get.virtuals], in the first line of paragraph 14, +change "&&" to "&".</p> + +<p>Then, replace paragraphs 15 and 16 as follows:</p> + +<blockquote> + + <p>Otherwise target sequences are determined "as if" by + calling the members <tt>falsename()</tt> and + <tt>truename()</tt> of the facet obtained by + <tt>use_facet<numpunct<charT> >(str.getloc())</tt>. + Successive characters in the range <tt>[in,end)</tt> (see + [lib.sequence.reqmts]) are obtained and matched against + corresponding positions in the target sequences only as necessary to + identify a unique match. The input iterator <tt>in</tt> is + compared to <tt>end</tt> only when necessary to obtain a + character. If and only if a target sequence is uniquely matched, + <tt>val</tt> is set to the corresponding value.</p> + +</blockquote> + +<blockquote> + <p>The <tt>in</tt> iterator is always left pointing one position beyond the last character + successfully matched. If <tt>val</tt> is set, then err is set to <tt>str.goodbit</tt>; or to + <tt>str.eofbit</tt> if, when seeking another character to match, it is found that + <tt>(in==end)</tt>. If <tt>val</tt> is not set, then <i>err</i> is set to <tt>str.failbit</tt>; or to + <tt>(str.failbit|str.eofbit)</tt>if + the reason for the failure was that <tt>(in==end)</tt>. [Example: for targets + <tt>true</tt>:"a" and <tt>false</tt>:"abb", the input sequence "a" yields + <tt>val==true</tt> and <tt>err==str.eofbit</tt>; the input sequence "abc" yields + <tt>err=str.failbit</tt>, with <tt>in</tt> ending at the 'c' element. For targets + <tt>true</tt>:"1" + and <tt>false</tt>:"0", the input sequence "1" yields <tt>val==true</tt> + and <tt>err=str.goodbit</tt>. For empty targets (""), any input sequence yields + <tt>err==str.failbit</tt>. --end example]</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="18"></a>18. Get(...bool&) omitted</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.2.1.1 [facet.num.get.members] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#facet.num.get.members">issues</a> in [facet.num.get.members].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>In the list of num_get<> non-virtual members on page 22-23, the member +that parses bool values was omitted from the list of definitions of non-virtual +members, though it is listed in the class definition and the corresponding +virtual is listed everywhere appropriate. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Add at the beginning of 22.4.2.1.1 [facet.num.get.members] +another get member for bool&, copied from the entry in +22.4.2.1 [locale.num.get].</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="19"></a>19. "Noconv" definition too vague</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.1.4 [locale.codecvt] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#locale.codecvt">issues</a> in [locale.codecvt].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#10">10</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In the definitions of codecvt<>::do_out and do_in, they are +specified to return noconv if "no conversion is +needed". This definition is too vague, and does not say +normatively what is done with the buffers. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change the entry for noconv in the table under paragraph 4 in section +22.4.1.4.2 [locale.codecvt.virtuals] to read: +</p> +<blockquote> + <p><tt>noconv</tt>: <tt>internT</tt> and <tt>externT</tt> are the same type, + and input sequence is identical to converted sequence.</p> +</blockquote> +<p>Change the Note in paragraph 2 to normative text as follows:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>If returns <tt>noconv</tt>, <tt>internT</tt> and <tt>externT</tt> are the + same type and the converted sequence is identical to the input sequence <tt>[from,from_next)</tt>. + <tt>to_next</tt> is set equal to <tt>to</tt>, the value of <tt>state</tt> is + unchanged, and there are no changes to the values in <tt>[to, to_limit)</tt>.</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="20"></a>20. Thousands_sep returns wrong type</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.3.1.2 [facet.numpunct.virtuals] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The synopsis for numpunct<>::do_thousands_sep, and the +definition of numpunct<>::thousands_sep which calls it, specify +that it returns a value of type char_type. Here it is erroneously +described as returning a "string_type". </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 22.4.3.1.2 [facet.numpunct.virtuals], above paragraph 2, change +"string_type" to "char_type". </p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="21"></a>21. Codecvt_byname<> instantiations</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.3.1.1.1 [locale.category] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#locale.category">issues</a> in [locale.category].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>In the second table in the section, captioned "Required +instantiations", the instantiations for codecvt_byname<> +have been omitted. These are necessary to allow users to construct a +locale by name from facets. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Add in 22.3.1.1.1 [locale.category] to the table captioned +"Required instantiations", in the category "ctype" +the lines </p> + +<blockquote> + <pre>codecvt_byname<char,char,mbstate_t>, +codecvt_byname<wchar_t,char,mbstate_t> </pre> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="22"></a>22. Member open vs. flags</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.9.1.9 [ifstream.members] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#ifstream.members">issues</a> in [ifstream.members].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The description of basic_istream<>::open leaves unanswered questions about how it +responds to or changes flags in the error status for the stream. A strict reading +indicates that it ignores the bits and does not change them, which confuses users who do +not expect eofbit and failbit to remain set after a successful open. There are three +reasonable resolutions: 1) status quo 2) fail if fail(), ignore eofbit 3) clear failbit +and eofbit on call to open(). </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 27.9.1.9 [ifstream.members] paragraph 3, <i>and</i> in 27.9.1.13 [ofstream.members] paragraph 3, under open() effects, add a footnote: +</p> + +<blockquote> + <p>A successful open does not change the error state.</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>This may seem surprising to some users, but it's just an instance +of a general rule: error flags are never cleared by the +implementation. The only way error flags are are ever cleared is if +the user explicitly clears them by hand.</p> + +<p>The LWG believed that preserving this general rule was +important enough so that an exception shouldn't be made just for this +one case. The resolution of this issue clarifies what the LWG +believes to have been the original intent.</p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="23"></a>23. Num_get overflow result</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.2.1.2 [facet.num.get.virtuals] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#facet.num.get.virtuals">issues</a> in [facet.num.get.virtuals].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The current description of numeric input does not account for the +possibility of overflow. This is an implicit result of changing the +description to rely on the definition of scanf() (which fails to +report overflow), and conflicts with the documented behavior of +traditional and current implementations. </p> + +<p>Users expect, when reading a character sequence that results in a +value unrepresentable in the specified type, to have an error +reported. The standard as written does not permit this. </p> + +<p><b>Further comments from Dietmar:</b></p> + +<p> +I don't feel comfortable with the proposed resolution to issue 23: It +kind of simplifies the issue to much. Here is what is going on: +</p> + +<p> +Currently, the behavior of numeric overflow is rather counter intuitive +and hard to trace, so I will describe it briefly: +</p> + +<ul> + <li> + According to 22.4.2.1.2 [facet.num.get.virtuals] + paragraph 11 <tt>failbit</tt> is set if <tt>scanf()</tt> would + return an input error; otherwise a value is converted to the rules + of <tt>scanf</tt>. + </li> + <li> + <tt>scanf()</tt> is defined in terms of <tt>fscanf()</tt>. + </li> + <li> + <tt>fscanf()</tt> returns an input failure if during conversion no + character matching the conversion specification could be extracted + before reaching EOF. This is the only reason for <tt>fscanf()</tt> + to fail due to an input error and clearly does not apply to the case + of overflow. + </li> + <li> + Thus, the conversion is performed according to the rules of + <tt>fscanf()</tt> which basically says that <tt>strtod</tt>, + <tt>strtol()</tt>, etc. are to be used for the conversion. + </li> + <li> + The <tt>strtod()</tt>, <tt>strtol()</tt>, etc. functions consume as + many matching characters as there are and on overflow continue to + consume matching characters but also return a value identical to + the maximum (or minimum for signed types if there was a leading minus) + value of the corresponding type and set <tt>errno</tt> to <tt>ERANGE</tt>. + </li> + <li> + Thus, according to the current wording in the standard, overflows + can be detected! All what is to be done is to check <tt>errno</tt> + after reading an element and, of course, clearing <tt>errno</tt> + before trying a conversion. With the current wording, it can be + detected whether the overflow was due to a positive or negative + number for signed types. + </li> +</ul> + +<p><b>Further discussion from Redmond:</b></p> + +<p>The basic problem is that we've defined our behavior, +including our error-reporting behavior, in terms of C90. However, +C90's method of reporting overflow in scanf is not technically an +"input error". The <tt>strto_*</tt> functions are more precise.</p> + +<p>There was general consensus that <tt>failbit</tt> should be set +upon overflow. We considered three options based on this:</p> +<ol> +<li>Set failbit upon conversion error (including overflow), and + don't store any value.</li> +<li>Set failbit upon conversion error, and also set <tt>errno</tt> to + indicated the precise nature of the error.</li> +<li>Set failbit upon conversion error. If the error was due to + overflow, store +-numeric_limits<T>::max() as an + overflow indication.</li> +</ol> + +<p>Straw poll: (1) 5; (2) 0; (3) 8.</p> + + +<p>Discussed at Lillehammer. General outline of what we want the + solution to look like: we want to say that overflow is an error, and + provide a way to distinguish overflow from other kinds of errors. + Choose candidate field the same way scanf does, but don't describe + the rest of the process in terms of format. If a finite input field + is too large (positive or negative) to be represented as a finite + value, then set failbit and assign the nearest representable value. + Bill will provide wording.</p> + +<p> +Discussed at Toronto: +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2327.pdf">N2327</a> +is in alignment with the direction we wanted to go with in Lillehammer. Bill +to work on. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +Change 22.4.2.1.2 [facet.num.get.virtuals], end of p3: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<b>Stage 3:</b> <del>The result of stage 2 processing can be one of</del> +<ins>The sequence of <tt>char</tt>s accumulated in stage 2 (the field) is +converted to a numeric value by the rules of one of the functions declared +in the header <tt><cstdlib></tt>:</ins> +</p> +<ul> +<li> +<del>A sequence of <tt>char</tt>s has been accumulated in stage 2 that is +converted (according to the rules of <tt>scanf</tt>) to a value of the +type of <i>val</i>. This value is stored in <i>val</i> and <tt>ios_base::goodbit</tt> is +stored in <i>err</i>.</del> +<ins>For a signed integer value, the function <tt>strtoll</tt>.</ins> +</li> +<li> +<del>The sequence of <tt>char</tt>s accumulated in stage 2 would have caused +<tt>scanf</tt> to report an input failure. <tt>ios_base::failbit</tt> is +assigned to <i>err</i>.</del> +<ins>For an unsigned integer value, the function <tt>strtoull</tt>.</ins> +</li> +<li> +<ins>For a floating-point value, the function <tt>strtold</tt>.</ins> +</li> +</ul> +<p> +<ins>The numeric value to be stored can be one of:</ins> +</p> +<ul> +<li><ins>zero, if the conversion function fails to convert the entire field. +<tt>ios_base::failbit</tt> is assigned to err.</ins></li> +<li><ins>the most positive representable value, if the field represents a value +too large positive to be represented in <i>val</i>. <tt>ios_base::failbit</tt> is assigned +to <i>err</i>.</ins></li> +<li><ins>the most negative representable value (zero for unsigned integer), if +the field represents a value too large negative to be represented in <i>val</i>. +<tt>ios_base::failbit</tt> is assigned to <i>err</i>.</ins></li> +<li><ins>the converted value, otherwise.</ins></li> +</ul> + +<p><ins> +The resultant numeric value is stored in <i>val</i>. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 22.4.2.1.2 [facet.num.get.virtuals], p6-p7: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>iter_type do_get(iter_type <i>in</i>, iter_type <i>end</i>, ios_base& <i>str</i>, + ios_base::iostate& <i>err</i>, bool& <i>val</i>) const; +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +-6- <i>Effects:</i> If +<tt>(<i>str</i>.flags()&ios_base::boolalpha)==0</tt> then input +proceeds as it would for a <tt>long</tt> except that if a value is being +stored into <i>val</i>, the value is determined according to the +following: If the value to be stored is 0 then <tt>false</tt> is stored. +If the value is 1 then <tt>true</tt> is stored. Otherwise +<del><tt><i>err</i>|=ios_base::failbit</tt> is performed and no value</del> <ins><tt>true</tt></ins> is +stored<del>.</del> <ins>and <tt>ios_base::failbit</tt> is assigned to <i>err</i>.</ins> +</p> +<p> +-7- Otherwise target sequences are determined "as if" by calling the +members <tt>falsename()</tt> and <tt>truename()</tt> of the facet +obtained by <tt>use_facet<numpunct<charT> +>(<i>str</i>.getloc())</tt>. Successive characters in the range +<tt>[<i>in</i>,<i>end</i>)</tt> (see 23.1.1) are obtained and matched +against corresponding positions in the target sequences only as +necessary to identify a unique match. The input iterator <i>in</i> is +compared to <i>end</i> only when necessary to obtain a character. If <del>and +only if</del> a target sequence is uniquely matched, <i>val</i> is set to the +corresponding value. <ins>Otherwise <tt>false</tt> is stored and <tt>ios_base::failbit</tt> +is assigned to <i>err</i>.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="24"></a>24. "do_convert" doesn't exist</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.1.4 [locale.codecvt] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#locale.codecvt">issues</a> in [locale.codecvt].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#72">72</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The description of codecvt<>::do_out and do_in mentions a +symbol "do_convert" which is not defined in the +standard. This is a leftover from an edit, and should be "do_in +and do_out". </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 22.4.1.4 [locale.codecvt], paragraph 3, change +"do_convert" to "do_in or do_out". Also, in 22.4.1.4.2 [locale.codecvt.virtuals], change "do_convert()" to "do_in +or do_out". </p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="25"></a>25. String operator<< uses width() value wrong</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.4.8.9 [string.io] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#string.io">issues</a> in [string.io].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#67">67</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>In the description of operator<< applied to strings, the standard says that uses +the smaller of os.width() and str.size(), to pad "as described in stage 3" +elsewhere; but this is inconsistent, as this allows no possibility of space for padding. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change 21.4.8.9 [string.io] paragraph 4 from:<br> +<br> + "... where <tt>n</tt> is the smaller of <tt>os.width()</tt> and <tt>str.size()</tt>; +..."<br> +<br> +to: <br> +<br> + "... where <tt>n</tt> is the larger of <tt>os.width()</tt> and <tt>str.size()</tt>; +..."</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="26"></a>26. Bad sentry example</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.1.1.3 [istream::sentry] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#istream::sentry">issues</a> in [istream::sentry].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>In paragraph 6, the code in the example: </p> + +<pre> template <class charT, class traits = char_traits<charT> > + basic_istream<charT,traits>::sentry( + basic_istream<charT,traits>& is, bool noskipws = false) { + ... + int_type c; + typedef ctype<charT> ctype_type; + const ctype_type& ctype = use_facet<ctype_type>(is.getloc()); + while ((c = is.rdbuf()->snextc()) != traits::eof()) { + if (ctype.is(ctype.space,c)==0) { + is.rdbuf()->sputbackc (c); + break; + } + } + ... + }</pre> + +<p>fails to demonstrate correct use of the facilities described. In +particular, it fails to use traits operators, and specifies incorrect +semantics. (E.g. it specifies skipping over the first character in the +sequence without examining it.) </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Remove the example above from 27.7.1.1.3 [istream::sentry] +paragraph 6.</p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The originally proposed replacement code for the example was not +correct. The LWG tried in Kona and again in Tokyo to correct it +without success. In Tokyo, an implementor reported that actual working +code ran over one page in length and was quite complicated. The LWG +decided that it would be counter-productive to include such a lengthy +example, which might well still contain errors.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="27"></a>27. String::erase(range) yields wrong iterator</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.4.6.5 [string::erase] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#string::erase">issues</a> in [string::erase].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The string::erase(iterator first, iterator last) is specified to return an element one +place beyond the next element after the last one erased. E.g. for the string +"abcde", erasing the range ['b'..'d') would yield an iterator for element 'e', +while 'd' has not been erased. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 21.4.6.5 [string::erase], paragraph 10, change: </p> + +<blockquote> + <p>Returns: an iterator which points to the element immediately following _last_ prior to + the element being erased. </p> +</blockquote> + +<p>to read </p> + +<blockquote> + <p>Returns: an iterator which points to the element pointed to by _last_ prior to the + other elements being erased. </p> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="28"></a>28. Ctype<char>is ambiguous</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.1.3.2 [facet.ctype.char.members] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#facet.ctype.char.members">issues</a> in [facet.ctype.char.members].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#236">236</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The description of the vector form of ctype<char>::is can be interpreted to mean +something very different from what was intended. Paragraph 4 says </p> + +<blockquote> + <p>Effects: The second form, for all *p in the range [low, high), assigns vec[p-low] to + table()[(unsigned char)*p]. </p> +</blockquote> + +<p>This is intended to copy the value indexed from table()[] into the place identified in +vec[]. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change 22.4.1.3.2 [facet.ctype.char.members], paragraph 4, to read </p> + +<blockquote> + <p>Effects: The second form, for all *p in the range [low, high), assigns into vec[p-low] + the value table()[(unsigned char)*p]. </p> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="29"></a>29. Ios_base::init doesn't exist</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.4.1 [narrow.stream.objects] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#narrow.stream.objects">issues</a> in [narrow.stream.objects].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Sections 27.4.1 [narrow.stream.objects] and 27.4.2 [wide.stream.objects] mention +a function ios_base::init, which is not defined. Probably they mean +basic_ios<>::init, defined in 27.5.4.1 [basic.ios.cons], +paragraph 3. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>[R12: modified to include paragraph 5.]</p> + +<p>In 27.4.1 [narrow.stream.objects] paragraph 2 and 5, change </p> + +<blockquote> + <p>ios_base::init </p> +</blockquote> + +<p>to </p> + +<blockquote> + <p>basic_ios<char>::init </p> +</blockquote> + +<p>Also, make a similar change in 27.4.2 [wide.stream.objects] except it +should read </p> + +<blockquote> + <p>basic_ios<wchar_t>::init </p> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="30"></a>30. Wrong header for LC_*</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.3.1.1.1 [locale.category] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#locale.category">issues</a> in [locale.category].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Paragraph 2 implies that the C macros LC_CTYPE etc. are defined in <cctype>, +where they are in fact defined elsewhere to appear in <clocale>. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 22.3.1.1.1 [locale.category], paragraph 2, change +"<cctype>" to read "<clocale>". </p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="31"></a>31. Immutable locale values</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.3.1 [locale] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#locale">issues</a> in [locale].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#378">378</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Paragraph 6, says "An instance of <tt>locale</tt> is +<i>immutable</i>; once a facet reference is obtained from it, +...". This has caused some confusion, because locale variables +are manifestly assignable. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 22.3.1 [locale] replace paragraph 6</p> + +<blockquote> + <p>An instance of <tt>locale</tt> is immutable; once a facet + reference is obtained from it, that reference remains usable as long + as the locale value itself exists.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>with</p> + +<blockquote> + <p>Once a facet reference is obtained from a locale object by + calling use_facet<>, that reference remains usable, and the + results from member functions of it may be cached and re-used, as + long as some locale object refers to that facet.</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="32"></a>32. Pbackfail description inconsistent</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.6.2.4.4 [streambuf.virt.pback] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The description of the required state before calling virtual member +basic_streambuf<>::pbackfail requirements is inconsistent with the conditions +described in 27.5.2.2.4 [lib.streambuf.pub.pback] where member sputbackc calls it. +Specifically, the latter says it calls pbackfail if: </p> + +<p> traits::eq(c,gptr()[-1]) is false </p> + +<p>where pbackfail claims to require: </p> + +<p> traits::eq(*gptr(),traits::to_char_type(c)) returns false </p> + +<p>It appears that the pbackfail description is wrong. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 27.6.2.4.4 [streambuf.virt.pback], paragraph 1, change:</p> + +<blockquote> + <p>"<tt>traits::eq(*gptr(),traits::to_char_type( c))</tt>"</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>to </p> + +<blockquote> + <p>"<tt>traits::eq(traits::to_char_type(c),gptr()[-1])</tt>" + </p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>Note deliberate reordering of arguments for clarity in addition to the correction of +the argument value.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="33"></a>33. Codecvt<> mentions from_type</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.1.4 [locale.codecvt] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#locale.codecvt">issues</a> in [locale.codecvt].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#43">43</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>In the table defining the results from do_out and do_in, the specification for the +result <i>error</i> says </p> + +<blockquote> + <p>encountered a from_type character it could not convert </p> +</blockquote> + +<p>but from_type is not defined. This clearly is intended to be an externT for do_in, or +an internT for do_out. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 22.4.1.4.2 [locale.codecvt.virtuals] paragraph 4, replace the definition +in the table for the case of _error_ with </p> + +<blockquote> + <p>encountered a character in <tt>[from,from_end)</tt> that it could not convert. </p> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="34"></a>34. True/falsename() not in ctype<></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.2.2.2 [facet.num.put.virtuals] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#facet.num.put.virtuals">issues</a> in [facet.num.put.virtuals].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>In paragraph 19, Effects:, members truename() and falsename are used from facet +ctype<charT>, but it has no such members. Note that this is also a problem in +22.2.2.1.2, addressed in (4). </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 22.4.2.2.2 [facet.num.put.virtuals], paragraph 19, in the Effects: +clause for member put(...., bool), replace the initialization of the +string_type value s as follows: </p> + +<blockquote> + <pre>const numpunct& np = use_facet<numpunct<charT> >(loc); +string_type s = val ? np.truename() : np.falsename(); </pre> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="35"></a>35. No manipulator unitbuf in synopsis</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.5 [iostreams.base] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#iostreams.base">issues</a> in [iostreams.base].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>In 27.5.5.1 [fmtflags.manip], we have a definition for a manipulator +named "unitbuf". Unlike other manipulators, it's not listed +in synopsis. Similarly for "nounitbuf". </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Add to the synopsis for <ios> in 27.5 [iostreams.base], after +the entry for "nouppercase", the prototypes: </p> + +<blockquote> + <pre>ios_base& unitbuf(ios_base& str); +ios_base& nounitbuf(ios_base& str); </pre> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="36"></a>36. Iword & pword storage lifetime omitted</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.5.2.5 [ios.base.storage] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#ios.base.storage">issues</a> in [ios.base.storage].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>In the definitions for ios_base::iword and pword, the lifetime of the storage is +specified badly, so that an implementation which only keeps the last value stored appears +to conform. In particular, it says: </p> + +<p>The reference returned may become invalid after another call to the object's iword +member with a different index ... </p> + +<p>This is not idle speculation; at least one implementation was done this way. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Add in 27.5.2.5 [ios.base.storage], in both paragraph 2 and also in +paragraph 4, replace the sentence: </p> + +<blockquote> + <p>The reference returned may become invalid after another call to the object's iword + [pword] member with a different index, after a call to its copyfmt member, or when the + object is destroyed. </p> +</blockquote> + +<p>with: </p> + +<blockquote> + <p>The reference returned is invalid after any other operations on the object. However, + the value of the storage referred to is retained, so that until the next call to copyfmt, + calling iword [pword] with the same index yields another reference to the same value. </p> +</blockquote> + +<p>substituting "iword" or "pword" as appropriate. </p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="37"></a>37. Leftover "global" reference</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.3.1 [locale] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#locale">issues</a> in [locale].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>In the overview of locale semantics, paragraph 4, is the sentence </p> + +<blockquote> + <p>If Facet is not present in a locale (or, failing that, in the global locale), it throws + the standard exception bad_cast. </p> +</blockquote> + +<p>This is not supported by the definition of use_facet<>, and represents semantics +from an old draft. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 22.3.1 [locale], paragraph 4, delete the parenthesized +expression </p> + +<blockquote> + <p>(or, failing that, in the global locale) </p> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="38"></a>38. Facet definition incomplete</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.3.2 [locale.global.templates] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>It has been noticed by Esa Pulkkinen that the definition of +"facet" is incomplete. In particular, a class derived from +another facet, but which does not define a member <i>id</i>, cannot +safely serve as the argument <i>F</i> to use_facet<F>(loc), +because there is no guarantee that a reference to the facet instance +stored in <i>loc</i> is safely convertible to <i>F</i>. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In the definition of std::use_facet<>(), replace the text in paragraph 1 which +reads: </p> + +<blockquote> + <p>Get a reference to a facet of a locale. </p> +</blockquote> + +<p>with: </p> + +<blockquote> + <p>Requires: <tt>Facet</tt> is a facet class whose definition + contains the public static member <tt>id</tt> as defined in 22.3.1.1.2 [locale.facet]. </p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Kona: strike as overspecification the text "(not inherits)" +from the original resolution, which read "... whose definition +contains (not inherits) the public static member +<tt>id</tt>..." +]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="39"></a>39. istreambuf_iterator<>::operator++(int) definition garbled</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 24.6.3.4 [istreambuf.iterator::op++] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Following the definition of istreambuf_iterator<>::operator++(int) in paragraph +3, the standard contains three lines of garbage text left over from a previous edit. </p> + +<blockquote> + <pre>istreambuf_iterator<charT,traits> tmp = *this; +sbuf_->sbumpc(); +return(tmp); </pre> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 24.6.3.4 [istreambuf.iterator::op++], delete the three lines of code at the +end of paragraph 3. </p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="40"></a>40. Meaningless normative paragraph in examples</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.8 [facets.examples] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#facets.examples">issues</a> in [facets.examples].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Paragraph 3 of the locale examples is a description of part of an +implementation technique that has lost its referent, and doesn't mean +anything. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Delete 22.4.8 [facets.examples] paragraph 3 which begins "This +initialization/identification system depends...", or (at the +editor's option) replace it with a place-holder to keep the paragraph +numbering the same. </p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="41"></a>41. Ios_base needs clear(), exceptions()</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.5.2 [ios.base] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#ios.base">issues</a> in [ios.base].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#157">157</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The description of ios_base::iword() and pword() in 27.5.2.4 [ios.members.static], say that if they fail, they "set badbit, +which may throw an exception". However, ios_base offers no +interface to set or to test badbit; those interfaces are defined in +basic_ios<>. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change the description in 27.5.2.5 [ios.base.storage] in +paragraph 2, and also in paragraph 4, as follows. Replace</p> + +<blockquote> + <p>If the function fails it sets badbit, which may throw an exception.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>with</p> + +<blockquote> + <p>If the function fails, and <tt>*this</tt> is a base sub-object of + a <tt>basic_ios<></tt> object or sub-object, the effect is + equivalent to calling <tt>basic_ios<>::setstate(badbit)</tt> + on the derived object (which may throw <tt>failure</tt>).</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[Kona: LWG reviewed wording; setstate(failbit) changed to +setstate(badbit).]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="42"></a>42. String ctors specify wrong default allocator</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.4 [basic.string] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#basic.string">issues</a> in [basic.string].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The basic_string<> copy constructor: </p> + +<pre>basic_string(const basic_string& str, size_type pos = 0, + size_type n = npos, const Allocator& a = Allocator()); </pre> + +<p>specifies an Allocator argument default value that is +counter-intuitive. The natural choice for a the allocator to copy from +is str.get_allocator(). Though this cannot be expressed in +default-argument notation, overloading suffices. </p> + +<p>Alternatively, the other containers in Clause 23 (deque, list, +vector) do not have this form of constructor, so it is inconsistent, +and an evident source of confusion, for basic_string<> to have +it, so it might better be removed. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> In 21.4 [basic.string], replace the declaration of the copy +constructor as follows: </p> + +<blockquote> + <pre>basic_string(const basic_string& str); +basic_string(const basic_string& str, size_type pos, size_type n = npos, + const Allocator& a = Allocator());</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p>In 21.4.1 [string.require], replace the copy constructor declaration +as above. Add to paragraph 5, Effects:</p> + +<blockquote> + <p>In the first form, the Allocator value used is copied from + <tt>str.get_allocator()</tt>.</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The LWG believes the constructor is actually broken, rather than +just an unfortunate design choice.</p> + +<p>The LWG considered two other possible resolutions:</p> + +<p>A. In 21.4 [basic.string], replace the declaration of the copy +constructor as follows:</p> + +<blockquote> + <pre>basic_string(const basic_string& str, size_type pos = 0, + size_type n = npos); +basic_string(const basic_string& str, size_type pos, + size_type n, const Allocator& a); </pre> +</blockquote> + +<p>In 21.4.1 [string.require], replace the copy constructor declaration +as above. Add to paragraph 5, Effects: </p> + +<blockquote> + <p>When no <tt>Allocator</tt> argument is provided, the string is constructed using the + value <tt>str.get_allocator()</tt>. </p> +</blockquote> + +<p>B. In 21.4 [basic.string], and also in 21.4.1 [string.require], replace +the declaration of the copy constructor as follows: </p> + +<blockquote> + <pre>basic_string(const basic_string& str, size_type pos = 0, + size_type n = npos); </pre> +</blockquote> + +<p>The proposed resolution reflects the original intent of the LWG. It +was also noted by Pete Becker that this fix "will cause +a small amount of existing code to now work correctly."</p> + +<p><i>[ +Kona: issue editing snafu fixed - the proposed resolution now correctly +reflects the LWG consensus. +]</i></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="44"></a>44. Iostreams use operator== on int_type values</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27 [input.output] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#input.output">issues</a> in [input.output].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Many of the specifications for iostreams specify that character +values or their int_type equivalents are compared using operators == +or !=, though in other places traits::eq() or traits::eq_int_type is +specified to be used throughout. This is an inconsistency; we should +change uses of == and != to use the traits members instead. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p><i>[Pre-Kona: Dietmar supplied wording]</i></p> + + +<p>List of changes to clause 27:</p> +<ol> +<li> + In lib.basic.ios.members paragraph 13 (postcondition clause for + 'fill(cT)') change + +<blockquote><pre> fillch == fill() +</pre></blockquote> + + to + +<blockquote><pre> traits::eq(fillch, fill()) +</pre></blockquote> + + +</li> +<li> + In lib.istream.unformatted paragraph 7 (effects clause for + 'get(cT,streamsize,cT)'), third bullet, change + +<blockquote><pre> c == delim for the next available input character c +</pre></blockquote> + + to + +<blockquote><pre> traits::eq(c, delim) for the next available input character c +</pre></blockquote> + +</li> +<li> + In lib.istream.unformatted paragraph 12 (effects clause for + 'get(basic_streambuf<cT,Tr>&,cT)'), third bullet, change + +<blockquote><pre> c == delim for the next available input character c +</pre></blockquote> + + to + +<blockquote><pre> traits::eq(c, delim) for the next available input character c +</pre></blockquote> + +</li> +<li> + In lib.istream.unformatted paragraph 17 (effects clause for + 'getline(cT,streamsize,cT)'), second bullet, change + +<blockquote><pre> c == delim for the next available input character c +</pre></blockquote> + + to + +<blockquote><pre> traits::eq(c, delim) for the next available input character c + </pre></blockquote> + +</li> +<li> + In lib.istream.unformatted paragraph 24 (effects clause for + 'ignore(int,int_type)'), second bullet, change + +<blockquote><pre> c == delim for the next available input character c +</pre></blockquote> + + to + +<blockquote><pre> traits::eq_int_type(c, delim) for the next available input + character c +</pre></blockquote> + +</li> +<li> + In lib.istream.unformatted paragraph 25 (notes clause for + 'ignore(int,int_type)'), second bullet, change + +<blockquote><pre> The last condition will never occur if delim == traits::eof() +</pre></blockquote> + + to + +<blockquote><pre> The last condition will never occur if + traits::eq_int_type(delim, traits::eof()). +</pre></blockquote> + +</li> +<li> + In lib.istream.sentry paragraph 6 (example implementation for the + sentry constructor) change + +<blockquote><pre> while ((c = is.rdbuf()->snextc()) != traits::eof()) { +</pre></blockquote> + + to + +<blockquote><pre> while (!traits::eq_int_type(c = is.rdbuf()->snextc(), traits::eof())) { +</pre></blockquote> + +</li> +</ol> + +<p>List of changes to Chapter 21:</p> + +<ol> +<li> + In lib.string::find paragraph 1 (effects clause for find()), + second bullet, change + +<blockquote><pre> at(xpos+I) == str.at(I) for all elements ... +</pre></blockquote> + + to + +<blockquote><pre> traits::eq(at(xpos+I), str.at(I)) for all elements ... +</pre></blockquote> + +</li> +<li> + In lib.string::rfind paragraph 1 (effects clause for rfind()), + second bullet, change + +<blockquote><pre> at(xpos+I) == str.at(I) for all elements ... +</pre></blockquote> + + to + +<blockquote><pre> traits::eq(at(xpos+I), str.at(I)) for all elements ... +</pre></blockquote> + +</li> +<li> + In lib.string::find.first.of paragraph 1 (effects clause for + find_first_of()), second bullet, change + +<blockquote><pre> at(xpos+I) == str.at(I) for all elements ... +</pre></blockquote> + + to + +<blockquote><pre> traits::eq(at(xpos+I), str.at(I)) for all elements ... +</pre></blockquote> + +</li> +<li> + In lib.string::find.last.of paragraph 1 (effects clause for + find_last_of()), second bullet, change + +<blockquote><pre> at(xpos+I) == str.at(I) for all elements ... +</pre></blockquote> + + to + +<blockquote><pre> traits::eq(at(xpos+I), str.at(I)) for all elements ... +</pre></blockquote> + +</li> +<li> + In lib.string::find.first.not.of paragraph 1 (effects clause for + find_first_not_of()), second bullet, change + +<blockquote><pre> at(xpos+I) == str.at(I) for all elements ... +</pre></blockquote> + + to + +<blockquote><pre> traits::eq(at(xpos+I), str.at(I)) for all elements ... +</pre></blockquote> +</li> + +<li> + In lib.string::find.last.not.of paragraph 1 (effects clause for + find_last_not_of()), second bullet, change + +<blockquote><pre> at(xpos+I) == str.at(I) for all elements ... +</pre></blockquote> + + to + +<blockquote><pre> traits::eq(at(xpos+I), str.at(I)) for all elements ... +</pre></blockquote> +</li> + +<li> + In lib.string.ios paragraph 5 (effects clause for getline()), + second bullet, change + +<blockquote><pre> c == delim for the next available input character c +</pre></blockquote> + + to + +<blockquote><pre> traits::eq(c, delim) for the next available input character c +</pre></blockquote> +</li> + +</ol> + +<p>Notes:</p> +<ul> +<li> + Fixing this issue highlights another sloppyness in + lib.istream.unformatted paragraph 24: this clause mentions a "character" + which is then compared to an 'int_type' (see item 5. in the list + below). It is not clear whether this requires explicit words and + if so what these words are supposed to be. A similar issue exists, + BTW, for operator*() of istreambuf_iterator which returns the result + of sgetc() as a character type (see lib.istreambuf.iterator::op* + paragraph 1), and for operator++() of istreambuf_iterator which + passes the result of sbumpc() to a constructor taking a char_type + (see lib.istreambuf.iterator::operator++ paragraph 3). Similarily, the + assignment operator ostreambuf_iterator passes a char_type to a function + taking an int_type (see lib.ostreambuf.iter.ops paragraph 1). +</li> +<li> + It is inconsistent to use comparisons using the traits functions in + Chapter 27 while not using them in Chapter 21, especially as some + of the inconsistent uses actually involve streams (eg. getline() on + streams). To avoid leaving this issue open still longer due to this + inconsistency (it is open since 1998), a list of changes to Chapter + 21 is below. +</li> +<li> + In Chapter 24 there are several places with statements like "the end + of stream is reached (streambuf_type::sgetc() returns traits::eof())" + (lib.istreambuf.iterator paragraph 1, lib.ostreambuf.iter.ops + paragraph 5). It is unclear whether these should be clarified to use + traits::eq_int_type() for detecting traits::eof(). +</li> +</ul> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="46"></a>46. Minor Annex D errors</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> D.9 [depr.str.strstreams] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Brendan Kehoe <b>Opened:</b> 1998-06-01 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p><p>See lib-6522 and edit-814.</p> + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change D.9.1 [depr.strstreambuf] (since streambuf is a typedef of +basic_streambuf<char>) from:</p> + +<pre> virtual streambuf<char>* setbuf(char* s, streamsize n);</pre> + +<p>to:</p> + +<pre> virtual streambuf* setbuf(char* s, streamsize n);</pre> + +<p>In D.9.4 [depr.strstream] insert the semicolon now missing after +int_type:</p> + +<pre> namespace std { + class strstream + : public basic_iostream<char> { + public: + // Types + typedef char char_type; + typedef typename char_traits<char>::int_type int_type + typedef typename char_traits<char>::pos_type pos_type;</pre> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="47"></a>47. Imbue() and getloc() Returns clauses swapped</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.5.2.3 [ios.base.locales] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 1998-06-21 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#ios.base.locales">issues</a> in [ios.base.locales].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Section 27.4.2.3 specifies how imbue() and getloc() work. That +section has two RETURNS clauses, and they make no sense as +stated. They make perfect sense, though, if you swap them. Am I +correct in thinking that paragraphs 2 and 4 just got mixed up by +accident?</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 27.5.2.3 [ios.base.locales] swap paragraphs 2 and 4.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="48"></a>48. Use of non-existent exception constructor</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.5.2.1.1 [ios::failure] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 1998-06-21 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#ios::failure">issues</a> in [ios::failure].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>27.4.2.1.1, paragraph 2, says that class failure initializes the +base class, exception, with exception(msg). Class exception (see +18.6.1) has no such constructor.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Replace 27.5.2.1.1 [ios::failure], paragraph 2, with</p> + +<blockquote> + <p>EFFECTS: Constructs an object of class <tt>failure</tt>.</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="49"></a>49. Underspecification of ios_base::sync_with_stdio</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.5.2.4 [ios.members.static] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 1998-06-21 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Two problems</p> + +<p>(1) 27.4.2.4 doesn't say what ios_base::sync_with_stdio(f) +returns. Does it return f, or does it return the previous +synchronization state? My guess is the latter, but the standard +doesn't say so.</p> + +<p>(2) 27.4.2.4 doesn't say what it means for streams to be +synchronized with stdio. Again, of course, I can make some +guesses. (And I'm unhappy about the performance implications of those +guesses, but that's another matter.)</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change the following sentence in 27.5.2.4 [ios.members.static] +returns clause from:</p> + +<blockquote> + <p><tt>true</tt> if the standard iostream objects (27.3) are + synchronized and otherwise returns <tt>false</tt>.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>to:</p> + +<blockquote> + <p><tt>true</tt> if the previous state of the standard iostream + objects (27.3) was synchronized and otherwise returns + <tt>false</tt>.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>Add the following immediately after 27.5.2.4 [ios.members.static], +paragraph 2:</p> + +<blockquote> +<p>When a standard iostream object str is <i>synchronized</i> with a +standard stdio stream f, the effect of inserting a character c by</p> +<pre> fputc(f, c); +</pre> + +<p>is the same as the effect of</p> +<pre> str.rdbuf()->sputc(c); +</pre> + +<p>for any sequence of characters; the effect of extracting a +character c by</p> +<pre> c = fgetc(f); +</pre> + +<p>is the same as the effect of:</p> +<pre> c = str.rdbuf()->sbumpc(c); +</pre> + +<p>for any sequences of characters; and the effect of pushing +back a character c by</p> +<pre> ungetc(c, f); +</pre> + +<p>is the same as the effect of</p> +<pre> str.rdbuf()->sputbackc(c); +</pre> + +<p>for any sequence of characters. [<i>Footnote</i>: This implies +that operations on a standard iostream object can be mixed arbitrarily +with operations on the corresponding stdio stream. In practical +terms, synchronization usually means that a standard iostream object +and a standard stdio object share a buffer. <i>--End Footnote</i>]</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[pre-Copenhagen: PJP and Matt contributed the definition +of "synchronization"]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[post-Copenhagen: proposed resolution was revised slightly: +text was added in the non-normative footnote to say that operations +on the two streams can be mixed arbitrarily.]</i></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="50"></a>50. Copy constructor and assignment operator of ios_base</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.5.2 [ios.base] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 1998-06-21 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#ios.base">issues</a> in [ios.base].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>As written, ios_base has a copy constructor and an assignment +operator. (Nothing in the standard says it doesn't have one, and all +classes have copy constructors and assignment operators unless you +take specific steps to avoid them.) However, nothing in 27.4.2 says +what the copy constructor and assignment operator do. </p> + +<p>My guess is that this was an oversight, that ios_base is, like +basic_ios, not supposed to have a copy constructor or an assignment +operator.</p> + +<p> +Jerry Schwarz comments: Yes, its an oversight, but in the opposite +sense to what you're suggesting. At one point there was a definite +intention that you could copy ios_base. It's an easy way to save the +entire state of a stream for future use. As you note, to carry out +that intention would have required a explicit description of the +semantics (e.g. what happens to the iarray and parray stuff). +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 27.5.2 [ios.base], class ios_base, specify the copy +constructor and operator= members as being private.</p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The LWG believes the difficulty of specifying correct semantics +outweighs any benefit of allowing ios_base objects to be copyable.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="51"></a>51. Requirement to not invalidate iterators missing</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2 [container.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> David Vandevoorde <b>Opened:</b> 1998-06-23 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#container.requirements">issues</a> in [container.requirements].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The std::sort algorithm can in general only sort a given sequence +by moving around values. The list<>::sort() member on the other +hand could move around values or just update internal pointers. Either +method can leave iterators into the list<> dereferencable, but +they would point to different things. </p> + +<p>Does the FDIS mandate anywhere which method should be used for +list<>::sort()?</p> + +<p>Matt Austern comments:</p> + +<p>I think you've found an omission in the standard. </p> + +<p>The library working group discussed this point, and there was +supposed to be a general requirement saying that list, set, map, +multiset, and multimap may not invalidate iterators, or change the +values that iterators point to, except when an operation does it +explicitly. So, for example, insert() doesn't invalidate any iterators +and erase() and remove() only invalidate iterators pointing to the +elements that are being erased. </p> + +<p>I looked for that general requirement in the FDIS, and, while I +found a limited form of it for the sorted associative containers, I +didn't find it for list. It looks like it just got omitted. </p> + +<p>The intention, though, is that list<>::sort does not +invalidate any iterators and does not change the values that any +iterator points to. There would be no reason to have the member +function otherwise.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Add a new paragraph at the end of 23.1:</p> + +<blockquote> + <p>Unless otherwise specified (either explicitly or by defining a function in terms of + other functions), invoking a container member function or passing a container as an + argument to a library function shall not invalidate iterators to, or change the values of, + objects within that container. </p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>This was US issue CD2-23-011; it was accepted in London but the +change was not made due to an editing oversight. The wording in the +proposed resolution below is somewhat updated from CD2-23-011, +particularly the addition of the phrase "or change the values +of"</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="52"></a>52. Small I/O problems</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.5.3.2 [fpos.operations] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 1998-06-23 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#fpos.operations">issues</a> in [fpos.operations].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>First, 27.5.4.1 [basic.ios.cons], table 89. This is pretty obvious: +it should be titled "basic_ios<>() effects", not +"ios_base() effects". </p> + +<p>[The second item is a duplicate; see issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#6">6</a> for +resolution.]</p> + +<p>Second, 27.5.3.2 [fpos.operations] table 88 . There are a couple +different things wrong with it, some of which I've already discussed +with Jerry, but the most obvious mechanical sort of error is that it +uses expressions like P(i) and p(i), without ever defining what sort +of thing "i" is. +</p> + +<p>(The other problem is that it requires support for streampos +arithmetic. This is impossible on some systems, i.e. ones where file +position is a complicated structure rather than just a number. Jerry +tells me that the intention was to require syntactic support for +streampos arithmetic, but that it wasn't actually supposed to do +anything meaningful except on platforms, like Unix, where genuine +arithmetic is possible.) </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change 27.5.4.1 [basic.ios.cons] table 89 title from +"ios_base() effects" to "basic_ios<>() +effects". </p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="53"></a>53. Basic_ios destructor unspecified</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.5.4.1 [basic.ios.cons] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 1998-06-23 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#basic.ios.cons">issues</a> in [basic.ios.cons].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>There's nothing in 27.4.4 saying what basic_ios's destructor does. +The important question is whether basic_ios::~basic_ios() destroys +rdbuf().</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Add after 27.5.4.1 [basic.ios.cons] paragraph 2:</p> + +<blockquote> + <p><tt>virtual ~basic_ios();</tt></p> + <p><b>Notes</b>: The destructor does not destroy <tt>rdbuf()</tt>.</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The LWG reviewed the additional question of whether or not +<tt>rdbuf(0)</tt> may set <tt>badbit</tt>. The answer is +clearly yes; it may be set via <tt>clear()</tt>. See 27.5.4.2 [basic.ios.members], paragraph 6. This issue was reviewed at length +by the LWG, which removed from the original proposed resolution a +footnote which incorrectly said "<tt>rdbuf(0)</tt> does not set +<tt>badbit</tt>".</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="54"></a>54. Basic_streambuf's destructor</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.6.2.1 [streambuf.cons] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 1998-06-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#streambuf.cons">issues</a> in [streambuf.cons].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The class synopsis for basic_streambuf shows a (virtual) +destructor, but the standard doesn't say what that destructor does. My +assumption is that it does nothing, but the standard should say so +explicitly. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Add after 27.6.2.1 [streambuf.cons] paragraph 2:</p> + +<blockquote> + <p><tt>virtual ~basic_streambuf();</tt></p> + <p><b>Effects</b>: None.</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="55"></a>55. Invalid stream position is undefined</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27 [input.output] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 1998-06-26 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#input.output">issues</a> in [input.output].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Several member functions in clause 27 are defined in certain +circumstances to return an "invalid stream position", a term +that is defined nowhere in the standard. Two places (27.5.2.4.2, +paragraph 4, and 27.8.1.4, paragraph 15) contain a cross-reference to +a definition in _lib.iostreams.definitions_, a nonexistent +section. </p> + +<p>I suspect that the invalid stream position is just supposed to be +pos_type(-1). Probably best to say explicitly in (for example) +27.5.2.4.2 that the return value is pos_type(-1), rather than to use +the term "invalid stream position", define that term +somewhere, and then put in a cross-reference. </p> + +<p>The phrase "invalid stream position" appears ten times in +the C++ Standard. In seven places it refers to a return value, and it +should be changed. In three places it refers to an argument, and it +should not be changed. Here are the three places where "invalid +stream position" should not be changed:</p> + +<blockquote> + <p>27.8.1.4 [stringbuf.virtuals], paragraph 14<br> + 27.9.1.5 [filebuf.virtuals], paragraph 14<br> + D.9.1.3 [depr.strstreambuf.virtuals], paragraph 17 + </p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 27.6.2.4.2 [streambuf.virt.buffer], paragraph 4, change "Returns an +object of class pos_type that stores an invalid stream position +(_lib.iostreams.definitions_)" to "Returns +<tt>pos_type(off_type(-1))</tt>". +</p> + +<p>In 27.6.2.4.2 [streambuf.virt.buffer], paragraph 6, change "Returns +an object of class pos_type that stores an invalid stream +position" to "Returns <tt>pos_type(off_type(-1))</tt>".</p> + +<p>In 27.8.1.4 [stringbuf.virtuals], paragraph 13, change "the object +stores an invalid stream position" to "the return value is +<tt>pos_type(off_type(-1))</tt>". </p> + +<p>In 27.9.1.5 [filebuf.virtuals], paragraph 13, change "returns an +invalid stream position (27.4.3)" to "returns +<tt>pos_type(off_type(-1))</tt>" </p> + +<p>In 27.9.1.5 [filebuf.virtuals], paragraph 15, change "Otherwise +returns an invalid stream position (_lib.iostreams.definitions_)" +to "Otherwise returns <tt>pos_type(off_type(-1))</tt>" +</p> + +<p>In D.9.1.3 [depr.strstreambuf.virtuals], paragraph 15, change "the object +stores an invalid stream position" to "the return value is +<tt>pos_type(off_type(-1))</tt>" </p> + +<p>In D.9.1.3 [depr.strstreambuf.virtuals], paragraph 18, change "the object +stores an invalid stream position" to "the return value is +<tt>pos_type(off_type(-1))</tt>"</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="56"></a>56. Showmanyc's return type</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.6.2 [streambuf] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 1998-06-29 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#streambuf">issues</a> in [streambuf].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The class summary for basic_streambuf<>, in 27.5.2, says that +showmanyc has return type int. However, 27.5.2.4.3 says that its +return type is streamsize. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change <tt>showmanyc</tt>'s return type in the +27.6.2 [streambuf] class summary to <tt>streamsize</tt>.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="57"></a>57. Mistake in char_traits</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.2.3.4 [char.traits.specializations.wchar.t] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 1998-07-01 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>21.1.3.2, paragraph 3, says "The types streampos and +wstreampos may be different if the implementation supports no shift +encoding in narrow-oriented iostreams but supports one or more shift +encodings in wide-oriented streams". </p> + +<p>That's wrong: the two are the same type. The <iosfwd> summary +in 27.2 says that streampos and wstreampos are, respectively, synonyms +for fpos<char_traits<char>::state_type> and +fpos<char_traits<wchar_t>::state_type>, and, flipping back +to clause 21, we see in 21.1.3.1 and 21.1.3.2 that +char_traits<char>::state_type and +char_traits<wchar_t>::state_type must both be mbstate_t. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Remove the sentence in 21.2.3.4 [char.traits.specializations.wchar.t] paragraph 3 which +begins "The types streampos and wstreampos may be +different..." . </p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="59"></a>59. Ambiguity in specification of gbump</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.6.2.3.2 [streambuf.get.area] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 1998-07-28 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>27.5.2.3.1 says that basic_streambuf::gbump() "Advances the +next pointer for the input sequence by n." </p> + +<p>The straightforward interpretation is that it is just gptr() += +n. An alternative interpretation, though, is that it behaves as if it +calls sbumpc n times. (The issue, of course, is whether it might ever +call underflow.) There is a similar ambiguity in the case of +pbump. </p> + +<p>(The "classic" AT&T implementation used the +former interpretation.)</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change 27.6.2.3.2 [streambuf.get.area] paragraph 4 gbump effects from:</p> + +<blockquote> + <p>Effects: Advances the next pointer for the input sequence by n.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>to:</p> + +<blockquote> + <p>Effects: Adds <tt>n</tt> to the next pointer for the input sequence.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>Make the same change to 27.6.2.3.3 [streambuf.put.area] paragraph 4 pbump +effects.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="60"></a>60. What is a formatted input function?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.1.2.1 [istream.formatted.reqmts] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-03 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#istream.formatted.reqmts">issues</a> in [istream.formatted.reqmts].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#162">162</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#163">163</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#166">166</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Paragraph 1 of 27.6.1.2.1 contains general requirements for all +formatted input functions. Some of the functions defined in section +27.6.1.2 explicitly say that those requirements apply ("Behaves +like a formatted input member (as described in 27.6.1.2.1)"), but +others don't. The question: is 27.6.1.2.1 supposed to apply to +everything in 27.6.1.2, or only to those member functions that +explicitly say "behaves like a formatted input member"? Or +to put it differently: are we to assume that everything that appears +in a section called "Formatted input functions" really is a +formatted input function? I assume that 27.6.1.2.1 is intended to +apply to the arithmetic extractors (27.6.1.2.2), but I assume that it +is not intended to apply to extractors like </p> + +<pre> basic_istream& operator>>(basic_istream& (*pf)(basic_istream&));</pre> + +<p>and </p> + +<pre> basic_istream& operator>>(basic_streammbuf*);</pre> + +<p>There is a similar ambiguity for unformatted input, formatted output, and unformatted +output. </p> + +<p>Comments from Judy Ward: It seems like the problem is that the +basic_istream and basic_ostream operator <<()'s that are used +for the manipulators and streambuf* are in the wrong section and +should have their own separate section or be modified to make it clear +that the "Common requirements" listed in section 27.6.1.2.1 +(for basic_istream) and section 27.6.2.5.1 (for basic_ostream) do not +apply to them. </p> + +<p>Additional comments from Dietmar Kühl: It appears to be somewhat +nonsensical to consider the functions defined in 27.7.1.2.3 [istream::extractors] paragraphs 1 to 5 to be "Formatted input +function" but since these functions are defined in a section +labeled "Formatted input functions" it is unclear to me +whether these operators are considered formatted input functions which +have to conform to the "common requirements" from 27.7.1.2.1 [istream.formatted.reqmts]: If this is the case, all manipulators, not +just <tt>ws</tt>, would skip whitespace unless <tt>noskipws</tt> is +set (... but setting <tt>noskipws</tt> using the manipulator syntax +would also skip whitespace :-)</p> <p>It is not clear which functions +are to be considered unformatted input functions. As written, it seems +that all functions in 27.7.1.3 [istream.unformatted] are unformatted input +functions. However, it does not really make much sense to construct a +sentry object for <tt>gcount()</tt>, <tt>sync()</tt>, ... Also it is +unclear what happens to the <tt>gcount()</tt> if +eg. <tt>gcount()</tt>, <tt>putback()</tt>, <tt>unget()</tt>, or +<tt>sync()</tt> is called: These functions don't extract characters, +some of them even "unextract" a character. Should this still +be reflected in <tt>gcount()</tt>? Of course, it could be read as if +after a call to <tt>gcount()</tt> <tt>gcount()</tt> return <tt>0</tt> +(the last unformatted input function, <tt>gcount()</tt>, didn't +extract any character) and after a call to <tt>putback()</tt> +<tt>gcount()</tt> returns <tt>-1</tt> (the last unformatted input +function <tt>putback()</tt> did "extract" back into the +stream). Correspondingly for <tt>unget()</tt>. Is this what is +intended? If so, this should be clarified. Otherwise, a corresponding +clarification should be used.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 27.6.1.2.2 [lib.istream.formatted.arithmetic], paragraph 1. +Change the beginning of the second sentence from "The conversion +occurs" to "These extractors behave as formatted input functions (as +described in 27.6.1.2.1). After a sentry object is constructed, +the conversion occurs" +</p> + +<p> +In 27.6.1.2.3, [lib.istream::extractors], before paragraph 1. +Add an effects clause. "Effects: None. This extractor does +not behave as a formatted input function (as described in +27.6.1.2.1). +</p> + +<p> +In 27.6.1.2.3, [lib.istream::extractors], paragraph 2. Change the +effects clause to "Effects: Calls pf(*this). This extractor does not +behave as a formatted input function (as described in 27.6.1.2.1). +</p> + +<p> +In 27.6.1.2.3, [lib.istream::extractors], paragraph 4. Change the +effects clause to "Effects: Calls pf(*this). This extractor does not +behave as a formatted input function (as described in 27.6.1.2.1). +</p> + +<p> +In 27.6.1.2.3, [lib.istream::extractors], paragraph 12. Change the +first two sentences from "If sb is null, calls setstate(failbit), +which may throw ios_base::failure (27.4.4.3). Extracts characters +from *this..." to "Behaves as a formatted input function (as described +in 27.6.1.2.1). If sb is null, calls setstate(failbit), which may +throw ios_base::failure (27.4.4.3). After a sentry object is +constructed, extracts characters from *this...". +</p> + +<p> +In 27.6.1.3, [lib.istream.unformatted], before paragraph 2. Add an +effects clause. "Effects: none. This member function does not behave +as an unformatted input function (as described in 27.6.1.3, paragraph 1)." +</p> + +<p> +In 27.6.1.3, [lib.istream.unformatted], paragraph 3. Change the +beginning of the first sentence of the effects clause from "Extracts a +character" to "Behaves as an unformatted input function (as described +in 27.6.1.3, paragraph 1). After constructing a sentry object, extracts a +character" +</p> + +<p> +In 27.6.1.3, [lib.istream.unformatted], paragraph 5. Change the +beginning of the first sentence of the effects clause from "Extracts a +character" to "Behaves as an unformatted input function (as described +in 27.6.1.3, paragraph 1). After constructing a sentry object, extracts a +character" +</p> + +<p> +In 27.6.1.3, [lib.istream.unformatted], paragraph 7. Change the +beginning of the first sentence of the effects clause from "Extracts +characters" to "Behaves as an unformatted input function (as described +in 27.6.1.3, paragraph 1). After constructing a sentry object, extracts +characters" +</p> + +<p> +[No change needed in paragraph 10, because it refers to paragraph 7.] +</p> + +<p> +In 27.6.1.3, [lib.istream.unformatted], paragraph 12. Change the +beginning of the first sentence of the effects clause from "Extracts +characters" to "Behaves as an unformatted input function (as described +in 27.6.1.3, paragraph 1). After constructing a sentry object, extracts +characters" +</p> + +<p> +[No change needed in paragraph 15.] +</p> + +<p> +In 27.6.1.3, [lib.istream.unformatted], paragraph 17. Change the +beginning of the first sentence of the effects clause from "Extracts +characters" to "Behaves as an unformatted input function (as described +in 27.6.1.3, paragraph 1). After constructing a sentry object, extracts +characters" +</p> + +<p> +[No change needed in paragraph 23.] +</p> + +<p> +In 27.6.1.3, [lib.istream.unformatted], paragraph 24. Change the +beginning of the first sentence of the effects clause from "Extracts +characters" to "Behaves as an unformatted input function (as described +in 27.6.1.3, paragraph 1). After constructing a sentry object, extracts +characters" +</p> + +<p> +In 27.6.1.3, [lib.istream.unformatted], before paragraph 27. Add an +Effects clause: "Effects: Behaves as an unformatted input function (as +described in 27.6.1.3, paragraph 1). After constructing a sentry +object, reads but does not extract the current input character." +</p> + +<p> +In 27.6.1.3, [lib.istream.unformatted], paragraph 28. Change the +first sentence of the Effects clause from "If !good() calls" to +Behaves as an unformatted input function (as described in 27.6.1.3, +paragraph 1). After constructing a sentry object, if !good() calls" +</p> + +<p> +In 27.6.1.3, [lib.istream.unformatted], paragraph 30. Change the +first sentence of the Effects clause from "If !good() calls" to +"Behaves as an unformatted input function (as described in 27.6.1.3, +paragraph 1). After constructing a sentry object, if !good() calls" +</p> + +<p> +In 27.6.1.3, [lib.istream.unformatted], paragraph 32. Change the +first sentence of the Effects clause from "If !good() calls..." to +"Behaves as an unformatted input function (as described in 27.6.1.3, +paragraph 1). After constructing a sentry object, if !good() +calls..." Add a new sentence to the end of the Effects clause: +"[Note: this function extracts no characters, so the value returned +by the next call to gcount() is 0.]" +</p> + +<p> +In 27.6.1.3, [lib.istream.unformatted], paragraph 34. Change the +first sentence of the Effects clause from "If !good() calls" to +"Behaves as an unformatted input function (as described in 27.6.1.3, +paragraph 1). After constructing a sentry object, if !good() calls". +Add a new sentence to the end of the Effects clause: "[Note: this +function extracts no characters, so the value returned by the next +call to gcount() is 0.]" +</p> + +<p> +In 27.6.1.3, [lib.istream.unformatted], paragraph 36. Change the +first sentence of the Effects clause from "If !rdbuf() is" to "Behaves +as an unformatted input function (as described in 27.6.1.3, paragraph +1), except that it does not count the number of characters extracted +and does not affect the value returned by subsequent calls to +gcount(). After constructing a sentry object, if rdbuf() is" +</p> + +<p> +In 27.6.1.3, [lib.istream.unformatted], before paragraph 37. Add an +Effects clause: "Effects: Behaves as an unformatted input function (as +described in 27.6.1.3, paragraph 1), except that it does not count the +number of characters extracted and does not affect the value returned +by subsequent calls to gcount()." Change the first sentence of +paragraph 37 from "if fail()" to "after constructing a sentry object, +if fail()". +</p> + +<p> +In 27.6.1.3, [lib.istream.unformatted], paragraph 38. Change the +first sentence of the Effects clause from "If fail()" to "Behaves +as an unformatted input function (as described in 27.6.1.3, paragraph +1), except that it does not count the number of characters extracted +and does not affect the value returned by subsequent calls to +gcount(). After constructing a sentry object, if fail() +</p> + +<p> +In 27.6.1.3, [lib.istream.unformatted], paragraph 40. Change the +first sentence of the Effects clause from "If fail()" to "Behaves +as an unformatted input function (as described in 27.6.1.3, paragraph +1), except that it does not count the number of characters extracted +and does not affect the value returned by subsequent calls to +gcount(). After constructing a sentry object, if fail() +</p> + +<p> +In 27.6.2.5.2 [lib.ostream.inserters.arithmetic], paragraph 1. Change +the beginning of the third sentence from "The formatting conversion" +to "These extractors behave as formatted output functions (as +described in 27.6.2.5.1). After the sentry object is constructed, the +conversion occurs". +</p> + +<p> +In 27.6.2.5.3 [lib.ostream.inserters], before paragraph 1. Add an +effects clause: "Effects: None. Does not behave as a formatted output +function (as described in 27.6.2.5.1).". +</p> + +<p> +In 27.6.2.5.3 [lib.ostream.inserters], paragraph 2. Change the +effects clause to "Effects: calls pf(*this). This extractor does not +behave as a formatted output function (as described in 27.6.2.5.1).". +</p> + +<p> +In 27.6.2.5.3 [lib.ostream.inserters], paragraph 4. Change the +effects clause to "Effects: calls pf(*this). This extractor does not +behave as a formatted output function (as described in 27.6.2.5.1).". +</p> + +<p> +In 27.6.2.5.3 [lib.ostream.inserters], paragraph 6. Change the first +sentence from "If sb" to "Behaves as a formatted output function (as +described in 27.6.2.5.1). After the sentry object is constructed, if +sb". +</p> + +<p> +In 27.6.2.6 [lib.ostream.unformatted], paragraph 2. Change the first +sentence from "Inserts the character" to "Behaves as an unformatted +output function (as described in 27.6.2.6, paragraph 1). After +constructing a sentry object, inserts the character". +</p> + +<p> +In 27.6.2.6 [lib.ostream.unformatted], paragraph 5. Change the first +sentence from "Obtains characters" to "Behaves as an unformatted +output function (as described in 27.6.2.6, paragraph 1). After +constructing a sentry object, obtains characters". +</p> + +<p> +In 27.6.2.6 [lib.ostream.unformatted], paragraph 7. Add a new +sentence at the end of the paragraph: "Does not behave as an +unformatted output function (as described in 27.6.2.6, paragraph 1)." +</p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>See J16/99-0043==WG21/N1219, Proposed Resolution to Library Issue 60, +by Judy Ward and Matt Austern. This proposed resolution is section +VI of that paper.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="61"></a>61. Ambiguity in iostreams exception policy</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.1.3 [istream.unformatted] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#istream.unformatted">issues</a> in [istream.unformatted].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The introduction to the section on unformatted input (27.6.1.3) +says that every unformatted input function catches all exceptions that +were thrown during input, sets badbit, and then conditionally rethrows +the exception. That seems clear enough. Several of the specific +functions, however, such as get() and read(), are documented in some +circumstances as setting eofbit and/or failbit. (The standard notes, +correctly, that setting eofbit or failbit can sometimes result in an +exception being thrown.) The question: if one of these functions +throws an exception triggered by setting failbit, is this an exception +"thrown during input" and hence covered by 27.6.1.3, or does +27.6.1.3 only refer to a limited class of exceptions? Just to make +this concrete, suppose you have the following snippet. </p> + +<pre> + char buffer[N]; + istream is; + ... + is.exceptions(istream::failbit); // Throw on failbit but not on badbit. + is.read(buffer, N);</pre> + +<p>Now suppose we reach EOF before we've read N characters. What +iostate bits can we expect to be set, and what exception (if any) will +be thrown? </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 27.6.1.3, paragraph 1, after the sentence that begins +"If an exception is thrown...", add the following +parenthetical comment: "(Exceptions thrown from +<tt>basic_ios<>::clear()</tt> are not caught or rethrown.)" +</p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The LWG looked to two alternative wordings, and choose the proposed +resolution as better standardese.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="62"></a>62. <tt>Sync</tt>'s return value</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.1.3 [istream.unformatted] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#istream.unformatted">issues</a> in [istream.unformatted].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The Effects clause for sync() (27.6.1.3, paragraph 36) says that it +"calls rdbuf()->pubsync() and, if that function returns -1 +... returns traits::eof()." </p> + +<p>That looks suspicious, because traits::eof() is of type +traits::int_type while the return type of sync() is int. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 27.7.1.3 [istream.unformatted], paragraph 36, change "returns +<tt>traits::eof()</tt>" to "returns <tt>-1</tt>". +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="63"></a>63. Exception-handling policy for unformatted output</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.2.7 [ostream.unformatted] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-11 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#ostream.unformatted">issues</a> in [ostream.unformatted].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Clause 27 details an exception-handling policy for formatted input, +unformatted input, and formatted output. It says nothing for +unformatted output (27.6.2.6). 27.6.2.6 should either include the same +kind of exception-handling policy as in the other three places, or +else it should have a footnote saying that the omission is +deliberate. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 27.6.2.6, paragraph 1, replace the last sentence ("In any +case, the unformatted output function ends by destroying the sentry +object, then returning the value specified for the formatted output +function.") with the following text: +</p> +<blockquote><p> +If an exception is thrown during output, then <tt>ios::badbit</tt> is +turned on [Footnote: without causing an <tt>ios::failure</tt> to be +thrown.] in <tt>*this</tt>'s error state. If <tt>(exceptions() & +badbit) != 0</tt> then the exception is rethrown. In any case, the +unformatted output function ends by destroying the sentry object, +then, if no exception was thrown, returning the value specified for +the formatted output function. +</p></blockquote> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +This exception-handling policy is consistent with that of formatted +input, unformatted input, and formatted output. +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="64"></a>64. Exception handling in <tt>basic_istream::operator>>(basic_streambuf*)</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.1.2.3 [istream::extractors] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-11 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#istream::extractors">issues</a> in [istream::extractors].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>27.6.1.2.3, paragraph 13, is ambiguous. It can be interpreted two +different ways, depending on whether the second sentence is read as an +elaboration of the first. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Replace 27.7.1.2.3 [istream::extractors], paragraph 13, which begins +"If the function inserts no characters ..." with:</p> + +<blockquote> + <p>If the function inserts no characters, it calls + <tt>setstate(failbit)</tt>, which may throw + <tt>ios_base::failure</tt> (27.4.4.3). If it inserted no characters + because it caught an exception thrown while extracting characters + from <tt>sb</tt> and <tt>failbit</tt> is on in <tt>exceptions()</tt> + (27.4.4.3), then the caught exception is rethrown. </p> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="66"></a>66. Strstreambuf::setbuf</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> D.9.1.3 [depr.strstreambuf.virtuals] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-18 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#depr.strstreambuf.virtuals">issues</a> in [depr.strstreambuf.virtuals].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>D.7.1.3, paragraph 19, says that strstreambuf::setbuf +"Performs an operation that is defined separately for each class +derived from strstreambuf". This is obviously an incorrect +cut-and-paste from basic_streambuf. There are no classes derived from +strstreambuf. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>D.9.1.3 [depr.strstreambuf.virtuals], paragraph 19, replace the setbuf effects +clause which currently says "Performs an operation that is +defined separately for each class derived from strstreambuf" +with:</p> + +<blockquote> + <p><b>Effects</b>: implementation defined, except that + <tt>setbuf(0,0)</tt> has no effect.</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="68"></a>68. Extractors for char* should store null at end</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.1.2.3 [istream::extractors] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Angelika Langer <b>Opened:</b> 1998-07-14 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#istream::extractors">issues</a> in [istream::extractors].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Extractors for char* (27.6.1.2.3) do not store a null character +after the extracted character sequence whereas the unformatted +functions like get() do. Why is this?</p> + +<p>Comment from Jerry Schwarz: There is apparently an editing +glitch. You'll notice that the last item of the list of what stops +extraction doesn't make any sense. It was supposed to be the line that +said a null is stored.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>27.7.1.2.3 [istream::extractors], paragraph 7, change the last list +item from:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + A null byte (<tt>charT()</tt>) in the next position, which may be + the first position if no characters were extracted. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>to become a new paragraph which reads:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + Operator>> then stores a null byte (<tt>charT()</tt>) in the + next position, which may be the first position if no characters were + extracted. +</p></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="69"></a>69. Must elements of a vector be contiguous?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.4.1 [vector] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Andrew Koenig <b>Opened:</b> 1998-07-29 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#vector">issues</a> in [vector].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The issue is this: Must the elements of a vector be in contiguous memory?</p> + +<p>(Please note that this is entirely separate from the question of +whether a vector iterator is required to be a pointer; the answer to +that question is clearly "no," as it would rule out +debugging implementations)</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Add the following text to the end of 23.4.1 [vector], +paragraph 1. </p> + +<blockquote> + <p>The elements of a vector are stored contiguously, meaning that if + v is a <tt>vector<T, Allocator></tt> where T is some type + other than <tt>bool</tt>, then it obeys the identity <tt>&v[n] + == &v[0] + n</tt> for all <tt>0 <= n < v.size()</tt>.</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The LWG feels that as a practical matter the answer is clearly +"yes". There was considerable discussion as to the best way +to express the concept of "contiguous", which is not +directly defined in the standard. Discussion included:</p> + +<ul> + <li>An operational definition similar to the above proposed resolution is + already used for valarray (26.6.2.3 [valarray.access]).</li> + <li>There is no need to explicitly consider a user-defined operator& + because elements must be copyconstructible (23.2 [container.requirements] para 3) + and copyconstructible (20.2.1 [utility.arg.requirements]) specifies + requirements for operator&.</li> + <li>There is no issue of one-past-the-end because of language rules.</li> +</ul> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="70"></a>70. Uncaught_exception() missing throw() specification</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.8 [support.exception], 18.8.4 [uncaught] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Steve Clamage <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-03 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#support.exception">issues</a> in [support.exception].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>In article 3E04@pratique.fr, Valentin Bonnard writes: </p> + +<p>uncaught_exception() doesn't have a throw specification.</p> + +<p>It is intentional ? Does it means that one should be prepared to +handle exceptions thrown from uncaught_exception() ?</p> + +<p>uncaught_exception() is called in exception handling contexts where +exception safety is very important.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 15.5.3 [except.uncaught], paragraph 1, 18.8 [support.exception], and 18.8.4 [uncaught], add "throw()" to uncaught_exception().</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="71"></a>71. Do_get_monthname synopsis missing argument</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.5.1 [locale.time.get] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-13 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The locale facet member <tt>time_get<>::do_get_monthname</tt> +is described in 22.4.5.1.2 [locale.time.get.virtuals] with five arguments, +consistent with do_get_weekday and with its specified use by member +get_monthname. However, in the synopsis, it is specified instead with +four arguments. The missing argument is the "end" iterator +value.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 22.4.5.1 [locale.time.get], add an "end" argument to +the declaration of member do_monthname as follows:</p> + +<pre> virtual iter_type do_get_monthname(iter_type s, iter_type end, ios_base&, + ios_base::iostate& err, tm* t) const;</pre> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="74"></a>74. Garbled text for <tt>codecvt::do_max_length</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.1.4 [locale.codecvt] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 1998-09-08 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#locale.codecvt">issues</a> in [locale.codecvt].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The text of <tt>codecvt::do_max_length</tt>'s "Returns" +clause (22.2.1.5.2, paragraph 11) is garbled. It has unbalanced +parentheses and a spurious <b>n</b>.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Replace 22.4.1.4.2 [locale.codecvt.virtuals] paragraph 11 with the +following:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + <b>Returns</b>: The maximum value that + <tt>do_length(state, from, from_end, 1)</tt> can return for any + valid range <tt>[from, from_end)</tt> and <tt>stateT</tt> value + <tt>state</tt>. The specialization <tt>codecvt<char, char, + mbstate_t>::do_max_length()</tt> returns 1. +</p></blockquote> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="75"></a>75. Contradiction in <tt>codecvt::length</tt>'s argument types</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.1.4 [locale.codecvt] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt +Austern <b>Opened:</b> 1998-09-18 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#locale.codecvt">issues</a> in [locale.codecvt].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The class synopses for classes <tt>codecvt<></tt> (22.2.1.5) +and <tt>codecvt_byname<></tt> (22.2.1.6) say that the first +parameter of the member functions <tt>length</tt> and +<tt>do_length</tt> is of type <tt>const stateT&</tt>. The member +function descriptions, however (22.2.1.5.1, paragraph 6; 22.2.1.5.2, +paragraph 9) say that the type is <tt>stateT&</tt>. Either the +synopsis or the summary must be changed. </p> + +<p>If (as I believe) the member function descriptions are correct, +then we must also add text saying how <tt>do_length</tt> changes its +<tt>stateT</tt> argument. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 22.4.1.4 [locale.codecvt], and also in 22.4.1.5 [locale.codecvt.byname], +change the <tt>stateT</tt> argument type on both member +<tt>length()</tt> and member <tt>do_length()</tt> from </p> + +<blockquote> + <p><tt>const stateT&</tt></p> +</blockquote> + +<p>to</p> + +<blockquote> + <p><tt>stateT&</tt></p> +</blockquote> + +<p>In 22.4.1.4.2 [locale.codecvt.virtuals], add to the definition for member +<tt>do_length</tt> a paragraph:</p> + +<blockquote> + <p>Effects: The effect on the <tt>state</tt> argument is ``as if'' + it called <tt>do_in(state, from, from_end, from, to, to+max, + to)</tt> for <tt>to</tt> pointing to a buffer of at least + <tt>max</tt> elements.</p> +</blockquote> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="76"></a>76. Can a <tt>codecvt</tt> facet always convert one internal character at a time?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.1.4 [locale.codecvt] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 1998-09-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#locale.codecvt">issues</a> in [locale.codecvt].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>This issue concerns the requirements on classes derived from +<tt>codecvt</tt>, including user-defined classes. What are the +restrictions on the conversion from external characters +(e.g. <tt>char</tt>) to internal characters (e.g. <tt>wchar_t</tt>)? +Or, alternatively, what assumptions about <tt>codecvt</tt> facets can +the I/O library make? </p> + +<p>The question is whether it's possible to convert from internal +characters to external characters one internal character at a time, +and whether, given a valid sequence of external characters, it's +possible to pick off internal characters one at a time. Or, to put it +differently: given a sequence of external characters and the +corresponding sequence of internal characters, does a position in the +internal sequence correspond to some position in the external +sequence? </p> + +<p>To make this concrete, suppose that <tt>[first, last)</tt> is a +sequence of <i>M</i> external characters and that <tt>[ifirst, +ilast)</tt> is the corresponding sequence of <i>N</i> internal +characters, where <i>N > 1</i>. That is, <tt>my_encoding.in()</tt>, +applied to <tt>[first, last)</tt>, yields <tt>[ifirst, +ilast)</tt>. Now the question: does there necessarily exist a +subsequence of external characters, <tt>[first, last_1)</tt>, such +that the corresponding sequence of internal characters is the single +character <tt>*ifirst</tt>? +</p> + +<p>(What a "no" answer would mean is that +<tt>my_encoding</tt> translates sequences only as blocks. There's a +sequence of <i>M</i> external characters that maps to a sequence of +<i>N</i> internal characters, but that external sequence has no +subsequence that maps to <i>N-1</i> internal characters.) </p> + +<p>Some of the wording in the standard, such as the description of +<tt>codecvt::do_max_length</tt> (22.4.1.4.2 [locale.codecvt.virtuals], +paragraph 11) and <tt>basic_filebuf::underflow</tt> (27.9.1.5 [filebuf.virtuals], paragraph 3) suggests that it must always be +possible to pick off internal characters one at a time from a sequence +of external characters. However, this is never explicitly stated one +way or the other. </p> + +<p>This issue seems (and is) quite technical, but it is important if +we expect users to provide their own encoding facets. This is an area +where the standard library calls user-supplied code, so a well-defined +set of requirements for the user-supplied code is crucial. Users must +be aware of the assumptions that the library makes. This issue affects +positioning operations on <tt>basic_filebuf</tt>, unbuffered input, +and several of <tt>codecvt</tt>'s member functions. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Add the following text as a new paragraph, following 22.4.1.4.2 [locale.codecvt.virtuals] paragraph 2:</p> + +<blockquote> +<p>A <tt>codecvt</tt> facet that is used by <tt>basic_filebuf</tt> +(27.9 [file.streams]) must have the property that if</p> +<pre> do_out(state, from, from_end, from_next, to, to_lim, to_next) +</pre> +<p>would return <tt>ok</tt>, where <tt>from != from_end</tt>, then </p> +<pre> do_out(state, from, from + 1, from_next, to, to_end, to_next) +</pre> +<p>must also return <tt>ok</tt>, and that if</p> +<pre> do_in(state, from, from_end, from_next, to, to_lim, to_next) +</pre> +<p>would return <tt>ok</tt>, where <tt>to != to_lim</tt>, then</p> +<pre> do_in(state, from, from_end, from_next, to, to + 1, to_next) +</pre> +<p>must also return <tt>ok</tt>. [<i>Footnote:</i> Informally, this +means that <tt>basic_filebuf</tt> assumes that the mapping from +internal to external characters is 1 to N: a <tt>codecvt</tt> that is +used by <tt>basic_filebuf</tt> must be able to translate characters +one internal character at a time. <i>--End Footnote</i>]</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[Redmond: Minor change in proposed resolution. Original +proposed resolution talked about "success", with a parenthetical +comment that success meant returning <tt>ok</tt>. New wording +removes all talk about "success", and just talks about the +return value.]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> + + <p>The proposed resoluion says that conversions can be performed one + internal character at a time. This rules out some encodings that + would otherwise be legal. The alternative answer would mean there + would be some internal positions that do not correspond to any + external file position.</p> + <p> + An example of an encoding that this rules out is one where the + <tt>internT</tt> and <tt>externT</tt> are of the same type, and + where the internal sequence <tt>c1 c2</tt> corresponds to the + external sequence <tt>c2 c1</tt>. + </p> + <p>It was generally agreed that <tt>basic_filebuf</tt> relies + on this property: it was designed under the assumption that + the external-to-internal mapping is N-to-1, and it is not clear + that <tt>basic_filebuf</tt> is implementable without that + restriction. + </p> + <p> + The proposed resolution is expressed as a restriction on + <tt>codecvt</tt> when used by <tt>basic_filebuf</tt>, rather + than a blanket restriction on all <tt>codecvt</tt> facets, + because <tt>basic_filebuf</tt> is the only other part of the + library that uses <tt>codecvt</tt>. If a user wants to define + a <tt>codecvt</tt> facet that implements a more general N-to-M + mapping, there is no reason to prohibit it, so long as the user + does not expect <tt>basic_filebuf</tt> to be able to use it. + </p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="78"></a>78. Typo: event_call_back</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.5.2 [ios.base] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nico Josuttis <b>Opened:</b> 1998-09-29 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#ios.base">issues</a> in [ios.base].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>typo: event_call_back should be event_callback </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In the 27.5.2 [ios.base] synopsis change +"event_call_back" to "event_callback". </p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="79"></a>79. Inconsistent declaration of polar()</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.4.1 [complex.syn], 26.4.7 [complex.value.ops] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nico Josuttis <b>Opened:</b> 1998-09-29 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#complex.syn">issues</a> in [complex.syn].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>In 26.4.1 [complex.syn] polar is declared as follows:</p> +<pre> template<class T> complex<T> polar(const T&, const T&); </pre> + +<p>In 26.4.7 [complex.value.ops] it is declared as follows:</p> +<pre> template<class T> complex<T> polar(const T& rho, const T& theta = 0); </pre> + +<p>Thus whether the second parameter is optional is not clear. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 26.4.1 [complex.syn] change:</p> +<pre> template<class T> complex<T> polar(const T&, const T&);</pre> + +<p>to:</p> +<pre> template<class T> complex<T> polar(const T& rho, const T& theta = 0); </pre> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="80"></a>80. Global Operators of complex declared twice</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.4.1 [complex.syn], 26.4.2 [complex] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nico Josuttis <b>Opened:</b> 1998-09-29 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#complex.syn">issues</a> in [complex.syn].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Both 26.2.1 and 26.2.2 contain declarations of global operators for +class complex. This redundancy should be removed.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Reduce redundancy according to the general style of the standard. </p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="83"></a>83. String::npos vs. string::max_size()</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.4 [basic.string] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nico Josuttis <b>Opened:</b> 1998-09-29 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#basic.string">issues</a> in [basic.string].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#89">89</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Many string member functions throw if size is getting or exceeding +npos. However, I wonder why they don't throw if size is getting or +exceeding max_size() instead of npos. May be npos is known at compile +time, while max_size() is known at runtime. However, what happens if +size exceeds max_size() but not npos, then? It seems the standard +lacks some clarifications here.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>After 21.4 [basic.string] paragraph 4 ("The functions +described in this clause...") add a new paragraph:</p> + +<blockquote> + <p>For any string operation, if as a result of the operation, <tt> size()</tt> would exceed + <tt> max_size()</tt> then + the operation throws <tt>length_error</tt>.</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The LWG believes length_error is the correct exception to throw.</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="86"></a>86. String constructors don't describe exceptions</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.4.1 [string.require] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nico Josuttis <b>Opened:</b> 1998-09-29 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#string.require">issues</a> in [string.require].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The constructor from a range:</p> + +<pre>template<class InputIterator> + basic_string(InputIterator begin, InputIterator end, + const Allocator& a = Allocator());</pre> + +<p>lacks a throws clause. However, I would expect that it throws +according to the other constructors if the numbers of characters in +the range equals npos (or exceeds max_size(), see above). </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 21.4.1 [string.require], Strike throws paragraphs for +constructors which say "Throws: length_error if n == +npos."</p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>Throws clauses for length_error if n == npos are no longer needed +because they are subsumed by the general wording added by the +resolution for issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#83">83</a>.</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="90"></a>90. Incorrect description of operator >> for strings</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.4.8.9 [string.io] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nico Josuttis <b>Opened:</b> 1998-09-29 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#string.io">issues</a> in [string.io].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The effect of operator >> for strings contain the following item:</p> + +<p> <tt>isspace(c,getloc())</tt> is true for the next available input +character c.</p> + +<p>Here <tt>getloc()</tt> has to be replaced by <tt>is.getloc()</tt>. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 21.4.8.9 [string.io] paragraph 1 Effects clause replace:</p> + +<blockquote> + <p><tt>isspace(c,getloc())</tt> is true for the next available input character c.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>with:</p> + +<blockquote> + <p><tt>isspace(c,is.getloc())</tt> is true for the next available input character c.</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="91"></a>91. Description of operator>> and getline() for string<> might cause endless loop</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.4.8.9 [string.io] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nico Josuttis <b>Opened:</b> 1998-09-29 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#string.io">issues</a> in [string.io].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Operator >> and getline() for strings read until eof() +in the input stream is true. However, this might never happen, if the +stream can't read anymore without reaching EOF. So shouldn't it be +changed into that it reads until !good() ? </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 21.4.8.9 [string.io], paragraph 1, replace:</p> +<blockquote><p> +Effects: Begins by constructing a sentry object k as if k were +constructed by typename basic_istream<charT,traits>::sentry k( is). If +bool( k) is true, it calls str.erase() and then extracts characters +from is and appends them to str as if by calling str.append(1, c). If +is.width() is greater than zero, the maximum number n of characters +appended is is.width(); otherwise n is str.max_size(). Characters are +extracted and appended until any of the following occurs: +</p></blockquote> +<p>with:</p> +<blockquote><p> +Effects: Behaves as a formatted input function (27.7.1.2.1 [istream.formatted.reqmts]). After constructing a sentry object, if the +sentry converts to true, calls str.erase() and then extracts +characters from is and appends them to str as if by calling +str.append(1,c). If is.width() is greater than zero, the maximum +number n of characters appended is is.width(); otherwise n is +str.max_size(). Characters are extracted and appended until any of the +following occurs: +</p></blockquote> + +<p>In 21.4.8.9 [string.io], paragraph 6, replace</p> +<blockquote><p> +Effects: Begins by constructing a sentry object k as if by typename +basic_istream<charT,traits>::sentry k( is, true). If bool( k) is true, +it calls str.erase() and then extracts characters from is and appends +them to str as if by calling str.append(1, c) until any of the +following occurs: +</p></blockquote> +<p>with:</p> +<blockquote><p> +Effects: Behaves as an unformatted input function (27.7.1.3 [istream.unformatted]), except that it does not affect the value returned +by subsequent calls to basic_istream<>::gcount(). After +constructing a sentry object, if the sentry converts to true, calls +str.erase() and then extracts characters from is and appends them to +str as if by calling str.append(1,c) until any of the following +occurs: +</p></blockquote> + +<p><i>[Redmond: Made changes in proposed resolution. <tt>operator>></tt> +should be a formatted input function, not an unformatted input function. +<tt>getline</tt> should not be required to set <tt>gcount</tt>, since +there is no mechanism for <tt>gcount</tt> to be set except by one of +<tt>basic_istream</tt>'s member functions.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Curaçao: Nico agrees with proposed resolution.]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The real issue here is whether or not these string input functions +get their characters from a streambuf, rather than by calling an +istream's member functions, a streambuf signals failure either by +returning eof or by throwing an exception; there are no other +possibilities. The proposed resolution makes it clear that these two +functions do get characters from a streambuf.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="92"></a>92. Incomplete Algorithm Requirements</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25 [algorithms] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nico Josuttis <b>Opened:</b> 1998-09-29 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#algorithms">issues</a> in [algorithms].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The standard does not state, how often a function object is copied, +called, or the order of calls inside an algorithm. This may lead to +surprising/buggy behavior. Consider the following example: </p> + +<pre>class Nth { // function object that returns true for the nth element + private: + int nth; // element to return true for + int count; // element counter + public: + Nth (int n) : nth(n), count(0) { + } + bool operator() (int) { + return ++count == nth; + } +}; +.... +// remove third element + list<int>::iterator pos; + pos = remove_if(coll.begin(),coll.end(), // range + Nth(3)), // remove criterion + coll.erase(pos,coll.end()); </pre> + +<p>This call, in fact removes the 3rd <b>AND the 6th</b> element. This +happens because the usual implementation of the algorithm copies the +function object internally: </p> + +<pre>template <class ForwIter, class Predicate> +ForwIter std::remove_if(ForwIter beg, ForwIter end, Predicate op) +{ + beg = find_if(beg, end, op); + if (beg == end) { + return beg; + } + else { + ForwIter next = beg; + return remove_copy_if(++next, end, beg, op); + } +} </pre> + +<p>The algorithm uses find_if() to find the first element that should +be removed. However, it then uses a copy of the passed function object +to process the resulting elements (if any). Here, Nth is used again +and removes also the sixth element. This behavior compromises the +advantage of function objects being able to have a state. Without any +cost it could be avoided (just implement it directly instead of +calling find_if()). </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p>Add a new paragraph following 25 [algorithms] paragraph 8:</p> +<blockquote><p> +[Note: Unless otherwise specified, algorithms that take function +objects as arguments are permitted to copy those function objects +freely. Programmers for whom object identity is important should +consider using a wrapper class that points to a noncopied +implementation object, or some equivalent solution.] +</p></blockquote> + +<p><i>[Dublin: Pete Becker felt that this may not be a defect, +but rather something that programmers need to be educated about. +There was discussion of adding wording to the effect that the number +and order of calls to function objects, including predicates, not +affect the behavior of the function object.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Pre-Kona: Nico comments: It seems the problem is that we don't +have a clear statement of "predicate" in the +standard. People including me seemed to think "a function +returning a Boolean value and being able to be called by an STL +algorithm or be used as sorting criterion or ... is a +predicate". But a predicate has more requirements: It should +never change its behavior due to a call or being copied. IMHO we have +to state this in the standard. If you like, see section 8.1.4 of my +library book for a detailed discussion.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Kona: Nico will provide wording to the effect that "unless +otherwise specified, the number of copies of and calls to function +objects by algorithms is unspecified". Consider placing in +25 [algorithms] after paragraph 9.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Santa Cruz: The standard doesn't currently guarantee that + functions object won't be copied, and what isn't forbidden is + allowed. It is believed (especially since implementations that were + written in concert with the standard do make copies of function + objects) that this was intentional. Thus, no normative change is + needed. What we should put in is a non-normative note suggesting to + programmers that if they want to guarantee the lack of copying they + should use something like the <tt>ref</tt> wrapper.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Oxford: Matt provided wording.]</i></p> + + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="98"></a>98. Input iterator requirements are badly written</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 24.2.3 [input.iterators] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> AFNOR <b>Opened:</b> 1998-10-07 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#input.iterators">issues</a> in [input.iterators].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Table 72 in 24.2.3 [input.iterators] specifies semantics for +<tt>*r++</tt> of:</p> + +<p> <tt>{ T tmp = *r; ++r; return tmp; }</tt></p> + +<p>There are two problems with this. First, the return type is +specified to be "T", as opposed to something like "convertible to T". +This is too specific: we want to allow *r++ to return an lvalue.</p> + +<p>Second, writing the semantics in terms of code misleadingly +suggests that the effects *r++ should precisely replicate the behavior +of this code, including side effects. (Does this mean that *r++ +should invoke the copy constructor exactly as many times as the sample +code above would?) See issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#334">334</a> for a similar +problem.</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In Table 72 in 24.2.3 [input.iterators], change the return type +for <tt>*r++</tt> from <tt>T</tt> to "convertible to T".</p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>This issue has two parts: the return type, and the number of times + the copy constructor is invoked.</p> + +<p>The LWG believes the the first part is a real issue. It's + inappropriate for the return type to be specified so much more + precisely for *r++ than it is for *r. In particular, if r is of + (say) type <tt>int*</tt>, then *r++ isn't <tt>int</tt>, + but <tt>int&</tt>.</p> + +<p>The LWG does not believe that the number of times the copy + constructor is invoked is a real issue. This can vary in any case, + because of language rules on copy constructor elision. That's too + much to read into these semantics clauses.</p> + +<p>Additionally, as Dave Abrahams pointed out (c++std-lib-13703): since + we're told (24.1/3) that forward iterators satisfy all the requirements + of input iterators, we can't impose any requirements in the Input + Iterator requirements table that forward iterators don't satisfy.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="103"></a>103. set::iterator is required to be modifiable, but this allows modification of keys</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2.4 [associative.reqmts] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> AFNOR <b>Opened:</b> 1998-10-07 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index-open.html#associative.reqmts">active issues</a> in [associative.reqmts].</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#associative.reqmts">issues</a> in [associative.reqmts].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Set::iterator is described as implementation-defined with a +reference to the container requirement; the container requirement says +that const_iterator is an iterator pointing to const T and iterator an +iterator pointing to T.</p> + +<p>23.1.2 paragraph 2 implies that the keys should not be modified to +break the ordering of elements. But that is not clearly +specified. Especially considering that the current standard requires +that iterator for associative containers be different from +const_iterator. Set, for example, has the following: </p> + +<p><tt>typedef implementation defined iterator;<br> + // See _lib.container.requirements_</tt></p> + +<p>23.2 [container.requirements] actually requires that iterator type pointing +to T (table 65). Disallowing user modification of keys by changing the +standard to require an iterator for associative container to be the +same as const_iterator would be overkill since that will unnecessarily +significantly restrict the usage of associative container. A class to +be used as elements of set, for example, can no longer be modified +easily without either redesigning the class (using mutable on fields +that have nothing to do with ordering), or using const_cast, which +defeats requiring iterator to be const_iterator. The proposed solution +goes in line with trusting user knows what he is doing. </p> + +<p><b>Other Options Evaluated:</b> </p> + +<p>Option A. In 23.2.4 [associative.reqmts], paragraph 2, after +first sentence, and before "In addition,...", add one line: +</p> + +<blockquote> + <p>Modification of keys shall not change their strict weak ordering. </p> +</blockquote> + +<p>Option B. Add three new sentences to 23.2.4 [associative.reqmts]:</p> + +<blockquote> + <p>At the end of paragraph 5: "Keys in an associative container + are immutable." At the end of paragraph 6: "For + associative containers where the value type is the same as the key + type, both <tt>iterator</tt> and <tt>const_iterator</tt> are + constant iterators. It is unspecified whether or not + <tt>iterator</tt> and <tt>const_iterator</tt> are the same + type."</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>Option C. To 23.2.4 [associative.reqmts], paragraph 3, which +currently reads:</p> + +<blockquote> + <p>The phrase ``equivalence of keys'' means the equivalence relation imposed by the + comparison and not the operator== on keys. That is, two keys k1 and k2 in the same + container are considered to be equivalent if for the comparison object comp, comp(k1, k2) + == false && comp(k2, k1) == false.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> add the following:</p> + +<blockquote> + <p>For any two keys k1 and k2 in the same container, comp(k1, k2) shall return the same + value whenever it is evaluated. [Note: If k2 is removed from the container and later + reinserted, comp(k1, k2) must still return a consistent value but this value may be + different than it was the first time k1 and k2 were in the same container. This is + intended to allow usage like a string key that contains a filename, where comp compares + file contents; if k2 is removed, the file is changed, and the same k2 (filename) is + reinserted, comp(k1, k2) must again return a consistent value but this value may be + different than it was the previous time k2 was in the container.]</p> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Add the following to 23.2.4 [associative.reqmts] at +the indicated location:</p> + +<blockquote> + <p>At the end of paragraph 3: "For any two keys k1 and k2 in the same container, + calling comp(k1, k2) shall always return the same + value."</p> + <p>At the end of paragraph 5: "Keys in an associative container are immutable."</p> + <p>At the end of paragraph 6: "For associative containers where the value type is the + same as the key type, both <tt>iterator</tt> and <tt>const_iterator</tt> are constant + iterators. It is unspecified whether or not <tt>iterator</tt> and <tt>const_iterator</tt> + are the same type."</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>Several arguments were advanced for and against allowing set elements to be +mutable as long as the ordering was not effected. The argument which swayed the +LWG was one of safety; if elements were mutable, there would be no compile-time +way to detect of a simple user oversight which caused ordering to be +modified. There was a report that this had actually happened in practice, +and had been painful to diagnose. If users need to modify elements, +it is possible to use mutable members or const_cast.</p> + +<p>Simply requiring that keys be immutable is not sufficient, because the comparison +object may indirectly (via pointers) operate on values outside of the keys.</p> + +<p> +The types <tt>iterator</tt> and <tt>const_iterator</tt> are permitted +to be different types to allow for potential future work in which some +member functions might be overloaded between the two types. No such +member functions exist now, and the LWG believes that user functionality +will not be impaired by permitting the two types to be the same. A +function that operates on both iterator types can be defined for +<tt>const_iterator</tt> alone, and can rely on the automatic +conversion from <tt>iterator</tt> to <tt>const_iterator</tt>. +</p> + +<p><i>[Tokyo: The LWG crafted the proposed resolution and rationale.]</i></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="106"></a>106. Numeric library private members are implementation defined</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.6.5 [template.slice.array] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> AFNOR <b>Opened:</b> 1998-10-07 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#template.slice.array">issues</a> in [template.slice.array].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>This is the only place in the whole standard where the implementation has to document +something private.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Remove the comment which says "// remainder implementation defined" from: +</p> + +<ul> + <li>26.6.5 [template.slice.array]</li> + <li>26.6.7 [template.gslice.array]</li> + <li>26.6.8 [template.mask.array]</li> + <li>26.6.9 [template.indirect.array]</li> +</ul> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="108"></a>108. Lifetime of exception::what() return unspecified</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.7.1 [type.info] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> AFNOR <b>Opened:</b> 1998-10-07 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>In 18.6.1, paragraphs 8-9, the lifetime of the return value of +exception::what() is left unspecified. This issue has implications +with exception safety of exception handling: some exceptions should +not throw bad_alloc.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Add to 18.7.1 [type.info] paragraph 9 (exception::what notes +clause) the sentence:</p> + +<blockquote> + <p>The return value remains valid until the exception object from which it is obtained is + destroyed or a non-const member function of the exception object is called.</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>If an exception object has non-const members, they may be used +to set internal state that should affect the contents of the string +returned by <tt>what()</tt>. +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="109"></a>109. Missing binders for non-const sequence elements</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> D.11 [depr.lib.binders] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Bjarne Stroustrup <b>Opened:</b> 1998-10-07 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#depr.lib.binders">issues</a> in [depr.lib.binders].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p>There are no versions of binders that apply to non-const elements +of a sequence. This makes examples like for_each() using bind2nd() on +page 521 of "The C++ Programming Language (3rd)" +non-conforming. Suitable versions of the binders need to be added.</p> + +<p>Further discussion from Nico:</p> + +<p>What is probably meant here is shown in the following example:</p> + +<pre>class Elem { + public: + void print (int i) const { } + void modify (int i) { } +}; </pre> +<pre>int main() +{ + vector<Elem> coll(2); + for_each (coll.begin(), coll.end(), bind2nd(mem_fun_ref(&Elem::print),42)); // OK + for_each (coll.begin(), coll.end(), bind2nd(mem_fun_ref(&Elem::modify),42)); // ERROR +}</pre> + +<p>The error results from the fact that bind2nd() passes its first +argument (the argument of the sequence) as constant reference. See the +following typical implementation:</p> + +<blockquote> + <pre>template <class Operation> +class binder2nd + : public unary_function<typename Operation::first_argument_type, + typename Operation::result_type> { +protected: + Operation op; + typename Operation::second_argument_type value; +public: + binder2nd(const Operation& o, + const typename Operation::second_argument_type& v) + : op(o), value(v) {} </pre> + <pre> typename Operation::result_type + operator()(const typename Operation::first_argument_type& x) const { + return op(x, value); + } +};</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p>The solution is to overload operator () of bind2nd for non-constant arguments:</p> + +<blockquote> + <pre>template <class Operation> +class binder2nd + : public unary_function<typename Operation::first_argument_type, + typename Operation::result_type> { +protected: + Operation op; + typename Operation::second_argument_type value; +public: + binder2nd(const Operation& o, + const typename Operation::second_argument_type& v) + : op(o), value(v) {} </pre> + <pre> typename Operation::result_type + operator()(const typename Operation::first_argument_type& x) const { + return op(x, value); + } + typename Operation::result_type + operator()(typename Operation::first_argument_type& x) const { + return op(x, value); + } +};</pre> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p><b>Howard believes there is a flaw</b> in this resolution. +See c++std-lib-9127. We may need to reopen this issue.</p> + +<p>In D.11 [depr.lib.binders] in the declaration of binder1st after:</p> +<blockquote> + <p><tt>typename Operation::result_type<br> + operator()(const typename Operation::second_argument_type& x) const;</tt></p> +</blockquote> +<p>insert:</p> +<blockquote> + <p><tt>typename Operation::result_type<br> + operator()(typename Operation::second_argument_type& x) const;</tt></p> +</blockquote> +<p>In D.11 [depr.lib.binders] in the declaration of binder2nd after:</p> +<blockquote> + <p><tt>typename Operation::result_type<br> + operator()(const typename Operation::first_argument_type& x) const;</tt></p> +</blockquote> +<p>insert:</p> +<blockquote> + <p><tt>typename Operation::result_type<br> + operator()(typename Operation::first_argument_type& x) const;</tt></p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[Kona: The LWG discussed this at some length.It was agreed that +this is a mistake in the design, but there was no consensus on whether +it was a defect in the Standard. Straw vote: NAD - 5. Accept +proposed resolution - 3. Leave open - 6.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Copenhagen: It was generally agreed that this was a defect. +Strap poll: NAD - 0. Accept proposed resolution - 10. +Leave open - 1.]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="110"></a>110. istreambuf_iterator::equal not const</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 24.6.3 [istreambuf.iterator], 24.6.3.5 [istreambuf.iterator::equal] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 1998-10-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#istreambuf.iterator">issues</a> in [istreambuf.iterator].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Member istreambuf_iterator<>::equal is not declared +"const", yet 24.6.3.6 [istreambuf.iterator::op==] says that operator==, +which is const, calls it. This is contradictory. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 24.6.3 [istreambuf.iterator] and also in 24.6.3.5 [istreambuf.iterator::equal], +replace:</p> + +<blockquote> + <pre>bool equal(istreambuf_iterator& b);</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p>with:</p> + +<blockquote> + <pre>bool equal(const istreambuf_iterator& b) const;</pre> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="112"></a>112. Minor typo in <tt>ostreambuf_iterator</tt> constructor</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 24.6.4.1 [ostreambuf.iter.cons] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 1998-10-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The <b>requires</b> clause for <tt>ostreambuf_iterator</tt>'s +constructor from an <tt>ostream_type</tt> (24.5.4.1, paragraph 1) +reads "<i>s</i> is not null". However, <i>s</i> is a +reference, and references can't be null. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 24.6.4.1 [ostreambuf.iter.cons]:</p> + +<p>Move the current paragraph 1, which reads "Requires: s is not +null.", from the first constructor to the second constructor.</p> + +<p>Insert a new paragraph 1 Requires clause for the first constructor +reading:</p> + +<blockquote> + <p><b>Requires</b>: <tt>s.rdbuf()</tt> is not null.</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="114"></a>114. Placement forms example in error twice</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.6.1.3 [new.delete.placement] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Steve Clamage <b>Opened:</b> 1998-10-28 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#new.delete.placement">issues</a> in [new.delete.placement].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#196">196</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Section 18.5.1.3 contains the following example: </p> + +<pre>[Example: This can be useful for constructing an object at a known address: + char place[sizeof(Something)]; + Something* p = new (place) Something(); + -end example]</pre> + +<p>First code line: "place" need not have any special alignment, and the +following constructor could fail due to misaligned data.</p> + +<p>Second code line: Aren't the parens on Something() incorrect? [Dublin: the LWG +believes the () are correct.]</p> + +<p>Examples are not normative, but nevertheless should not show code that is invalid or +likely to fail.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Replace the first line of code in the example in +18.6.1.3 [new.delete.placement] with: +</p> + +<blockquote> + <pre>void* place = operator new(sizeof(Something));</pre> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="115"></a>115. Typo in strstream constructors</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> D.9.4.1 [depr.strstream.cons] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Steve Clamage <b>Opened:</b> 1998-11-02 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>D.7.4.1 strstream constructors paragraph 2 says: </p> + +<blockquote> + <p>Effects: Constructs an object of class strstream, initializing the base class with + iostream(& sb) and initializing sb with one of the two constructors: </p> + <p>- If mode&app==0, then s shall designate the first element of an array of n + elements. The constructor is strstreambuf(s, n, s). </p> + <p>- If mode&app==0, then s shall designate the first element of an array of n + elements that contains an NTBS whose first element is designated by s. The constructor is + strstreambuf(s, n, s+std::strlen(s)).</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>Notice the second condition is the same as the first. I think the second condition +should be "If mode&app==app", or "mode&app!=0", meaning that +the append bit is set.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In D.9.3.1 [depr.ostrstream.cons] paragraph 2 and D.9.4.1 [depr.strstream.cons] +paragraph 2, change the first condition to <tt>(mode&app)==0</tt> +and the second condition to <tt>(mode&app)!=0</tt>.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="117"></a>117. <tt>basic_ostream</tt> uses nonexistent <tt>num_put</tt> member functions</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.2.6.2 [ostream.inserters.arithmetic] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 1998-11-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#ostream.inserters.arithmetic">issues</a> in [ostream.inserters.arithmetic].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The <b>effects</b> clause for numeric inserters says that +insertion of a value <tt>x</tt>, whose type is either <tt>bool</tt>, +<tt>short</tt>, <tt>unsigned short</tt>, <tt>int</tt>, <tt>unsigned +int</tt>, <tt>long</tt>, <tt>unsigned long</tt>, <tt>float</tt>, +<tt>double</tt>, <tt>long double</tt>, or <tt>const void*</tt>, is +delegated to <tt>num_put</tt>, and that insertion is performed as if +through the following code fragment: </p> + +<pre>bool failed = use_facet< + num_put<charT,ostreambuf_iterator<charT,traits> > + >(getloc()).put(*this, *this, fill(), val). failed();</pre> + +<p>This doesn't work, because <tt>num_put<></tt>::put is only +overloaded for the types <tt>bool</tt>, <tt>long</tt>, <tt>unsigned +long</tt>, <tt>double</tt>, <tt>long double</tt>, and <tt>const +void*</tt>. That is, the code fragment in the standard is incorrect +(it is diagnosed as ambiguous at compile time) for the types +<tt>short</tt>, <tt>unsigned short</tt>, <tt>int</tt>, <tt>unsigned +int</tt>, and <tt>float</tt>. </p> + +<p>We must either add new member functions to <tt>num_put</tt>, or +else change the description in <tt>ostream</tt> so that it only calls +functions that are actually there. I prefer the latter. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Replace 27.6.2.5.2, paragraph 1 with the following: </p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +The classes num_get<> and num_put<> handle locale-dependent numeric +formatting and parsing. These inserter functions use the imbued +locale value to perform numeric formatting. When val is of type bool, +long, unsigned long, double, long double, or const void*, the +formatting conversion occurs as if it performed the following code +fragment: +</p> + +<pre>bool failed = use_facet< + num_put<charT,ostreambuf_iterator<charT,traits> > + >(getloc()).put(*this, *this, fill(), val). failed(); +</pre> + +<p> +When val is of type short the formatting conversion occurs as if it +performed the following code fragment: +</p> + +<pre>ios_base::fmtflags baseflags = ios_base::flags() & ios_base::basefield; +bool failed = use_facet< + num_put<charT,ostreambuf_iterator<charT,traits> > + >(getloc()).put(*this, *this, fill(), + baseflags == ios_base::oct || baseflags == ios_base::hex + ? static_cast<long>(static_cast<unsigned short>(val)) + : static_cast<long>(val)). failed(); +</pre> + +<p> +When val is of type int the formatting conversion occurs as if it performed +the following code fragment: +</p> + +<pre>ios_base::fmtflags baseflags = ios_base::flags() & ios_base::basefield; +bool failed = use_facet< + num_put<charT,ostreambuf_iterator<charT,traits> > + >(getloc()).put(*this, *this, fill(), + baseflags == ios_base::oct || baseflags == ios_base::hex + ? static_cast<long>(static_cast<unsigned int>(val)) + : static_cast<long>(val)). failed(); +</pre> + +<p> +When val is of type unsigned short or unsigned int the formatting conversion +occurs as if it performed the following code fragment: +</p> + +<pre>bool failed = use_facet< + num_put<charT,ostreambuf_iterator<charT,traits> > + >(getloc()).put(*this, *this, fill(), static_cast<unsigned long>(val)). +failed(); +</pre> + +<p> +When val is of type float the formatting conversion occurs as if it +performed the following code fragment: +</p> + +<pre>bool failed = use_facet< + num_put<charT,ostreambuf_iterator<charT,traits> > + >(getloc()).put(*this, *this, fill(), static_cast<double>(val)). +failed(); +</pre> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[post-Toronto: This differs from the previous proposed +resolution; PJP provided the new wording. The differences are in +signed short and int output.]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The original proposed resolution was to cast int and short to long, +unsigned int and unsigned short to unsigned long, and float to double, +thus ensuring that we don't try to use nonexistent num_put<> +member functions. The current proposed resolution is more +complicated, but gives more expected results for hex and octal output +of signed short and signed int. (On a system with 16-bit short, for +example, printing short(-1) in hex format should yield 0xffff.)</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="118"></a>118. <tt>basic_istream</tt> uses nonexistent <tt>num_get</tt> member functions</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.1.2.2 [istream.formatted.arithmetic] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 1998-11-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#istream.formatted.arithmetic">issues</a> in [istream.formatted.arithmetic].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Formatted input is defined for the types <tt>short</tt>, <tt>unsigned short</tt>, <tt>int</tt>, +<tt>unsigned int</tt>, <tt>long</tt>, <tt>unsigned long</tt>, <tt>float</tt>, <tt>double</tt>, +<tt>long double</tt>, <tt>bool</tt>, and <tt>void*</tt>. According to section 27.6.1.2.2, +formatted input of a value <tt>x</tt> is done as if by the following code fragment: </p> + +<pre>typedef num_get< charT,istreambuf_iterator<charT,traits> > numget; +iostate err = 0; +use_facet< numget >(loc).get(*this, 0, *this, err, val); +setstate(err);</pre> + +<p>According to section 22.4.2.1.1 [facet.num.get.members], however, +<tt>num_get<>::get()</tt> is only overloaded for the types +<tt>bool</tt>, <tt>long</tt>, <tt>unsigned short</tt>, <tt>unsigned +int</tt>, <tt>unsigned long</tt>, <tt>unsigned long</tt>, +<tt>float</tt>, <tt>double</tt>, <tt>long double</tt>, and +<tt>void*</tt>. Comparing the lists from the two sections, we find +that 27.6.1.2.2 is using a nonexistent function for types +<tt>short</tt> and <tt>int</tt>. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 27.7.1.2.2 [istream.formatted.arithmetic] Arithmetic Extractors, remove the +two lines (1st and 3rd) which read:</p> +<blockquote> + <pre>operator>>(short& val); +... +operator>>(int& val);</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p>And add the following at the end of that section (27.6.1.2.2) :</p> + +<blockquote> + <pre>operator>>(short& val);</pre> + <p>The conversion occurs as if performed by the following code fragment (using + the same notation as for the preceding code fragment):</p> + <pre> typedef num_get< charT,istreambuf_iterator<charT,traits> > numget; + iostate err = 0; + long lval; + use_facet< numget >(loc).get(*this, 0, *this, err, lval); + if (err == 0 + && (lval < numeric_limits<short>::min() || numeric_limits<short>::max() < lval)) + err = ios_base::failbit; + setstate(err);</pre> + <pre>operator>>(int& val);</pre> + <p>The conversion occurs as if performed by the following code fragment (using + the same notation as for the preceding code fragment):</p> + <pre> typedef num_get< charT,istreambuf_iterator<charT,traits> > numget; + iostate err = 0; + long lval; + use_facet< numget >(loc).get(*this, 0, *this, err, lval); + if (err == 0 + && (lval < numeric_limits<int>::min() || numeric_limits<int>::max() < lval)) + err = ios_base::failbit; + setstate(err);</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[Post-Tokyo: PJP provided the above wording.]</i></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="119"></a>119. Should virtual functions be allowed to strengthen the exception specification?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17.6.4.12 [res.on.exception.handling] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Judy Ward <b>Opened:</b> 1998-12-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#res.on.exception.handling">issues</a> in [res.on.exception.handling].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Section 17.6.4.12 [res.on.exception.handling] states: </p> + +<p>"An implementation may strengthen the exception-specification +for a function by removing listed exceptions." </p> + +<p>The problem is that if an implementation is allowed to do this for +virtual functions, then a library user cannot write a class that +portably derives from that class. </p> + +<p>For example, this would not compile if ios_base::failure::~failure +had an empty exception specification: </p> + +<pre>#include <ios> +#include <string> + +class D : public std::ios_base::failure { +public: + D(const std::string&); + ~D(); // error - exception specification must be compatible with + // overridden virtual function ios_base::failure::~failure() +};</pre> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change Section 17.6.4.12 [res.on.exception.handling] from:</p> + +<p> "may strengthen the +exception-specification for a function"</p> + +<p>to:</p> + +<p> "may strengthen the +exception-specification for a non-virtual function". </p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="120"></a>120. Can an implementor add specializations?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17.6.3.3 [reserved.names] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Judy Ward <b>Opened:</b> 1998-12-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#reserved.names">issues</a> in [reserved.names].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p>The original issue asked whether a library implementor could +specialize standard library templates for built-in types. (This was +an issue because users are permitted to explicitly instantiate +standard library templates.)</p> + +<p>Specializations are no longer a problem, because of the resolution +to core issue 259. Under the proposed resolution, it will be legal +for a translation unit to contain both a specialization and an +explicit instantiation of the same template, provided that the +specialization comes first. In such a case, the explicit +instantiation will be ignored. Further discussion of library issue +120 assumes that the core 259 resolution will be adopted.</p> + +<p>However, as noted in lib-7047, one piece of this issue still +remains: what happens if a standard library implementor explicitly +instantiates a standard library templates? It's illegal for a program +to contain two different explicit instantiations of the same template +for the same type in two different translation units (ODR violation), +and the core working group doesn't believe it is practical to relax +that restriction.</p> + +<p>The issue, then, is: are users allowed to explicitly instantiate +standard library templates for non-user defined types? The status quo +answer is 'yes'. Changing it to 'no' would give library implementors +more freedom.</p> + +<p>This is an issue because, for performance reasons, library +implementors often need to explicitly instantiate standard library +templates. (for example, std::basic_string<char>) Does giving +users freedom to explicitly instantiate standard library templates for +non-user defined types make it impossible or painfully difficult for +library implementors to do this?</p> + +<p>John Spicer suggests, in lib-8957, that library implementors have a +mechanism they can use for explicit instantiations that doesn't +prevent users from performing their own explicit instantiations: put +each explicit instantiation in its own object file. (Different +solutions might be necessary for Unix DSOs or MS-Windows DLLs.) On +some platforms, library implementors might not need to do anything +special: the "undefined behavior" that results from having two +different explicit instantiations might be harmless.</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + <p>Append to 17.6.3.3 [reserved.names] paragraph 1: </p> + <blockquote><p> + A program may explicitly instantiate any templates in the standard + library only if the declaration depends on the name of a user-defined + type of external linkage and the instantiation meets the standard library + requirements for the original template. + </p></blockquote> + +<p><i>[Kona: changed the wording from "a user-defined name" to "the name of + a user-defined type"]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The LWG considered another possible resolution:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>In light of the resolution to core issue 259, no normative changes + in the library clauses are necessary. Add the following non-normative + note to the end of 17.6.3.3 [reserved.names] paragraph 1:</p> + <blockquote><p> + [<i>Note:</i> A program may explicitly instantiate standard library + templates, even when an explicit instantiation does not depend on + a user-defined name. <i>--end note</i>] + </p></blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p>The LWG rejected this because it was believed that it would make + it unnecessarily difficult for library implementors to write + high-quality implementations. A program may not include an + explicit instantiation of the same template, for the same template + arguments, in two different translation units. If users are + allowed to provide explicit instantiations of Standard Library + templates for built-in types, then library implementors aren't, + at least not without nonportable tricks.</p> + +<p>The most serious problem is a class template that has writeable + static member variables. Unfortunately, such class templates are + important and, in existing Standard Library implementations, are + often explicitly specialized by library implementors: locale facets, + which have a writeable static member variable <tt>id</tt>. If a + user's explicit instantiation collided with the implementations + explicit instantiation, iostream initialization could cause locales + to be constructed in an inconsistent state.</p> + +<p>One proposed implementation technique was for Standard Library + implementors to provide explicit instantiations in separate object + files, so that they would not be picked up by the linker when the + user also provides an explicit instantiation. However, this + technique only applies for Standard Library implementations that + are packaged as static archives. Most Standard Library + implementations nowadays are packaged as dynamic libraries, so this + technique would not apply.</p> + +<p>The Committee is now considering standardization of dynamic + linking. If there are such changes in the future, it may be + appropriate to revisit this issue later.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="122"></a>122. streambuf/wstreambuf description should not say they are specializations</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.6.2 [streambuf] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Judy Ward <b>Opened:</b> 1998-12-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#streambuf">issues</a> in [streambuf].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Section 27.5.2 describes the streambuf classes this way: </p> + +<blockquote> + +<p>The class streambuf is a specialization of the template class basic_streambuf +specialized for the type char. </p> + +<p>The class wstreambuf is a specialization of the template class basic_streambuf +specialized for the type wchar_t. </p> + +</blockquote> + +<p>This implies that these classes must be template specializations, not typedefs. </p> + +<p>It doesn't seem this was intended, since Section 27.5 has them declared as typedefs. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Remove 27.6.2 [streambuf] paragraphs 2 and 3 (the above two +sentences). </p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The <tt>streambuf</tt> synopsis already has a declaration for the +typedefs and that is sufficient. </p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="123"></a>123. Should valarray helper arrays fill functions be const?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.6.5.3 [slice.arr.fill], 26.6.7.3 [gslice.array.fill], 26.6.8.3 [mask.array.fill], 26.6.9.3 [indirect.array.fill] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Judy Ward <b>Opened:</b> 1998-12-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>One of the operator= in the valarray helper arrays is const and one +is not. For example, look at slice_array. This operator= in Section +26.6.5.1 [slice.arr.assign] is const: </p> + +<p> <tt>void operator=(const valarray<T>&) const;</tt> </p> + +<p>but this one in Section 26.6.5.3 [slice.arr.fill] is not: </p> + +<p> <tt>void operator=(const T&); </tt></p> + +<p>The description of the semantics for these two functions is similar. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p>26.6.5 [template.slice.array] Template class slice_array</p> +<blockquote> + + <p>In the class template definition for slice_array, replace the member + function declaration</p> + <pre> void operator=(const T&); + </pre> + <p>with</p> + <pre> void operator=(const T&) const; + </pre> +</blockquote> + +<p>26.6.5.3 [slice.arr.fill] slice_array fill function</p> +<blockquote> + + <p>Change the function declaration</p> + <pre> void operator=(const T&); + </pre> + <p>to</p> + <pre> void operator=(const T&) const; + </pre> +</blockquote> + +<p>26.6.7 [template.gslice.array] Template class gslice_array</p> +<blockquote> + + <p>In the class template definition for gslice_array, replace the member + function declaration</p> + <pre> void operator=(const T&); + </pre> + <p>with</p> + <pre> void operator=(const T&) const; + </pre> +</blockquote> + +<p>26.6.7.3 [gslice.array.fill] gslice_array fill function</p> +<blockquote> + + <p>Change the function declaration</p> + <pre> void operator=(const T&); + </pre> + <p>to</p> + <pre> void operator=(const T&) const; + </pre> +</blockquote> + +<p>26.6.8 [template.mask.array] Template class mask_array</p> +<blockquote> + + <p>In the class template definition for mask_array, replace the member + function declaration</p> + <pre> void operator=(const T&); + </pre> + <p>with</p> + <pre> void operator=(const T&) const; + </pre> +</blockquote> + +<p>26.6.8.3 [mask.array.fill] mask_array fill function</p> +<blockquote> + + <p>Change the function declaration</p> + <pre> void operator=(const T&); + </pre> + <p>to</p> + <pre> void operator=(const T&) const; + </pre> +</blockquote> + +<p>26.6.9 [template.indirect.array] Template class indirect_array</p> +<blockquote> + + <p>In the class template definition for indirect_array, replace the member + function declaration</p> + <pre> void operator=(const T&); + </pre> + <p>with</p> + <pre> void operator=(const T&) const; + </pre> +</blockquote> + +<p>26.6.9.3 [indirect.array.fill] indirect_array fill function</p> +<blockquote> + + <p>Change the function declaration</p> + <pre> void operator=(const T&); + </pre> + <p>to</p> + <pre> void operator=(const T&) const; + </pre> +</blockquote> + + +<p><i>[Redmond: Robert provided wording.]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>There's no good reason for one version of operator= being const and +another one not. Because of issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#253">253</a>, this now +matters: these functions are now callable in more circumstances. In +many existing implementations, both versions are already const.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="124"></a>124. ctype_byname<charT>::do_scan_is & do_scan_not return type should be const charT*</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.1.2 [locale.ctype.byname] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Judy Ward <b>Opened:</b> 1998-12-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#locale.ctype.byname">issues</a> in [locale.ctype.byname].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>In Section 22.4.1.2 [locale.ctype.byname] +ctype_byname<charT>::do_scan_is() and do_scan_not() are declared +to return a const char* not a const charT*. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change Section 22.4.1.2 [locale.ctype.byname] <tt>do_scan_is()</tt> and +<tt>do_scan_not()</tt> to return a <tt> const +charT*</tt>. </p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="125"></a>125. valarray<T>::operator!() return type is inconsistent</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.6.2 [template.valarray] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Judy Ward <b>Opened:</b> 1998-12-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#template.valarray">issues</a> in [template.valarray].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>In Section 26.6.2 [template.valarray] valarray<T>::operator!() is +declared to return a valarray<T>, but in Section 26.6.2.5 [valarray.unary] it is declared to return a valarray<bool>. The +latter appears to be correct. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change in Section 26.6.2 [template.valarray] the declaration of +<tt>operator!()</tt> so that the return type is +<tt>valarray<bool></tt>. </p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="126"></a>126. typos in Effects clause of ctype::do_narrow()</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.1.1.2 [locale.ctype.virtuals] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Judy Ward <b>Opened:</b> 1998-12-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#locale.ctype.virtuals">issues</a> in [locale.ctype.virtuals].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p><p>Typos in 22.2.1.1.2 need to be fixed.</p> + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In Section 22.4.1.1.2 [locale.ctype.virtuals] change: </p> + +<pre> do_widen(do_narrow(c),0) == c</pre> + +<p>to:</p> + +<pre> do_widen(do_narrow(c,0)) == c</pre> + +<p>and change:</p> + +<pre> (is(M,c) || !ctc.is(M, do_narrow(c),dfault) )</pre> + +<p>to:</p> + +<pre> (is(M,c) || !ctc.is(M, do_narrow(c,dfault)) )</pre> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="127"></a>127. auto_ptr<> conversion issues</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> D.12.1 [auto.ptr] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Greg Colvin <b>Opened:</b> 1999-02-17 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#auto.ptr">issues</a> in [auto.ptr].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>There are two problems with the current <tt>auto_ptr</tt> wording +in the standard: </p> + +<p>First, the <tt>auto_ptr_ref</tt> definition cannot be nested +because <tt>auto_ptr<Derived>::auto_ptr_ref</tt> is unrelated to +<tt>auto_ptr<Base>::auto_ptr_ref</tt>. <i>Also submitted by +Nathan Myers, with the same proposed resolution.</i></p> + +<p>Second, there is no <tt>auto_ptr</tt> assignment operator taking an +<tt>auto_ptr_ref</tt> argument. </p> + +<p>I have discussed these problems with my proposal coauthor, Bill +Gibbons, and with some compiler and library implementors, and we +believe that these problems are not desired or desirable implications +of the standard. </p> + +<p>25 Aug 1999: The proposed resolution now reflects changes suggested +by Dave Abrahams, with Greg Colvin's concurrence; 1) changed +"assignment operator" to "public assignment +operator", 2) changed effects to specify use of release(), 3) +made the conversion to auto_ptr_ref const. </p> + +<p>2 Feb 2000: Lisa Lippincott comments: [The resolution of] this issue +states that the conversion from auto_ptr to auto_ptr_ref should +be const. This is not acceptable, because it would allow +initialization and assignment from _any_ const auto_ptr! It also +introduces an implementation difficulty in writing this conversion +function -- namely, somewhere along the line, a const_cast will be +necessary to remove that const so that release() may be called. This +may result in undefined behavior [7.1.5.1/4]. The conversion +operator does not have to be const, because a non-const implicit +object parameter may be bound to an rvalue [13.3.3.1.4/3] +[13.3.1/5]. </p> + + <p>Tokyo: The LWG removed the following from the proposed resolution:</p> + + <p>In 20.7.4 [meta.unary], paragraph 2, and 20.7.4.3 [meta.unary.prop], + paragraph 2, make the conversion to auto_ptr_ref const:</p> + <blockquote> + <pre>template<class Y> operator auto_ptr_ref<Y>() const throw();</pre> + </blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 20.7.4 [meta.unary], paragraph 2, move +the <tt>auto_ptr_ref</tt> definition to namespace scope.</p> + +<p>In 20.7.4 [meta.unary], paragraph 2, add +a public assignment operator to the <tt>auto_ptr</tt> definition: </p> + +<blockquote> + <pre>auto_ptr& operator=(auto_ptr_ref<X> r) throw();</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p>Also add the assignment operator to 20.7.4.3 [meta.unary.prop]: </p> + +<blockquote> + <pre>auto_ptr& operator=(auto_ptr_ref<X> r) throw()</pre> + + <p><b>Effects:</b> Calls <tt>reset(p.release())</tt> for the <tt>auto_ptr + p</tt> that <tt>r</tt> holds a reference to.<br> + <b>Returns: </b><tt>*this</tt>.</p> + +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="129"></a>129. Need error indication from seekp() and seekg()</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.1.3 [istream.unformatted], 27.7.2.5 [ostream.seeks] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Angelika Langer <b>Opened:</b> 1999-02-22 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#istream.unformatted">issues</a> in [istream.unformatted].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Currently, the standard does not specify how seekg() and seekp() +indicate failure. They are not required to set failbit, and they can't +return an error indication because they must return *this, i.e. the +stream. Hence, it is undefined what happens if they fail. And they +<i>can</i> fail, for instance, when a file stream is disconnected from the +underlying file (is_open()==false) or when a wide character file +stream must perform a state-dependent code conversion, etc. </p> + +<p>The stream functions seekg() and seekp() should set failbit in the +stream state in case of failure.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Add to the Effects: clause of seekg() in +27.7.1.3 [istream.unformatted] and to the Effects: clause of seekp() in +27.7.2.5 [ostream.seeks]: </p> + +<blockquote> + <p>In case of failure, the function calls <tt>setstate(failbit)</tt> (which may throw <tt>ios_base::failure</tt>). + </p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>Setting failbit is the usual error reporting mechanism for streams</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="130"></a>130. Return type of container::erase(iterator) differs for associative containers</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2.4 [associative.reqmts], 23.2.3 [sequence.reqmts] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Andrew Koenig <b>Opened:</b> 1999-03-02 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index-open.html#associative.reqmts">active issues</a> in [associative.reqmts].</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#associative.reqmts">issues</a> in [associative.reqmts].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#451">451</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Table 67 (23.1.1) says that container::erase(iterator) returns an +iterator. Table 69 (23.1.2) says that in addition to this requirement, +associative containers also say that container::erase(iterator) +returns void. That's not an addition; it's a change to the +requirements, which has the effect of making associative containers +fail to meet the requirements for containers.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +In 23.2.4 [associative.reqmts], in Table 69 Associative container +requirements, change the return type of <tt>a.erase(q)</tt> from +<tt>void</tt> to <tt>iterator</tt>. Change the +assertion/not/pre/post-condition from "erases the element pointed to +by <tt>q</tt>" to "erases the element pointed to by <tt>q</tt>. +Returns an iterator pointing to the element immediately following q +prior to the element being erased. If no such element exists, a.end() +is returned." +</p> + +<p> +In 23.2.4 [associative.reqmts], in Table 69 Associative container +requirements, change the return type of <tt>a.erase(q1, q2)</tt> +from <tt>void</tt> to <tt>iterator</tt>. Change the +assertion/not/pre/post-condition from "erases the elements in the +range <tt>[q1, q2)</tt>" to "erases the elements in the range <tt>[q1, +q2)</tt>. Returns q2." +</p> + +<p> +In 23.6.1 [map], in the <tt>map</tt> class synopsis; and +in 23.6.2 [multimap], in the <tt>multimap</tt> class synopsis; and +in 23.6.3 [set], in the <tt>set</tt> class synopsis; and +in 23.6.4 [multiset], in the <tt>multiset</tt> class synopsis: +change the signature of the first <tt>erase</tt> overload to +</p> +<pre> iterator erase(iterator position); +</pre> +<p>and change the signature of the third <tt>erase</tt> overload to</p> +<pre> iterator erase(iterator first, iterator last); +</pre> + + +<p><i>[Pre-Kona: reopened at the request of Howard Hinnant]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Post-Kona: the LWG agrees the return type should be +<tt>iterator</tt>, not <tt>void</tt>. (Alex Stepanov agrees too.) +Matt provided wording.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ + Sydney: the proposed wording went in the right direction, but it + wasn't good enough. We want to return an iterator from the range form + of erase as well as the single-iterator form. Also, the wording is + slightly different from the wording we have for sequences; there's no + good reason for having a difference. Matt provided new wording, +(reflected above) which we will review at the next meeting. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Redmond: formally voted into WP. +]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="132"></a>132. list::resize description uses random access iterators</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.3.4.2 [list.capacity] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 1999-03-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#list.capacity">issues</a> in [list.capacity].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The description reads:</p> + +<p>-1- Effects:</p> + +<pre> if (sz > size()) + insert(end(), sz-size(), c); + else if (sz < size()) + erase(begin()+sz, end()); + else + ; // do nothing</pre> + +<p>Obviously list::resize should not be specified in terms of random access iterators.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change 23.3.4.2 [list.capacity] paragraph 1 to:</p> + +<p>Effects:</p> + +<pre> if (sz > size()) + insert(end(), sz-size(), c); + else if (sz < size()) + { + iterator i = begin(); + advance(i, sz); + erase(i, end()); + }</pre> + +<p><i>[Dublin: The LWG asked Howard to discuss exception safety offline +with David Abrahams. They had a discussion and believe there is +no issue of exception safety with the proposed resolution.]</i></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="133"></a>133. map missing get_allocator()</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.6.1 [map] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 1999-03-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#map">issues</a> in [map].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p><p>The title says it all.</p> + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Insert in 23.6.1 [map], paragraph 2, +after operator= in the map declaration:</p> + +<pre> allocator_type get_allocator() const;</pre> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="134"></a>134. vector constructors over specified</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.4.1.1 [vector.cons] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 1999-03-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The complexity description says: "It does at most 2N calls to the copy constructor +of T and logN reallocations if they are just input iterators ...".</p> + +<p>This appears to be overly restrictive, dictating the precise memory/performance +tradeoff for the implementor.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change 23.4.1.1 [vector.cons], paragraph 1 to:</p> + +<p>-1- Complexity: The constructor template <class +InputIterator> vector(InputIterator first, InputIterator last) +makes only N calls to the copy constructor of T (where N is the +distance between first and last) and no reallocations if iterators +first and last are of forward, bidirectional, or random access +categories. It makes order N calls to the copy constructor of T and +order logN reallocations if they are just input iterators. +</p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>"at most 2N calls" is correct only if the growth factor +is greater than or equal to 2. +</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="136"></a>136. seekp, seekg setting wrong streams?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.1.3 [istream.unformatted] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 1999-03-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#istream.unformatted">issues</a> in [istream.unformatted].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>I may be misunderstanding the intent, but should not seekg set only +the input stream and seekp set only the output stream? The description +seems to say that each should set both input and output streams. If +that's really the intent, I withdraw this proposal.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In section 27.6.1.3 change:</p> + +<pre>basic_istream<charT,traits>& seekg(pos_type pos); +Effects: If fail() != true, executes rdbuf()->pubseekpos(pos). </pre> + +<p>To:</p> + +<pre>basic_istream<charT,traits>& seekg(pos_type pos); +Effects: If fail() != true, executes rdbuf()->pubseekpos(pos, ios_base::in). </pre> + +<p>In section 27.6.1.3 change:</p> + +<pre>basic_istream<charT,traits>& seekg(off_type& off, ios_base::seekdir dir); +Effects: If fail() != true, executes rdbuf()->pubseekoff(off, dir). </pre> + +<p>To:</p> + +<pre>basic_istream<charT,traits>& seekg(off_type& off, ios_base::seekdir dir); +Effects: If fail() != true, executes rdbuf()->pubseekoff(off, dir, ios_base::in). </pre> + +<p>In section 27.6.2.4, paragraph 2 change:</p> + +<pre>-2- Effects: If fail() != true, executes rdbuf()->pubseekpos(pos). </pre> + +<p>To:</p> + +<pre>-2- Effects: If fail() != true, executes rdbuf()->pubseekpos(pos, ios_base::out). </pre> + +<p>In section 27.6.2.4, paragraph 4 change:</p> + +<pre>-4- Effects: If fail() != true, executes rdbuf()->pubseekoff(off, dir). </pre> + +<p>To:</p> + +<pre>-4- Effects: If fail() != true, executes rdbuf()->pubseekoff(off, dir, ios_base::out). </pre> + +<p><i>[Dublin: Dietmar Kühl thinks this is probably correct, but would +like the opinion of more iostream experts before taking action.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Tokyo: Reviewed by the LWG. PJP noted that although his docs are +incorrect, his implementation already implements the Proposed +Resolution.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Post-Tokyo: Matt Austern comments:<br> +Is it a problem with basic_istream and basic_ostream, or is it a problem +with basic_stringbuf? +We could resolve the issue either by changing basic_istream and +basic_ostream, or by changing basic_stringbuf. I prefer the latter +change (or maybe both changes): I don't see any reason for the standard to +require that std::stringbuf s(std::string("foo"), std::ios_base::in); +s.pubseekoff(0, std::ios_base::beg); must fail.<br> +This requirement is a bit weird. There's no similar requirement +for basic_streambuf<>::seekpos, or for basic_filebuf<>::seekoff or +basic_filebuf<>::seekpos.]</i></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="137"></a>137. Do use_facet and has_facet look in the global locale?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.3.1 [locale] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Angelika Langer <b>Opened:</b> 1999-03-17 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#locale">issues</a> in [locale].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Section 22.3.1 [locale] says:</p> + +<p>-4- In the call to use_facet<Facet>(loc), the type argument +chooses a facet, making available all members of the named type. If +Facet is not present in a locale (or, failing that, in the global +locale), it throws the standard exception bad_cast. A C++ program can +check if a locale implements a particular facet with the template +function has_facet<Facet>(). </p> + +<p>This contradicts the specification given in section +22.3.2 [locale.global.templates]: +<br><br> +template <class Facet> const Facet& use_facet(const +locale& loc); <br> +<br> +-1- Get a reference to a facet of a locale. <br> +-2- Returns: a reference to the corresponding facet of loc, if present. <br> +-3- Throws: bad_cast if has_facet<Facet>(loc) is false. <br> +-4- Notes: The reference returned remains valid at least as long as any copy of loc exists +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Remove the phrase "(or, failing that, in the global locale)" +from section 22.1.1. </p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>Needed for consistency with the way locales are handled elsewhere +in the standard.</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="139"></a>139. Optional sequence operation table description unclear</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2.3 [sequence.reqmts] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Andrew Koenig <b>Opened:</b> 1999-03-30 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#sequence.reqmts">issues</a> in [sequence.reqmts].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The sentence introducing the Optional sequence operation table +(23.1.1 paragraph 12) has two problems:</p> + +<p>A. It says ``The operations in table 68 are provided only for the containers for which +they take constant time.''<br> +<br> +That could be interpreted in two ways, one of them being ``Even though table 68 shows +particular operations as being provided, implementations are free to omit them if they +cannot implement them in constant time.''<br> +<br> +B. That paragraph says nothing about amortized constant time, and it should. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Replace the wording in 23.1.1 paragraph 12 which begins ``The operations in table 68 are provided only..." +with:</p> + +<blockquote> + <p>Table 68 lists sequence operations that are provided for some types of sequential + containers but not others. An implementation shall provide these operations for all + container types shown in the ``container'' column, and shall implement them so as to take + amortized constant time.</p> +</blockquote> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="141"></a>141. basic_string::find_last_of, find_last_not_of say pos instead of xpos</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.4.6.4 [string::insert], 21.4.6.6 [string::replace] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Arch Robison <b>Opened:</b> 1999-04-28 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#string::insert">issues</a> in [string::insert].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Sections 21.3.6.4 paragraph 1 and 21.3.6.6 paragraph 1 surely have misprints where they +say:<br> +<br> +— <tt>xpos <= pos</tt> and <tt>pos < size();</tt></p> + +<p>Surely the document meant to say ``<tt>xpos < size()</tt>'' in both places.</p> + +<p><i>[Judy Ward also sent in this issue for 21.3.6.4 with the same +proposed resolution.]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change Sections 21.3.6.4 paragraph 1 and 21.3.6.6 paragraph 1, the line which says:<br> +<br> +— <tt>xpos <= pos</tt> and <tt>pos < size();<br> +<br> +</tt>to:<br> +<tt><br> +</tt>— <tt>xpos <= pos</tt> and <tt>xpos < size();</tt></p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="142"></a>142. lexicographical_compare complexity wrong</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.4.8 [alg.lex.comparison] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 1999-06-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The lexicographical_compare complexity is specified as:<br> +<br> + "At most min((last1 - first1), (last2 - first2)) +applications of the corresponding comparison."<br> +<br> +The best I can do is twice that expensive.</p> + +<p>Nicolai Josuttis comments in lib-6862: You mean, to check for +equality you have to check both < and >? Yes, IMO you are +right! (and Matt states this complexity in his book)</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change 25.4.8 [alg.lex.comparison] complexity to:</p> + <blockquote><p> + At most <tt>2*min((last1 - first1), (last2 - first2))</tt> + applications of the corresponding comparison. + </p></blockquote> + +<p>Change the example at the end of paragraph 3 to read:</p> + <blockquote><p> + [Example:<br> + <br> + for ( ; first1 != last1 && first2 != last2 ; + ++first1, ++first2) {<br> + if (*first1 < *first2) return true;<br> + if (*first2 < *first1) return false;<br> + }<br> + return first1 == last1 && first2 != last2;<br> + <br> + --end example] + </p></blockquote> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="144"></a>144. Deque constructor complexity wrong </h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.3.2.1 [deque.cons] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Herb Sutter <b>Opened:</b> 1999-05-09 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#deque.cons">issues</a> in [deque.cons].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>In 23.3.2.1 [deque.cons] paragraph 6, the deque ctor that takes an iterator range appears +to have complexity requirements which are incorrect, and which contradict the +complexity requirements for insert(). I suspect that the text in question, +below, was taken from vector:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>Complexity: If the iterators first and last are forward iterators, + bidirectional iterators, or random access iterators the constructor makes only + N calls to the copy constructor, and performs no reallocations, where N is + last - first.</p> +</blockquote> +<p>The word "reallocations" does not really apply to deque. Further, +all of the following appears to be spurious:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>It makes at most 2N calls to the copy constructor of T and log N + reallocations if they are input iterators.1)</p> + <p>1) The complexity is greater in the case of input iterators because each + element must be added individually: it is impossible to determine the distance + between first abd last before doing the copying.</p> +</blockquote> +<p>This makes perfect sense for vector, but not for deque. Why should deque gain +an efficiency advantage from knowing in advance the number of elements to +insert?</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 23.3.2.1 [deque.cons] paragraph 6, replace the Complexity description, including the +footnote, with the following text (which also corrects the "abd" +typo):</p> +<blockquote> + <p>Complexity: Makes last - first calls to the copy constructor of T.</p> +</blockquote> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="146"></a>146. complex<T> Inserter and Extractor need sentries</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.4.6 [complex.ops] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Angelika Langer <b>Opened:</b> 1999-05-12 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#complex.ops">issues</a> in [complex.ops].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The extractor for complex numbers is specified as: </p> + +<blockquote> + +<p> template<class T, class charT, class traits> <br> + basic_istream<charT, traits>& <br> + operator>>(basic_istream<charT, traits>& is, complex<T>& x);<br> + <br> +Effects: Extracts a complex number x of the form: u, (u), or (u,v), +where u is the real part and v is the imaginary part +(lib.istream.formatted). <br> +Requires: The input values be convertible to T. If bad input is +encountered, calls is.setstate(ios::failbit) (which may throw +ios::failure (lib.iostate.flags). <br> +Returns: is .</p> + +</blockquote> +<p>Is it intended that the extractor for complex numbers does not skip +whitespace, unlike all other extractors in the standard library do? +Shouldn't a sentry be used? <br> +<br> +The inserter for complex numbers is specified as:</p> + +<blockquote> + +<p> template<class T, class charT, class traits> <br> + basic_ostream<charT, traits>& <br> + operator<<(basic_ostream<charT, traits>& o, const complex<T>& x);<br> +<br> +Effects: inserts the complex number x onto the stream o as if it were implemented as follows:<br> +<br> + template<class T, class charT, class traits> <br> + basic_ostream<charT, traits>& <br> + operator<<(basic_ostream<charT, traits>& o, const complex<T>& x) <br> + { <br> + basic_ostringstream<charT, traits> s; <br> + s.flags(o.flags()); <br> + s.imbue(o.getloc()); <br> + s.precision(o.precision()); <br> + s << '(' << x.real() << "," << x.imag() << ')'; <br> + return o << s.str(); <br> + }</p> + +</blockquote> + +<p>Is it intended that the inserter for complex numbers ignores the +field width and does not do any padding? If, with the suggested +implementation above, the field width were set in the stream then the +opening parentheses would be adjusted, but the rest not, because the +field width is reset to zero after each insertion.</p> + +<p>I think that both operations should use sentries, for sake of +consistency with the other inserters and extractors in the +library. Regarding the issue of padding in the inserter, I don't know +what the intent was. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>After 26.4.6 [complex.ops] paragraph 14 (operator>>), add a +Notes clause:</p> + +<blockquote> + +<p>Notes: This extraction is performed as a series of simpler +extractions. Therefore, the skipping of whitespace is specified to be the +same for each of the simpler extractions.</p> + +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>For extractors, the note is added to make it clear that skipping whitespace +follows an "all-or-none" rule.</p> + +<p>For inserters, the LWG believes there is no defect; the standard is correct +as written.</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="147"></a>147. Library Intro refers to global functions that aren't global</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17.6.4.4 [global.functions] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Lois Goldthwaite <b>Opened:</b> 1999-06-04 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#global.functions">issues</a> in [global.functions].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The library had many global functions until 17.4.1.1 [lib.contents] +paragraph 2 was added: </p> + +<blockquote> + +<p>All library entities except macros, operator new and operator +delete are defined within the namespace std or namespaces nested +within namespace std. </p> + +</blockquote> + +<p>It appears "global function" was never updated in the following: </p> + +<blockquote> + +<p>17.4.4.3 - Global functions [lib.global.functions]<br> +<br> +-1- It is unspecified whether any global functions in the C++ Standard +Library are defined as inline (dcl.fct.spec).<br> +<br> +-2- A call to a global function signature described in Clauses +lib.language.support through lib.input.output behaves the same as if +the implementation declares no additional global function +signatures.*<br> +<br> + [Footnote: A valid C++ program always calls the expected library + global function. An implementation may also define additional + global functions that would otherwise not be called by a valid C++ + program. --- end footnote]<br> +<br> +-3- A global function cannot be declared by the implementation as +taking additional default arguments. <br> +<br> +17.4.4.4 - Member functions [lib.member.functions]<br> +<br> +-2- An implementation can declare additional non-virtual member +function signatures within a class: </p> + + <blockquote> + +<p>-- by adding arguments with default values to a member function +signature; The same latitude does not extend to the implementation of +virtual or global functions, however. </p> + + </blockquote> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> Change "global" to "global or non-member" in:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>17.4.4.3 [lib.global.functions] section title,<br> + 17.4.4.3 [lib.global.functions] para 1,<br> + 17.4.4.3 [lib.global.functions] para 2 in 2 places plus 2 + places in the footnote,<br> + 17.4.4.3 [lib.global.functions] para 3,<br> + 17.4.4.4 [lib.member.functions] para 2</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +Because operator new and delete are global, the proposed resolution +was changed from "non-member" to "global or non-member. +</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="148"></a>148. Functions in the example facet BoolNames should be const</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.8 [facets.examples] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Jeremy Siek <b>Opened:</b> 1999-06-03 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#facets.examples">issues</a> in [facets.examples].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>In 22.4.8 [facets.examples] paragraph 13, the do_truename() and +do_falsename() functions in the example facet BoolNames should be +const. The functions they are overriding in +numpunct_byname<char> are const. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 22.4.8 [facets.examples] paragraph 13, insert "const" in +two places:</p> +<blockquote> + <p><tt>string do_truename() const { return "Oui Oui!"; }<br> + string do_falsename() const { return "Mais Non!"; }</tt></p> +</blockquote> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="149"></a>149. Insert should return iterator to first element inserted</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2.3 [sequence.reqmts] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Andrew Koenig <b>Opened:</b> 1999-06-28 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#sequence.reqmts">issues</a> in [sequence.reqmts].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Suppose that c and c1 are sequential containers and i is an +iterator that refers to an element of c. Then I can insert a copy of +c1's elements into c ahead of element i by executing </p> + +<blockquote> + +<pre>c.insert(i, c1.begin(), c1.end());</pre> + +</blockquote> + +<p>If c is a vector, it is fairly easy for me to find out where the +newly inserted elements are, even though i is now invalid: </p> + +<blockquote> + +<pre>size_t i_loc = i - c.begin(); +c.insert(i, c1.begin(), c1.end());</pre> + +</blockquote> + +<p>and now the first inserted element is at c.begin()+i_loc and one +past the last is at c.begin()+i_loc+c1.size().<br> +<br> +But what if c is a list? I can still find the location of one past the last inserted element, because i is still valid. To find the location of the first inserted element, though, I must execute something like </p> + +<blockquote> + +<pre>for (size_t n = c1.size(); n; --n) + --i;</pre> + +</blockquote> + +<p>because i is now no longer a random-access iterator.<br> +<br> +Alternatively, I might write something like </p> + +<blockquote> + +<pre>bool first = i == c.begin(); +list<T>::iterator j = i; +if (!first) --j; +c.insert(i, c1.begin(), c1.end()); +if (first) + j = c.begin(); +else + ++j;</pre> + +</blockquote> + +<p>which, although wretched, requires less overhead.<br> +<br> +But I think the right solution is to change the definition of insert +so that instead of returning void, it returns an iterator that refers +to the first element inserted, if any, and otherwise is a copy of its +first argument. </p> + +<p><i>[ +Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Reopened by Alisdair. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit Alisdair adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +In addition to the original rationale for C++03, this change also gives a +consistent interface for all container insert operations i.e. they all +return an iterator to the (first) inserted item. +</p> + +<p> +Proposed wording provided. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Q: why isn't this change also proposed for associative containers? +</p> + +<p> +A: The returned iterator wouldn't necessarily point to a contiguous range. +</p> + +<p> +Moved to Ready. +</p> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +<sef ref="[sequence.reqmts]"> Table 83 +change return type from <tt>void</tt> to <tt>iterator</tt> for the following rows: +</sef></p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 83 -- Sequence container requirements (in addition to container)</caption> +<tbody><tr> +<th>Expression</th> +<th>Return type</th> +<th>Assertion/note pre-/post-condition</th> +</tr> +<tr> +<td> +<tt>a.insert(p,n,t)</tt> +</td> +<td> +<tt><del>void</del> <ins>iterator</ins></tt> +</td> +<td> +Inserts <tt>n</tt> copies of <tt>t</tt> before <tt>p</tt>. +</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> +<tt>a.insert(p,i,j)</tt> +</td> +<td> +<tt><del>void</del> <ins>iterator</ins></tt> +</td> +<td> +Each iterator in the range <tt>[i,j)</tt> shall be +dereferenced exactly once. +pre: <tt>i</tt> and <tt>j</tt> are not iterators into <tt>a</tt>. +Inserts copies of elements in <tt>[i, j)</tt> before <tt>p</tt> +</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> +<tt>a.insert(p,il)</tt> +</td> +<td> +<tt><del>void</del> <ins>iterator</ins></tt> +</td> +<td> +<tt>a.insert(p, il.begin(), il.end())</tt>. +</td> +</tr> +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Add after p6 23.2.3 [sequence.reqmts]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p>-6- ...</p> + +<p><ins> +The iterator returned from <tt>a.insert(p,n,t)</tt> points to the copy of the +first element inserted into <tt>a</tt>, or <tt>p</tt> if <tt>n == 0</tt>. +</ins></p> + +<p><ins> +The iterator returned from <tt>a.insert(p,i,j)</tt> points to the copy of the +first element inserted into <tt>a</tt>, or <tt>p</tt> if <tt>i == j</tt>. +</ins></p> + +<p><ins> +The iterator returned from <tt>a.insert(p,il)</tt> points to the copy of the +first element inserted into <tt>a</tt>, or <tt>p</tt> if <tt>il</tt> is empty. +</ins></p> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +p2 23.3.2 [deque] Update class definition, change return type +from <tt>void</tt> to <tt>iterator</tt>: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>void</del> <ins>iterator</ins> insert(const_iterator position, size_type n, const T& x); +template <class InputIterator> + <del>void</del> <ins>iterator</ins> insert(const_iterator position, InputIterator first, InputIterator last); + <del>void</del> <ins>iterator</ins> insert(const_iterator position, initializer_list<T>); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +23.3.2.3 [deque.modifiers] change return type from <tt>void</tt> to <tt>iterator</tt> on following declarations: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre> <del>void</del> <ins>iterator</ins> insert(const_iterator position, size_type n, const T& x); +template <class InputIterator> + <del>void</del> <ins>iterator</ins> insert(const_iterator position, InputIterator first, InputIterator last); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Add the following (missing) declaration +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>iterator insert(const_iterator position, initializer_list<T>);</ins> +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +23.3.3 [forwardlist] Update class definition, change return type +from <tt>void</tt> to <tt>iterator</tt>: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>void</del> <ins>iterator</ins> insert_after(const_iterator position, initializer_list<T> il); +<del>void</del> <ins>iterator</ins> insert_after(const_iterator position, size_type n, const T& x); +template <class InputIterator> + <del>void</del> <ins>iterator</ins> insert_after(const_iterator position, InputIterator first, InputIterator last); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +p8 23.3.3.4 [forwardlist.modifiers] change return type from <tt>void</tt> to <tt>iterator</tt>: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>void</del> <ins>iterator</ins> insert_after(const_iterator position, size_type n, const T& x); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Add paragraph: +</p> + +<blockquote> +Returns: position. +</blockquote> + +<p> +p10 23.3.3.4 [forwardlist.modifiers] change return type from <tt>void</tt> to <tt>iterator</tt>: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class InputIterator> + <del>void</del> <ins>iterator</ins> insert_after(const_iterator position, InputIterator first, InputIterator last); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Add paragraph: +</p> + +<blockquote> +Returns: position. +</blockquote> + +<p> +p12 23.3.3.4 [forwardlist.modifiers] change return type from <tt>void</tt> to <tt>iterator</tt> on following declarations: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>void</del> <ins>iterator</ins> insert_after(const_iterator position, initializer_list<T> il); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +change return type from <tt>void</tt> to <tt>iterator</tt> on following declarations: +</p> + +<p> +p2 23.3.4 [list] Update class definition, change return type from <tt>void</tt> to <tt>iterator</tt>: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>void</del> <ins>iterator</ins> insert(const_iterator position, size_type n, const T& x); + +template <class InputIterator> +<del>void</del> <ins>iterator</ins> insert(const_iterator position, InputIterator first, InputIterator last); + +<del>void</del> <ins>iterator</ins> insert(const_iterator position, initializer_list<T>); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +23.3.4.3 [list.modifiers] change return type from <tt>void</tt> to <tt>iterator</tt> on following declarations: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>void</del> <ins>iterator</ins> insert(const_iterator position, size_type n, const T& x); + +template <class InputIterator> + <del>void</del> <ins>iterator</ins> insert(const_iterator position, InputIterator first, InputIterator last); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Add the following (missing) declaration +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>iterator insert(const_iterator position, initializer_list<T>); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +p2 23.4.1 [vector] +</p> + +<p> +Update class definition, change return type from <tt>void</tt> to <tt>iterator</tt>: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>void</del> <ins>iterator</ins> insert(const_iterator position, T&& x); + +<del>void</del> <ins>iterator</ins> insert(const_iterator position, size_type n, const T& x); + +template <class InputIterator> + <del>void</del> <ins>iterator</ins> insert(const_iterator position, InputIterator first, InputIterator last); + +<del>void</del> <ins>iterator</ins> insert(const_iterator position, initializer_list<T>); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +23.4.1.4 [vector.modifiers] change return type from <tt>void</tt> to <tt>iterator</tt> on following declarations: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>void</del> <ins>iterator</ins> insert(const_iterator position, size_type n, const T& x); + +template <class InputIterator> + <del>void</del> <ins>iterator</ins> insert(const_iterator position, InputIterator first, InputIterator last); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Add the following (missing) declaration +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>iterator insert(const_iterator position, initializer_list<T>); +</pre></blockquote> + + +<p> +p1 23.4.2 [vector.bool] Update class definition, change return type from <tt>void</tt> to <tt>iterator</tt>: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>void</del> <ins>iterator</ins> insert (const_iterator position, size_type n, const bool& x); + +template <class InputIterator> + <del>void</del> <ins>iterator</ins> insert(const_iterator position, InputIterator first, InputIterator last); + + <del>void</del> <ins>iterator</ins> insert(const_iterator position, initializer_list<bool> il); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +p5 21.4 [basic.string] Update class definition, change return type from <tt>void</tt> to <tt>iterator</tt>: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>void</del> <ins>iterator</ins> insert(const_iterator p, size_type n, charT c); + +template<class InputIterator> + <del>void</del> <ins>iterator</ins> insert(const_iterator p, InputIterator first, InputIterator last); + +<del>void</del> <ins>iterator</ins> insert(const_iterator p, initializer_list<charT>); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +p13 21.4.6.4 [string::insert] change return type from <tt>void</tt> to <tt>iterator</tt>: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>void</del> <ins>iterator</ins> insert(const_iterator p, size_type n, charT c); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Add paragraph: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Returns:</i> an iterator which refers to the copy of the first inserted +character, or <tt>p</tt> if <tt>n == 0</tt>. +</blockquote> + +<p> +p15 21.4.6.4 [string::insert] change return type from <tt>void</tt> to <tt>iterator</tt>: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class InputIterator> + <del>void</del> <ins>iterator</ins> insert(const_iterator p, InputIterator first, InputIterator last); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Add paragraph: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Returns:</i> an iterator which refers to the copy of the first inserted +character, or <tt>p</tt> if <tt>first == last</tt>. +</blockquote> + +<p> +p17 21.4.6.4 [string::insert] change return type from <tt>void</tt> to <tt>iterator</tt>: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>void</del> <ins>iterator</ins> insert(const_iterator p, initializer_list<charT> il); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Add paragraph: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Returns:</i> an iterator which refers to the copy of the first inserted +character, or <tt>p</tt> if <tt>il</tt> is empty. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> + +<p><i>[ +The following was the C++98/03 rationale and does not necessarily apply to the +proposed resolution in the C++0X time frame: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p>The LWG believes this was an intentional design decision and so is +not a defect. It may be worth revisiting for the next standard.</p> +</blockquote> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="150"></a>150. Find_first_of says integer instead of iterator </h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.2.7 [alg.find.first.of] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt McClure <b>Opened:</b> 1999-06-30 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#alg.find.first.of">issues</a> in [alg.find.first.of].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change 25.2.7 [alg.find.first.of] paragraph 2 from:</p> + +<blockquote> +<p>Returns: The first iterator i in the range [first1, last1) such +that for some integer j in the range [first2, last2) ...</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>to:</p> + +<blockquote> +<p>Returns: The first iterator i in the range [first1, last1) such +that for some iterator j in the range [first2, last2) ...</p> +</blockquote> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="151"></a>151. Can't currently clear() empty container</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2.3 [sequence.reqmts] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Ed Brey <b>Opened:</b> 1999-06-21 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#sequence.reqmts">issues</a> in [sequence.reqmts].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>For both sequences and associative containers, a.clear() has the +semantics of erase(a.begin(),a.end()), which is undefined for an empty +container since erase(q1,q2) requires that q1 be dereferenceable +(23.1.1,3 and 23.1.2,7). When the container is empty, a.begin() is +not dereferenceable.<br> +<br> +The requirement that q1 be unconditionally dereferenceable causes many +operations to be intuitively undefined, of which clearing an empty +container is probably the most dire.<br> +<br> +Since q1 and q2 are only referenced in the range [q1, q2), and [q1, +q2) is required to be a valid range, stating that q1 and q2 must be +iterators or certain kinds of iterators is unnecessary. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 23.1.1, paragraph 3, change:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>p and q2 denote valid iterators to a, q and q1 denote valid dereferenceable iterators to a, [q1, q2) denotes a valid range</p> +</blockquote> +<p>to:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>p denotes a valid iterator to a, q denotes a valid dereferenceable iterator to a, [q1, q2) denotes a valid range + in a</p> +</blockquote> +<p>In 23.1.2, paragraph 7, change:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>p and q2 are valid iterators to a, q and q1 are valid dereferenceable + iterators to a, [q1, q2) is a valid range</p> +</blockquote> +<p>to</p> +<blockquote> + <p>p is a valid iterator to a, q is a valid dereferenceable iterator to a, [q1, q2) is a valid range + into a</p> +</blockquote> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="152"></a>152. Typo in <tt>scan_is()</tt> semantics</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.1.1.2 [locale.ctype.virtuals] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Dietmar Kühl <b>Opened:</b> 1999-07-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#locale.ctype.virtuals">issues</a> in [locale.ctype.virtuals].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The semantics of <tt>scan_is()</tt> (paragraphs 4 and 6) is not exactly described +because there is no function <tt>is()</tt> which only takes a character as +argument. Also, in the effects clause (paragraph 3), the semantic is also kept +vague.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 22.4.1.1.2 [locale.ctype.virtuals] paragraphs 4 and 6, change the returns +clause from:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>"... such that <tt>is(*p)</tt> +would..."</p> +</blockquote> +<p>to: "... such that <tt>is(m, *p)</tt> + would...."</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="153"></a>153. Typo in <tt>narrow()</tt> semantics</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.1.3.2 [facet.ctype.char.members] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Dietmar Kühl <b>Opened:</b> 1999-07-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#facet.ctype.char.members">issues</a> in [facet.ctype.char.members].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#207">207</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The description of the array version of <tt>narrow()</tt> (in +paragraph 11) is flawed: There is no member <tt>do_narrow()</tt> which +takes only three arguments because in addition to the range a default +character is needed.</p> + +<p>Additionally, for both <tt>widen</tt> and <tt>narrow</tt> we have +two signatures followed by a <b>Returns</b> clause that only addresses +one of them.</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change the returns clause in 22.4.1.3.2 [facet.ctype.char.members] +paragraph 10 from:</p> +<p> Returns: do_widen(low, high, to).</p> + +<p>to:</p> +<p> Returns: do_widen(c) or do_widen(low, high, to), +respectively.</p> + +<p>Change 22.4.1.3.2 [facet.ctype.char.members] paragraph 10 and 11 from:</p> +<pre> char narrow(char c, char /*dfault*/) const; + const char* narrow(const char* low, const char* high, + char /*dfault*/, char* to) const;</pre> +<pre> Returns: do_narrow(low, high, to).</pre> +<p>to:</p> +<pre> char narrow(char c, char dfault) const; + const char* narrow(const char* low, const char* high, + char dfault, char* to) const;</pre> +<pre> Returns: do_narrow(c, dfault) or + do_narrow(low, high, dfault, to), respectively.</pre> + +<p><i>[Kona: 1) the problem occurs in additional places, 2) a user +defined version could be different.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Post-Tokyo: Dietmar provided the above wording at the request of +the LWG. He could find no other places the problem occurred. He +asks for clarification of the Kona "a user defined +version..." comment above. Perhaps it was a circuitous way of +saying "dfault" needed to be uncommented?]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Post-Toronto: the issues list maintainer has merged in the +proposed resolution from issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#207">207</a>, which addresses the +same paragraphs.]</i></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="154"></a>154. Missing <tt>double</tt> specifier for <tt>do_get()</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.2.1.2 [facet.num.get.virtuals] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Dietmar Kühl <b>Opened:</b> 1999-07-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#facet.num.get.virtuals">issues</a> in [facet.num.get.virtuals].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The table in paragraph 7 for the length modifier does not list the length +modifier <tt>l</tt> to be applied if the type is <tt>double</tt>. Thus, the +standard asks the implementation to do undefined things when using <tt>scanf()</tt> +(the missing length modifier for <tt>scanf()</tt> when scanning <tt>double</tt>s +is actually a problem I found quite often in production code, too).</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 22.4.2.1.2 [facet.num.get.virtuals], paragraph 7, add a row in the Length +Modifier table to say that for <tt>double</tt> a length modifier +<tt>l</tt> is to be used.</p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The standard makes an embarrassing beginner's mistake.</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="155"></a>155. Typo in naming the class defining the class <tt>Init</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.4 [iostream.objects] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Dietmar Kühl <b>Opened:</b> 1999-07-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#iostream.objects">issues</a> in [iostream.objects].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>There are conflicting statements about where the class +<tt>Init</tt> is defined. According to 27.4 [iostream.objects] paragraph 2 +it is defined as <tt>basic_ios::Init</tt>, according to 27.5.2 [ios.base] it is defined as <tt>ios_base::Init</tt>.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change 27.4 [iostream.objects] paragraph 2 from +"<tt>basic_ios::Init"</tt> to +"<tt>ios_base::Init"</tt>.</p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>Although not strictly wrong, the standard was misleading enough to warrant +the change.</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="156"></a>156. Typo in <tt>imbue()</tt> description</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.5.2.3 [ios.base.locales] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Dietmar Kühl <b>Opened:</b> 1999-07-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#ios.base.locales">issues</a> in [ios.base.locales].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>There is a small discrepancy between the declarations of +<tt>imbue()</tt>: in 27.5.2 [ios.base] the argument is passed as +<tt>locale const&</tt> (correct), in 27.5.2.3 [ios.base.locales] it +is passed as <tt>locale const</tt> (wrong).</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 27.5.2.3 [ios.base.locales] change the <tt>imbue</tt> argument +from "<tt>locale const" to "locale +const&".</tt></p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="158"></a>158. Underspecified semantics for <tt>setbuf()</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.6.2.4.2 [streambuf.virt.buffer] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Dietmar Kühl <b>Opened:</b> 1999-07-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#streambuf.virt.buffer">issues</a> in [streambuf.virt.buffer].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The default behavior of <tt>setbuf()</tt> is described only for the +situation that <tt>gptr() != 0 && gptr() != egptr()</tt>: +namely to do nothing. What has to be done in other situations +is not described although there is actually only one reasonable +approach, namely to do nothing, too.</p> + +<p>Since changing the buffer would almost certainly mess up most +buffer management of derived classes unless these classes do it +themselves, the default behavior of <tt>setbuf()</tt> should always be +to do nothing.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change 27.6.2.4.2 [streambuf.virt.buffer], paragraph 3, Default behavior, +to: "Default behavior: Does nothing. Returns this."</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="159"></a>159. Strange use of <tt>underflow()</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.6.2.4.3 [streambuf.virt.get] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Dietmar Kühl <b>Opened:</b> 1999-07-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The description of the meaning of the result of +<tt>showmanyc()</tt> seems to be rather strange: It uses calls to +<tt>underflow()</tt>. Using <tt>underflow()</tt> is strange because +this function only reads the current character but does not extract +it, <tt>uflow()</tt> would extract the current character. This should +be fixed to use <tt>sbumpc()</tt> instead.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change 27.6.2.4.3 [streambuf.virt.get] paragraph 1, +<tt>showmanyc()</tt>returns clause, by replacing the word +"supplied" with the words "extracted from the +stream".</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="160"></a>160. Typo: Use of non-existing function <tt>exception()</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.1.1 [istream] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Dietmar Kühl <b>Opened:</b> 1999-07-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#istream">issues</a> in [istream].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The paragraph 4 refers to the function <tt>exception()</tt> which +is not defined. Probably, the referred function is +<tt>basic_ios<>::exceptions()</tt>.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 27.7.1.1 [istream], 27.7.1.3 [istream.unformatted], paragraph 1, +27.7.2.1 [ostream], paragraph 3, and 27.7.2.6.1 [ostream.formatted.reqmts], +paragraph 1, change "<tt>exception()" to +"exceptions()"</tt>.</p> + +<p><i>[Note to Editor: "exceptions" with an "s" +is the correct spelling.]</i></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="161"></a>161. Typo: <tt>istream_iterator</tt> vs. <tt>istreambuf_iterator</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.1.2.2 [istream.formatted.arithmetic] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Dietmar Kühl <b>Opened:</b> 1999-07-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#istream.formatted.arithmetic">issues</a> in [istream.formatted.arithmetic].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The note in the second paragraph pretends that the first argument +is an object of type <tt>istream_iterator</tt>. This is wrong: It is +an object of type <tt>istreambuf_iterator</tt>.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change 27.7.1.2.2 [istream.formatted.arithmetic] from:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>The first argument provides an object of the istream_iterator class...</p> +</blockquote> +<p>to</p> +<blockquote> + <p>The first argument provides an object of the istreambuf_iterator class...</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="164"></a>164. do_put() has apparently unused fill argument</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.5.3.2 [locale.time.put.virtuals] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Angelika Langer <b>Opened:</b> 1999-07-23 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>In 22.4.5.3.2 [locale.time.put.virtuals] the do_put() function is specified +as taking a fill character as an argument, but the description of the +function does not say whether the character is used at all and, if so, +in which way. The same holds for any format control parameters that +are accessible through the ios_base& argument, such as the +adjustment or the field width. Is strftime() supposed to use the fill +character in any way? In any case, the specification of +time_put.do_put() looks inconsistent to me.<br> <br> Is the +signature of do_put() wrong, or is the effects clause incomplete?</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Add the following note after 22.4.5.3.2 [locale.time.put.virtuals] +paragraph 2:</p> +<blockquote> + <p> [Note: the <tt>fill</tt> argument may be used in the implementation-defined formats, or by derivations. A space character is a reasonable default + for this argument. --end Note]</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The LWG felt that while the normative text was correct, +users need some guidance on what to pass for the <tt>fill</tt> +argument since the standard doesn't say how it's used.</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="165"></a>165. <tt>xsputn()</tt>, <tt>pubsync()</tt> never called by <tt>basic_ostream</tt> members?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.2.1 [ostream] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Dietmar Kühl <b>Opened:</b> 1999-07-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#ostream">issues</a> in [ostream].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Paragraph 2 explicitly states that none of the <tt>basic_ostream</tt> +functions falling into one of the groups "formatted output functions" +and "unformatted output functions" calls any stream buffer function +which might call a virtual function other than <tt>overflow()</tt>. Basically +this is fine but this implies that <tt>sputn()</tt> (this function would call +the virtual function <tt>xsputn()</tt>) is never called by any of the standard +output functions. Is this really intended? At minimum it would be convenient to +call <tt>xsputn()</tt> for strings... Also, the statement that <tt>overflow()</tt> +is the only virtual member of <tt>basic_streambuf</tt> called is in conflict +with the definition of <tt>flush()</tt> which calls <tt>rdbuf()->pubsync()</tt> +and thereby the virtual function <tt>sync()</tt> (<tt>flush()</tt> is listed +under "unformatted output functions").</p> +<p>In addition, I guess that the sentence starting with "They may use other +public members of <tt>basic_ostream</tt> ..." probably was intended to +start with "They may use other public members of <tt>basic_streamuf</tt>..." +although the problem with the virtual members exists in both cases.</p> +<p>I see two obvious resolutions:</p> +<ol> + <li>state in a footnote that this means that <tt>xsputn()</tt> will never be + called by any ostream member and that this is intended.</li> + <li>relax the restriction and allow calling <tt>overflow()</tt> and <tt>xsputn()</tt>. + Of course, the problem with <tt>flush()</tt> has to be resolved in some way.</li> +</ol> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change the last sentence of 27.6.2.1 (lib.ostream) paragraph 2 from:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>They may use other public members of basic_ostream except that they do not + invoke any virtual members of rdbuf() except overflow().</p> +</blockquote> +<p>to:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>They may use other public members of basic_ostream except that they shall + not invoke any virtual members of rdbuf() except overflow(), xsputn(), and + sync().</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[Kona: the LWG believes this is a problem. Wish to ask Jerry or +PJP why the standard is written this way.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Post-Tokyo: Dietmar supplied wording at the request of the +LWG. He comments: The rules can be made a little bit more specific if +necessary be explicitly spelling out what virtuals are allowed to be +called from what functions and eg to state specifically that flush() +is allowed to call sync() while other functions are not.]</i></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="167"></a>167. Improper use of <tt>traits_type::length()</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.2.6.4 [ostream.inserters.character] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Dietmar Kühl <b>Opened:</b> 1999-07-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#ostream.inserters.character">issues</a> in [ostream.inserters.character].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Paragraph 4 states that the length is determined using +<tt>traits::length(s)</tt>. Unfortunately, this function is not +defined for example if the character type is <tt>wchar_t</tt> and the +type of <tt>s</tt> is <tt>char const*</tt>. Similar problems exist if +the character type is <tt>char</tt> and the type of <tt>s</tt> is +either <tt>signed char const*</tt> or <tt>unsigned char +const*</tt>.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change 27.7.2.6.4 [ostream.inserters.character] paragraph 4 from:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>Effects: Behaves like an formatted inserter (as described in + lib.ostream.formatted.reqmts) of out. After a sentry object is + constructed it inserts characters. The number of characters starting + at s to be inserted is traits::length(s). Padding is determined as + described in lib.facet.num.put.virtuals. The traits::length(s) + characters starting at s are widened using out.widen + (lib.basic.ios.members). The widened characters and any required + padding are inserted into out. Calls width(0).</p> +</blockquote> +<p>to:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>Effects: Behaves like a formatted inserter (as described in + lib.ostream.formatted.reqmts) of out. After a sentry object is + constructed it inserts <i>n</i> characters starting at <i>s</i>, + where <i>n</i> is the number that would be computed as if by:</p> + <ul> + <li>traits::length(s) for the overload where the first argument is of + type basic_ostream<charT, traits>& and the second is + of type const charT*, and also for the overload where the first + argument is of type basic_ostream<char, traits>& and + the second is of type const char*.</li> + <li>std::char_traits<char>::length(s) + for the overload where the first argument is of type + basic_ostream<charT, traits>& and the second is of type + const char*.</li> + <li>traits::length(reinterpret_cast<const char*>(s)) + for the other two overloads.</li> + </ul> + <p>Padding is determined as described in + lib.facet.num.put.virtuals. The <i>n</i> characters starting at + <i>s</i> are widened using out.widen (lib.basic.ios.members). The + widened characters and any required padding are inserted into + out. Calls width(0).</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[Santa Cruz: Matt supplied new wording]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Kona: changed "where <i>n</i> is" to " where <i>n</i> is the + number that would be computed as if by"]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>We have five separate cases. In two of them we can use the +user-supplied traits class without any fuss. In the other three we +try to use something as close to that user-supplied class as possible. +In two cases we've got a traits class that's appropriate for +char and what we've got is a const signed char* or a const +unsigned char*; that's close enough so we can just use a reinterpret +cast, and continue to use the user-supplied traits class. Finally, +there's one case where we just have to give up: where we've got a +traits class for some arbitrary charT type, and we somehow have to +deal with a const char*. There's nothing better to do but fall back +to char_traits<char></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="168"></a>168. Typo: formatted vs. unformatted</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.2.7 [ostream.unformatted] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Dietmar Kühl <b>Opened:</b> 1999-07-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#ostream.unformatted">issues</a> in [ostream.unformatted].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The first paragraph begins with a descriptions what has to be done +in <i>formatted</i> output functions. Probably this is a typo and the +paragraph really want to describe unformatted output functions...</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 27.7.2.7 [ostream.unformatted] paragraph 1, the first and last +sentences, change the word "formatted" to +"unformatted":</p> +<blockquote> + <p>"Each <b>unformatted </b> output function begins ..."<br> + "... value specified for the <b>unformatted </b> output + function."</p> +</blockquote> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="169"></a>169. Bad efficiency of <tt>overflow()</tt> mandated</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.8.1.4 [stringbuf.virtuals] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Dietmar Kühl <b>Opened:</b> 1999-07-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#stringbuf.virtuals">issues</a> in [stringbuf.virtuals].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Paragraph 8, Notes, of this section seems to mandate an extremely +inefficient way of buffer handling for <tt>basic_stringbuf</tt>, +especially in view of the restriction that <tt>basic_ostream</tt> +member functions are not allowed to use <tt>xsputn()</tt> (see 27.7.2.1 [ostream]): For each character to be inserted, a new buffer +is to be created.</p> +<p>Of course, the resolution below requires some handling of +simultaneous input and output since it is no longer possible to update +<tt>egptr()</tt> whenever <tt>epptr()</tt> is changed. A possible +solution is to handle this in <tt>underflow()</tt>.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 27.8.1.4 [stringbuf.virtuals] paragraph 8, Notes, insert the words +"at least" as in the following:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>To make a write position available, the function reallocates (or initially + allocates) an array object with a sufficient number of elements to hold the + current array object (if any), plus <b>at least</b> one additional write + position.</p> +</blockquote> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="170"></a>170. Inconsistent definition of <tt>traits_type</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.8.4 [stringstream] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Dietmar Kühl <b>Opened:</b> 1999-07-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The classes <tt>basic_stringstream</tt> (27.8.4 [stringstream]), +<tt>basic_istringstream</tt> (27.8.2 [istringstream]), and +<tt>basic_ostringstream</tt> (27.8.3 [ostringstream]) are inconsistent +in their definition of the type <tt>traits_type</tt>: For +<tt>istringstream</tt>, this type is defined, for the other two it is +not. This should be consistent.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> <p>To the declarations of +<tt>basic_ostringstream</tt> (27.8.3 [ostringstream]) and +<tt>basic_stringstream</tt> (27.8.4 [stringstream]) add:</p> +<blockquote> +<pre>typedef traits traits_type;</pre> +</blockquote> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="171"></a>171. Strange <tt>seekpos()</tt> semantics due to joint position</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.9.1.5 [filebuf.virtuals] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Dietmar Kühl <b>Opened:</b> 1999-07-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#filebuf.virtuals">issues</a> in [filebuf.virtuals].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Overridden virtual functions, seekpos()</p> <p>In 27.9.1.1 [filebuf] paragraph 3, it is stated that a joint input and +output position is maintained by <tt>basic_filebuf</tt>. Still, the +description of <tt>seekpos()</tt> seems to talk about different file +positions. In particular, it is unclear (at least to me) what is +supposed to happen to the output buffer (if there is one) if only the +input position is changed. The standard seems to mandate that the +output buffer is kept and processed as if there was no positioning of +the output position (by changing the input position). Of course, this +can be exactly what you want if the flag <tt>ios_base::ate</tt> is +set. However, I think, the standard should say something like +this:</p> +<ul> + <li>If <tt>(which & mode) == 0</tt> neither read nor write position is + changed and the call fails. Otherwise, the joint read and write position is + altered to correspond to <tt>sp</tt>.</li> + <li>If there is an output buffer, the output sequences is updated and any + unshift sequence is written before the position is altered.</li> + <li>If there is an input buffer, the input sequence is updated after the + position is altered.</li> +</ul> +<p>Plus the appropriate error handling, that is...</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change the unnumbered paragraph in 27.8.1.4 (lib.filebuf.virtuals) before +paragraph 14 from:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>pos_type seekpos(pos_type sp, ios_base::openmode = ios_base::in | + ios_base::out);</p> + <p>Alters the file position, if possible, to correspond to the position stored + in sp (as described below).</p> + <p>- if (which&ios_base::in)!=0, set the file position to sp, then update + the input sequence</p> + <p>- if (which&ios_base::out)!=0, then update the output sequence, write + any unshift sequence, and set the file position to sp.</p> +</blockquote> +<p>to:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>pos_type seekpos(pos_type sp, ios_base::openmode = ios_base::in | + ios_base::out);</p> + <p>Alters the file position, if possible, to correspond to the position stored + in sp (as described below). Altering the file position performs as follows:</p> + <p>1. if (om & ios_base::out)!=0, then update the output sequence and + write any unshift sequence;</p> + <p>2. set the file position to sp;</p> + <p>3. if (om & ios_base::in)!=0, then update the input sequence;</p> + <p>where om is the open mode passed to the last call to open(). The operation + fails if is_open() returns false.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[Kona: Dietmar is working on a proposed resolution.]</i></p> + +<p><i>[Post-Tokyo: Dietmar supplied the above wording.]</i></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="172"></a>172. Inconsistent types for <tt>basic_istream::ignore()</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.1.3 [istream.unformatted] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Greg Comeau, Dietmar Kühl <b>Opened:</b> 1999-07-23 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#istream.unformatted">issues</a> in [istream.unformatted].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>In 27.7.1.1 [istream] the function +<tt>ignore()</tt> gets an object of type <tt>streamsize</tt> as first +argument. However, in 27.7.1.3 [istream.unformatted] +paragraph 23 the first argument is of type <tt>int.</tt></p> + +<p>As far as I can see this is not really a contradiction because +everything is consistent if <tt>streamsize</tt> is typedef to be +<tt>int</tt>. However, this is almost certainly not what was +intended. The same thing happened to <tt>basic_filebuf::setbuf()</tt>, +as described in issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#173">173</a>.</p> + +<p>Darin Adler also +submitted this issue, commenting: Either 27.6.1.1 should be modified +to show a first parameter of type int, or 27.6.1.3 should be modified +to show a first parameter of type streamsize and use +numeric_limits<streamsize>::max.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 27.7.1.3 [istream.unformatted] paragraph 23 and 24, change both uses +of <tt>int</tt> in the description of <tt>ignore()</tt> to +<tt>streamsize</tt>.</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="173"></a>173. Inconsistent types for <tt>basic_filebuf::setbuf()</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.9.1.5 [filebuf.virtuals] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Greg Comeau, Dietmar Kühl <b>Opened:</b> 1999-07-23 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#filebuf.virtuals">issues</a> in [filebuf.virtuals].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p> +In 27.9.1.1 [filebuf] the function <tt>setbuf()</tt> gets an +object of type <tt>streamsize</tt> as second argument. However, in +27.9.1.5 [filebuf.virtuals] paragraph 9 the second argument is of type +<tt>int</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +As far as I can see this is not really a contradiction because +everything is consistent if <tt>streamsize</tt> is typedef to be +<tt>int</tt>. However, this is almost certainly not what was +intended. The same thing happened to <tt>basic_istream::ignore()</tt>, +as described in issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#172">172</a>. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 27.9.1.5 [filebuf.virtuals] paragraph 9, change all uses of +<tt>int</tt> in the description of <tt>setbuf()</tt> to +<tt>streamsize</tt>.</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="174"></a>174. Typo: <tt>OFF_T</tt> vs. <tt>POS_T</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> D.8 [depr.ios.members] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Dietmar Kühl <b>Opened:</b> 1999-07-23 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#depr.ios.members">issues</a> in [depr.ios.members].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>According to paragraph 1 of this section, <tt>streampos</tt> is the +type <tt>OFF_T</tt>, the same type as <tt>streamoff</tt>. However, in +paragraph 6 the <tt>streampos</tt> gets the type <tt>POS_T</tt></p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change D.8 [depr.ios.members] paragraph 1 from "<tt>typedef +OFF_T streampos;</tt>" to "<tt>typedef POS_T +streampos;</tt>"</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="175"></a>175. Ambiguity for <tt>basic_streambuf::pubseekpos()</tt> and a few other functions.</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> D.8 [depr.ios.members] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Dietmar Kühl <b>Opened:</b> 1999-07-23 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#depr.ios.members">issues</a> in [depr.ios.members].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>According to paragraph 8 of this section, the methods +<tt>basic_streambuf::pubseekpos()</tt>, +<tt>basic_ifstream::open()</tt>, and <tt>basic_ofstream::open</tt> +"may" be overloaded by a version of this function taking the +type <tt>ios_base::open_mode</tt> as last argument argument instead of +<tt>ios_base::openmode</tt> (<tt>ios_base::open_mode</tt> is defined +in this section to be an alias for one of the integral types). The +clause specifies, that the last argument has a default argument in +three cases. However, this generates an ambiguity with the overloaded +version because now the arguments are absolutely identical if the last +argument is not specified.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In D.8 [depr.ios.members] paragraph 8, remove the default arguments for +<tt>basic_streambuf::pubseekpos()</tt>, +<tt>basic_ifstream::open()</tt>, and +<tt>basic_ofstream::open().</tt></p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="176"></a>176. <tt>exceptions()</tt> in <tt>ios_base</tt>...?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> D.8 [depr.ios.members] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Dietmar Kühl <b>Opened:</b> 1999-07-23 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#depr.ios.members">issues</a> in [depr.ios.members].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The "overload" for the function <tt>exceptions()</tt> in +paragraph 8 gives the impression that there is another function of +this function defined in class <tt>ios_base</tt>. However, this is not +the case. Thus, it is hard to tell how the semantics (paragraph 9) can +be implemented: "Call the corresponding member function specified +in clause 27 [input.output]."</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In D.8 [depr.ios.members] paragraph 8, move the declaration of the +function <tt>exceptions()</tt>into class <tt>basic_ios</tt>.</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="179"></a>179. Comparison of const_iterators to iterators doesn't work</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2 [container.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Judy Ward <b>Opened:</b> 1998-07-02 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#container.requirements">issues</a> in [container.requirements].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Currently the following will not compile on two well-known standard +library implementations:</p> + +<blockquote> + <pre>#include <set> +using namespace std; + +void f(const set<int> &s) +{ + set<int>::iterator i; + if (i==s.end()); // s.end() returns a const_iterator +}</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p> +The reason this doesn't compile is because operator== was implemented +as a member function of the nested classes set:iterator and +set::const_iterator, and there is no conversion from const_iterator to +iterator. Surprisingly, (s.end() == i) does work, though, because of +the conversion from iterator to const_iterator. +</p> + +<p> +I don't see a requirement anywhere in the standard that this must +work. Should there be one? If so, I think the requirement would need +to be added to the tables in section 24.1.1. I'm not sure about the +wording. If this requirement existed in the standard, I would think +that implementors would have to make the comparison operators +non-member functions.</p> + +<p>This issues was also raised on comp.std.c++ by Darin +Adler. The example given was:</p> + +<blockquote> + <pre>bool check_equal(std::deque<int>::iterator i, +std::deque<int>::const_iterator ci) +{ +return i == ci; +}</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p>Comment from John Potter:</p> +<blockquote> + <p> + In case nobody has noticed, accepting it will break reverse_iterator. + </p> + + <p> + The fix is to make the comparison operators templated on two types. + </p> + + <pre> template <class Iterator1, class Iterator2> + bool operator== (reverse_iterator<Iterator1> const& x, + reverse_iterator<Iterator2> const& y); + </pre> + + <p> + Obviously: return x.base() == y.base(); + </p> + + <p> + Currently, no reverse_iterator to const_reverse_iterator compares are + valid. + </p> + + <p> + BTW, I think the issue is in support of bad code. Compares should be + between two iterators of the same type. All std::algorithms require + the begin and end iterators to be of the same type. + </p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Insert this paragraph after 23.2 [container.requirements] paragraph 7:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>In the expressions</p> + <pre> i == j + i != j + i < j + i <= j + i >= j + i > j + i - j + </pre> + <p>Where i and j denote objects of a container's iterator type, + either or both may be replaced by an object of the container's + const_iterator type referring to the same element with no + change in semantics.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[post-Toronto: Judy supplied a proposed resolution saying that +<tt>iterator</tt> and <tt>const_iterator</tt> could be freely mixed in +iterator comparison and difference operations.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Redmond: Dave and Howard supplied a new proposed resolution which +explicitly listed expressions; there was concern that the previous +proposed resolution was too informal.]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +The LWG believes it is clear that the above wording applies only to +the nested types <tt>X::iterator</tt> and <tt>X::const_iterator</tt>, +where <tt>X</tt> is a container. There is no requirement that +<tt>X::reverse_iterator</tt> and <tt>X::const_reverse_iterator</tt> +can be mixed. If mixing them is considered important, that's a +separate issue. (Issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#280">280</a>.) +</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="180"></a>180. Container member iterator arguments constness has unintended consequences</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.4 [basic.string] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Dave Abrahams <b>Opened:</b> 1999-07-01 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#basic.string">issues</a> in [basic.string].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>It is the constness of the container which should control whether +it can be modified through a member function such as erase(), not the +constness of the iterators. The iterators only serve to give +positioning information.</p> + +<p>Here's a simple and typical example problem which is currently very +difficult or impossible to solve without the change proposed +below.</p> + +<p>Wrap a standard container C in a class W which allows clients to +find and read (but not modify) a subrange of (C.begin(), C.end()]. The +only modification clients are allowed to make to elements in this +subrange is to erase them from C through the use of a member function +of W.</p> + +<p><i>[ +post Bellevue, Alisdair adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +This issue was implemented by +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2350.pdf">N2350</a> +for everything but <tt>basic_string</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +Note that the specific example in this issue (<tt>basic_string</tt>) is the one place +we forgot to amend in +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2350.pdf">N2350</a>, +so we might open this issue for that +single container? +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Sophia Antipolis: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +This was a fix that was intended for all standard library containers, +and has been done for other containers, but string was missed. +</p> +<p> +The wording updated. +</p> +<p> +We did not make the change in <tt>replace</tt>, because this change would affect +the implementation because the string may be written into. This is an +issue that should be taken up by concepts. +</p> +<p> +We note that the supplied wording addresses the initializer list provided in +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2679.pdf">N2679</a>. +</p> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Update the following signature in the <tt>basic_string</tt> class template definition in +21.4 [basic.string], p5: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>namespace std { + template<class charT, class traits = char_traits<charT>, + class Allocator = allocator<charT> > + class basic_string { + + ... + + iterator insert(<ins>const_</ins>iterator p, charT c); + void insert(<ins>const_</ins>iterator p, size_type n, charT c); + template<class InputIterator> + void insert(<ins>const_</ins>iterator p, InputIterator first, InputIterator last); + void insert(<ins>const_</ins>iterator <ins>p</ins>, initializer_list<charT>); + + ... + + iterator erase(<ins>const_</ins>iterator <ins>const_</ins>position); + iterator erase(<ins>const_</ins>iterator first, <ins>const_</ins>iterator last); + + ... + + }; +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Update the following signatures in 21.4.6.4 [string::insert]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>iterator insert(<ins>const_</ins>iterator p, charT c); +void insert(<ins>const_</ins>iterator p, size_type n, charT c); +template<class InputIterator> + void insert(<ins>const_</ins>iterator p, InputIterator first, InputIterator last); +void insert(<ins>const_</ins>iterator <ins>p</ins>, initializer_list<charT>); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Update the following signatures in 21.4.6.5 [string::erase]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>iterator erase(<ins>const_</ins>iterator <ins>const_</ins>position); +iterator erase(<ins>const_</ins>iterator first, <ins>const_</ins>iterator last); +</pre></blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The issue was discussed at length. It was generally agreed that 1) +There is no major technical argument against the change (although +there is a minor argument that some obscure programs may break), and +2) Such a change would not break const correctness. The concerns about +making the change were 1) it is user detectable (although only in +boundary cases), 2) it changes a large number of signatures, and 3) it +seems more of a design issue that an out-and-out defect.</p> + +<p>The LWG believes that this issue should be considered as part of a +general review of const issues for the next revision of the +standard. Also see issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#200">200</a>.</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="181"></a>181. make_pair() unintended behavior</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.3.5 [pairs] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Andrew Koenig <b>Opened:</b> 1999-08-03 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#pairs">issues</a> in [pairs].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The claim has surfaced in Usenet that expressions such as<br> +<br> + <tt>make_pair("abc", 3)</tt><br> +<br> +are illegal, notwithstanding their use in examples, because template instantiation tries to bind the first template +parameter to <tt> const char (&)[4]</tt>, which type is uncopyable.<br> +<br> +I doubt anyone intended that behavior... +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 20.3 [utility], paragraph 1 change the following +declaration of make_pair():</p> +<blockquote> + <pre>template <class T1, class T2> pair<T1,T2> make_pair(const T1&, const T2&);</pre> +</blockquote> +<p>to:</p> +<blockquote> + <pre>template <class T1, class T2> pair<T1,T2> make_pair(T1, T2);</pre> +</blockquote> +<p> In 20.3.5 [pairs] paragraph 7 and the line before, change:</p> +<blockquote> +<pre>template <class T1, class T2> +pair<T1, T2> make_pair(const T1& x, const T2& y);</pre> +</blockquote> +<p>to:</p> +<blockquote> +<pre>template <class T1, class T2> +pair<T1, T2> make_pair(T1 x, T2 y);</pre> +</blockquote> +<p>and add the following footnote to the effects clause:</p> +<blockquote> + <p> According to 12.8 [class.copy], an implementation is permitted + to not perform a copy of an argument, thus avoiding unnecessary + copies.</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>Two potential fixes were suggested by Matt Austern and Dietmar +Kühl, respectively, 1) overloading with array arguments, and 2) use of +a reference_traits class with a specialization for arrays. Andy +Koenig suggested changing to pass by value. In discussion, it appeared +that this was a much smaller change to the standard that the other two +suggestions, and any efficiency concerns were more than offset by the +advantages of the solution. Two implementors reported that the +proposed resolution passed their test suites.</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="182"></a>182. Ambiguous references to size_t</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17 [library] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Al Stevens <b>Opened:</b> 1999-08-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index-open.html#library">active issues</a> in [library].</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#library">issues</a> in [library].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Many references to <tt> size_t</tt> throughout the document +omit the <tt> std::</tt> namespace qualification.</p> <p>For +example, 17.6.3.6 [replacement.functions] paragraph 2:</p> +<blockquote> +<pre> operator new(size_t) + operator new(size_t, const std::nothrow_t&) + operator new[](size_t) + operator new[](size_t, const std::nothrow_t&)</pre> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> In 17.6.3.6 [replacement.functions] paragraph 2: replace:</p> +<blockquote> +<p><tt> - operator new(size_t)<br> + - operator new(size_t, const std::nothrow_t&)<br> + - operator new[](size_t)<br> + - operator new[](size_t, const std::nothrow_t&)</tt></p> +</blockquote> +<p> by:</p> +<blockquote> +<pre>- operator new(std::size_t) +- operator new(std::size_t, const std::nothrow_t&) +- operator new[](std::size_t) +- operator new[](std::size_t, const std::nothrow_t&)</pre> +</blockquote> +<p>In [lib.allocator.requirements] 20.1.5, paragraph 4: replace:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>The typedef members pointer, const_pointer, size_type, and difference_type + are required to be T*, T const*, size_t, and ptrdiff_t, respectively.</p> +</blockquote> +<p> by:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>The typedef members pointer, const_pointer, size_type, and difference_type + are required to be T*, T const*, std::size_t, and std::ptrdiff_t, + respectively.</p> +</blockquote> +<p>In [lib.allocator.members] 20.4.1.1, paragraphs 3 and 6: replace:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>3 Notes: Uses ::operator new(size_t) (18.4.1).</p> + <p>6 Note: the storage is obtained by calling ::operator new(size_t), but it + is unspecified when or how often this function is called. The use of hint is + unspecified, but intended as an aid to locality if an implementation so + desires.</p> +</blockquote> +<p>by:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>3 Notes: Uses ::operator new(std::size_t) (18.4.1).</p> + <p>6 Note: the storage is obtained by calling ::operator new(std::size_t), but + it is unspecified when or how often this function is called. The use of hint + is unspecified, but intended as an aid to locality if an implementation so + desires.</p> +</blockquote> +<p>In [lib.char.traits.require] 21.1.1, paragraph 1: replace:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>In Table 37, X denotes a Traits class defining types and functions for the + character container type CharT; c and d denote values of type CharT; p and q + denote values of type const CharT*; s denotes a value of type CharT*; n, i and + j denote values of type size_t; e and f denote values of type X::int_type; pos + denotes a value of type X::pos_type; and state denotes a value of type X::state_type.</p> +</blockquote> +<p>by:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>In Table 37, X denotes a Traits class defining types and functions for the + character container type CharT; c and d denote values of type CharT; p and q + denote values of type const CharT*; s denotes a value of type CharT*; n, i and + j denote values of type std::size_t; e and f denote values of type X::int_type; + pos denotes a value of type X::pos_type; and state denotes a value of type X::state_type.</p> +</blockquote> +<p>In [lib.char.traits.require] 21.1.1, table 37: replace the return type of +X::length(p): "size_t" by "std::size_t".</p> +<p> In [lib.std.iterator.tags] 24.3.3, paragraph 2: replace:<br> + typedef ptrdiff_t difference_type;<br> + by:<br> + typedef std::ptrdiff_t difference_type;</p> +<p> In [lib.locale.ctype] 22.2.1.1 put namespace std { ...} around the declaration of template <class charT> class ctype.<br> +<br> + In [lib.iterator.traits] 24.3.1, paragraph 2 put namespace std { ...} around the declaration of:<br> +<br> + template<class Iterator> struct iterator_traits<br> + template<class T> struct iterator_traits<T*><br> + template<class T> struct iterator_traits<const T*></p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The LWG believes correcting names like <tt>size_t</tt> and +<tt>ptrdiff_t</tt> to <tt>std::size_t</tt> and <tt>std::ptrdiff_t</tt> +to be essentially editorial. There there can't be another size_t or +ptrdiff_t meant anyway because, according to 17.6.3.3.4 [extern.types],</p> + +<blockquote><p> +For each type T from the Standard C library, the types ::T and std::T +are reserved to the implementation and, when defined, ::T shall be +identical to std::T. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>The issue is treated as a Defect Report to make explicit the Project +Editor's authority to make this change.</p> + +<p><i>[Post-Tokyo: Nico Josuttis provided the above wording at the +request of the LWG.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Toronto: This is tangentially related to issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#229">229</a>, but only tangentially: the intent of this issue is to +address use of the name <tt>size_t</tt> in contexts outside of +namespace std, such as in the description of <tt>::operator new</tt>. +The proposed changes should be reviewed to make sure they are +correct.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[pre-Copenhagen: Nico has reviewed the changes and believes +them to be correct.]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="183"></a>183. I/O stream manipulators don't work for wide character streams</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.3 [std.manip] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Andy Sawyer <b>Opened:</b> 1999-07-07 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#std.manip">issues</a> in [std.manip].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>27.7.3 [std.manip] paragraph 3 says (clause numbering added for +exposition):</p> +<blockquote> +<p>Returns: An object s of unspecified type such that if [1] out is an (instance +of) basic_ostream then the expression out<<s behaves as if f(s) were +called, and if [2] in is an (instance of) basic_istream then the expression +in>>s behaves as if f(s) were called. Where f can be defined as: ios_base& +f(ios_base& str, ios_base::fmtflags mask) { // reset specified flags +str.setf(ios_base::fmtflags(0), mask); return str; } [3] The expression +out<<s has type ostream& and value out. [4] The expression in>>s +has type istream& and value in.</p> +</blockquote> +<p>Given the definitions [1] and [2] for out and in, surely [3] should read: +"The expression out << s has type basic_ostream& ..." and +[4] should read: "The expression in >> s has type basic_istream& +..."</p> +<p>If the wording in the standard is correct, I can see no way of implementing +any of the manipulators so that they will work with wide character streams.</p> +<p>e.g. wcout << setbase( 16 );</p> +<p>Must have value 'wcout' (which makes sense) and type 'ostream&' (which +doesn't).</p> +<p>The same "cut'n'paste" type also seems to occur in Paras 4,5,7 and +8. In addition, Para 6 [setfill] has a similar error, but relates only to +ostreams.</p> +<p>I'd be happier if there was a better way of saying this, to make it clear +that the value of the expression is "the same specialization of +basic_ostream as out"&</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Replace section 27.7.3 [std.manip] except paragraph 1 with the +following:</p> +<blockquote> +<p>2- The type designated smanip in each of the following function descriptions is implementation-specified and may be different for each +function.<br> +<br> +<tt>smanip resetiosflags(ios_base::fmtflags mask);</tt><br> +<br> +-3- Returns: An object s of unspecified type such that if out is an instance of basic_ostream<charT,traits> then the expression out<<s behaves +as if f(s, mask) were called, or if in is an instance of basic_istream<charT,traits> then the expression in>>s behaves as if +f(s, mask) were called. The function f can be defined as:*<br> +<br> +[Footnote: The expression cin >> resetiosflags(ios_base::skipws) clears ios_base::skipws in the format flags stored in the +basic_istream<charT,traits> object cin (the same as cin >> noskipws), and the expression cout << resetiosflags(ios_base::showbase) clears +ios_base::showbase in the format flags stored in the basic_ostream<charT,traits> object cout (the same as cout << +noshowbase). --- end footnote]<br> +<br> + <tt>ios_base& f(ios_base& str, ios_base::fmtflags mask)<br> + {<br> + // reset specified flags<br> + str.setf(ios_base::fmtflags(0), mask);<br> + return str;<br> + }<br> +</tt><br> +The expression out<<s has type basic_ostream<charT,traits>& and value out. +The expression in>>s has type basic_istream<charT,traits>& and value in.<br> +<br> + <tt>smanip setiosflags(ios_base::fmtflags mask);</tt><br> +<br> +-4- Returns: An object s of unspecified type such that if out is an instance of basic_ostream<charT,traits> then the expression out<<s behaves +as if f(s, mask) were called, or if in is an instance of basic_istream<charT,traits> then the expression in>>s behaves as if f(s, +mask) were called. The function f can be defined as:<br> +<br> + <tt>ios_base& f(ios_base& str, ios_base::fmtflags mask)<br> + {<br> + // set specified flags<br> + str.setf(mask);<br> + return str;<br> + }<br> +</tt><br> +The expression out<<s has type basic_ostream<charT,traits>& and value out. +The expression in>>s has type basic_istream<charT,traits>& and value in.<br> +<br> +<tt>smanip setbase(int base);</tt><br> +<br> +-5- Returns: An object s of unspecified type such that if out is an instance of basic_ostream<charT,traits> then the expression out<<s behaves +as if f(s, base) were called, or if in is an instance of basic_istream<charT,traits> then the expression in>>s behaves as if f(s, +base) were called. The function f can be defined as:<br> +<br> + <tt>ios_base& f(ios_base& str, int base)<br> + {<br> + // set basefield<br> + str.setf(base == 8 ? ios_base::oct :<br> + base == 10 ? ios_base::dec :<br> + base == 16 ? ios_base::hex :<br> + ios_base::fmtflags(0), ios_base::basefield);<br> + return str;<br> + }<br> +</tt><br> +The expression out<<s has type basic_ostream<charT,traits>& and value out. +The expression in>>s has type basic_istream<charT,traits>& and value in.<br> +<br> +<tt>smanip setfill(char_type c);<br> +</tt><br> +-6- Returns: An object s of unspecified type such that if out is (or is derived from) basic_ostream<charT,traits> and c has type charT then the +expression out<<s behaves as if f(s, c) were called. The function f can be +defined as:<br> +<br> + <tt>template<class charT, class traits><br> + basic_ios<charT,traits>& f(basic_ios<charT,traits>& str, charT c)<br> + {<br> + // set fill character<br> + str.fill(c);<br> + return str;<br> + }<br> +</tt><br> +The expression out<<s has type basic_ostream<charT,traits>& and value out.<br> +<br> +<tt>smanip setprecision(int n);</tt><br> +<br> +-7- Returns: An object s of unspecified type such that if out is an instance of basic_ostream<charT,traits> then the expression out<<s behaves +as if f(s, n) were called, or if in is an instance of basic_istream<charT,traits> then the expression in>>s behaves as if f(s, n) +were called. The function f can be defined as:<br> +<br> + <tt>ios_base& f(ios_base& str, int n)<br> + {<br> + // set precision<br> + str.precision(n);<br> + return str;<br> + }<br> +</tt><br> +The expression out<<s has type basic_ostream<charT,traits>& and value out. +The expression in>>s has type basic_istream<charT,traits>& and value in<br> +.<br> +<tt>smanip setw(int n);<br> +</tt><br> +-8- Returns: An object s of unspecified type such that if out is an instance of basic_ostream<charT,traits> then the expression out<<s behaves +as if f(s, n) were called, or if in is an instance of basic_istream<charT,traits> then the expression in>>s behaves as if f(s, n) +were called. The function f can be defined as:<br> +<br> + <tt>ios_base& f(ios_base& str, int n)<br> + {<br> + // set width<br> + str.width(n);<br> + return str;<br> + }<br> +</tt><br> +The expression out<<s has type +basic_ostream<charT,traits>& and value out. The expression +in>>s has type basic_istream<charT,traits>& and value +in. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[Kona: Andy Sawyer and Beman Dawes will work to improve the wording of +the proposed resolution.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Tokyo - The LWG noted that issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#216">216</a> involves +the same paragraphs.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Post-Tokyo: The issues list maintainer combined the proposed +resolution of this issue with the proposed resolution for issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#216">216</a> as they both involved the same paragraphs, and were so +intertwined that dealing with them separately appear fraught with +error. The full text was supplied by Bill Plauger; it was cross +checked against changes supplied by Andy Sawyer. It should be further +checked by the LWG.]</i></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="184"></a>184. numeric_limits<bool> wording problems</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.3.1.5 [numeric.special] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Gabriel Dos Reis <b>Opened:</b> 1999-07-21 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#numeric.special">issues</a> in [numeric.special].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>bools are defined by the standard to be of integer types, as per +3.9.1 [basic.fundamental] paragraph 7. However "integer types" +seems to have a special meaning for the author of 18.2. The net effect +is an unclear and confusing specification for +numeric_limits<bool> as evidenced below.</p> + +<p>18.2.1.2/7 says numeric_limits<>::digits is, for built-in integer +types, the number of non-sign bits in the representation.</p> + +<p>4.5/4 states that a bool promotes to int ; whereas 4.12/1 says any non zero +arithmetical value converts to true.</p> + +<p>I don't think it makes sense at all to require +numeric_limits<bool>::digits and numeric_limits<bool>::digits10 to +be meaningful.</p> + +<p>The standard defines what constitutes a signed (resp. unsigned) integer +types. It doesn't categorize bool as being signed or unsigned. And the set of +values of bool type has only two elements.</p> + +<p>I don't think it makes sense to require numeric_limits<bool>::is_signed +to be meaningful.</p> + +<p>18.2.1.2/18 for numeric_limits<integer_type>::radix says:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>For integer types, specifies the base of the representation.186)</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>This disposition is at best misleading and confusing for the standard +requires a "pure binary numeration system" for integer types as per +3.9.1/7</p> + +<p>The footnote 186) says: "Distinguishes types with base other than 2 (e.g +BCD)." This also erroneous as the standard never defines any integer +types with base representation other than 2.</p> + +<p>Furthermore, numeric_limits<bool>::is_modulo and +numeric_limits<bool>::is_signed have similar problems.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Append to the end of 18.3.1.5 [numeric.special]:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>The specialization for bool shall be provided as follows:</p> + <pre> namespace std { + template<> class numeric_limits<bool> { + public: + static const bool is_specialized = true; + static bool min() throw() { return false; } + static bool max() throw() { return true; } + + static const int digits = 1; + static const int digits10 = 0; + static const bool is_signed = false; + static const bool is_integer = true; + static const bool is_exact = true; + static const int radix = 2; + static bool epsilon() throw() { return 0; } + static bool round_error() throw() { return 0; } + + static const int min_exponent = 0; + static const int min_exponent10 = 0; + static const int max_exponent = 0; + static const int max_exponent10 = 0; + + static const bool has_infinity = false; + static const bool has_quiet_NaN = false; + static const bool has_signaling_NaN = false; + static const float_denorm_style has_denorm = denorm_absent; + static const bool has_denorm_loss = false; + static bool infinity() throw() { return 0; } + static bool quiet_NaN() throw() { return 0; } + static bool signaling_NaN() throw() { return 0; } + static bool denorm_min() throw() { return 0; } + + static const bool is_iec559 = false; + static const bool is_bounded = true; + static const bool is_modulo = false; + + static const bool traps = false; + static const bool tinyness_before = false; + static const float_round_style round_style = round_toward_zero; + }; + }</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[Tokyo: The LWG desires wording that specifies exact values +rather than more general wording in the original proposed +resolution.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Post-Tokyo: At the request of the LWG in Tokyo, Nico +Josuttis provided the above wording.]</i></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="185"></a>185. Questionable use of term "inline"</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8 [function.objects] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> UK Panel <b>Opened:</b> 1999-07-26 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#function.objects">issues</a> in [function.objects].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Paragraph 4 of 20.8 [function.objects] says:</p> +<blockquote> + <p> [Example: To negate every element of a: transform(a.begin(), a.end(), + a.begin(), negate<double>()); The corresponding functions will inline + the addition and the negation. end example]</p> +</blockquote> +<p>(Note: The "addition" referred to in the above is in para 3) we can +find no other wording, except this (non-normative) example which suggests that +any "inlining" will take place in this case.</p> +<p>Indeed both:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>17.4.4.3 Global Functions [lib.global.functions] 1 It is + unspecified whether any global functions in the C++ Standard Library + are defined as inline (7.1.2).</p> +</blockquote> +<p>and</p> +<blockquote> + <p>17.4.4.4 Member Functions [lib.member.functions] 1 It is + unspecified whether any member functions in the C++ Standard Library + are defined as inline (7.1.2).</p> +</blockquote> +<p>take care to state that this may indeed NOT be the case.</p> +<p>Thus the example "mandates" behavior that is explicitly +not required elsewhere.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 20.8 [function.objects] paragraph 1, remove the sentence:</p> +<blockquote> +<p>They are important for the effective use of the library.</p> +</blockquote> +<p>Remove 20.8 [function.objects] paragraph 2, which reads:</p> +<blockquote> + <p> Using function objects together with function templates + increases the expressive power of the library as well as making the + resulting code much more efficient.</p> +</blockquote> +<p>In 20.8 [function.objects] paragraph 4, remove the sentence:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>The corresponding functions will inline the addition and the + negation.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[Kona: The LWG agreed there was a defect.]</i></p> + +<p><i>[Tokyo: The LWG crafted the proposed resolution.]</i></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="186"></a>186. bitset::set() second parameter should be bool</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.5.2 [bitset.members] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Darin Adler <b>Opened:</b> 1999-08-13 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#bitset.members">issues</a> in [bitset.members].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>In section 20.5.2 [bitset.members], paragraph 13 defines the +bitset::set operation to take a second parameter of type int. The +function tests whether this value is non-zero to determine whether to +set the bit to true or false. The type of this second parameter should +be bool. For one thing, the intent is to specify a Boolean value. For +another, the result type from test() is bool. In addition, it's +possible to slice an integer that's larger than an int. This can't +happen with bool, since conversion to bool has the semantic of +translating 0 to false and any non-zero value to true.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 20.5 [template.bitset] Para 1 Replace:</p> +<blockquote> +<pre>bitset<N>& set(size_t pos, int val = true ); </pre> +</blockquote> +<p>With:</p> +<blockquote> + <pre>bitset<N>& set(size_t pos, bool val = true );</pre> +</blockquote> +<p>In 20.5.2 [bitset.members] Para 12(.5) Replace:</p> +<blockquote> + <pre>bitset<N>& set(size_t pos, int val = 1 );</pre> +</blockquote> +<p>With:</p> +<blockquote> + <pre>bitset<N>& set(size_t pos, bool val = true );</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[Kona: The LWG agrees with the description. Andy Sawyer will work +on better P/R wording.]</i></p> + +<p><i>[Post-Tokyo: Andy provided the above wording.]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p><tt>bool</tt> is a better choice. It is believed that binary +compatibility is not an issue, because this member function is +usually implemented as <tt>inline</tt>, and because it is already +the case that users cannot rely on the type of a pointer to a +nonvirtual member of a standard library class.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="187"></a>187. iter_swap underspecified</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.3.3 [alg.swap] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Andrew Koenig <b>Opened:</b> 1999-08-14 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#alg.swap">issues</a> in [alg.swap].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The description of iter_swap in 25.2.2 paragraph 7,says that it +``exchanges the values'' of the objects to which two iterators +refer.<br> <br> What it doesn't say is whether it does so using swap +or using the assignment operator and copy constructor.<br> <br> This +question is an important one to answer, because swap is specialized to +work efficiently for standard containers.<br> For example:</p> +<blockquote> +<pre>vector<int> v1, v2; +iter_swap(&v1, &v2);</pre> +</blockquote> +<p>Is this call to iter_swap equivalent to calling swap(v1, v2)? +Or is it equivalent to</p> +<blockquote> +<pre>{ +vector<int> temp = v1; +v1 = v2; +v2 = temp; +}</pre> +</blockquote> +<p>The first alternative is O(1); the second is O(n).</p> +<p>A LWG member, Dave Abrahams, comments:</p> +<blockquote> +<p>Not an objection necessarily, but I want to point out the cost of +that requirement:</p> + <blockquote> +<p><tt>iter_swap(list<T>::iterator, list<T>::iterator)</tt></p> + </blockquote> +<p>can currently be specialized to be more efficient than +iter_swap(T*,T*) for many T (by using splicing). Your proposal would +make that optimization illegal. </p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[Kona: The LWG notes the original need for iter_swap was proxy iterators +which are no longer permitted.]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change the effect clause of iter_swap in 25.2.2 paragraph 7 from:</p> +<blockquote> +<p>Exchanges the values pointed to by the two iterators a and b.</p> +</blockquote> +<p>to</p> +<blockquote> +<p><tt>swap(*a, *b)</tt>.</p> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>It's useful to say just what <tt>iter_swap</tt> does. There may be + some iterators for which we want to specialize <tt>iter_swap</tt>, + but the fully general version should have a general specification.</p> + +<p>Note that in the specific case of <tt>list<T>::iterator</tt>, +iter_swap should not be specialized as suggested above. That would do +much more than exchanging the two iterators' values: it would change +predecessor/successor relationships, possibly moving the iterator from +one list to another. That would surely be inappropriate.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="189"></a>189. setprecision() not specified correctly</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.5.2.2 [fmtflags.state] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Andrew Koenig <b>Opened:</b> 1999-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#fmtflags.state">issues</a> in [fmtflags.state].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>27.4.2.2 paragraph 9 claims that setprecision() sets the precision, +and includes a parenthetical note saying that it is the number of +digits after the decimal point.<br> +<br> +This claim is not strictly correct. For example, in the default +floating-point output format, setprecision sets the number of +significant digits printed, not the number of digits after the decimal +point.<br> +<br> +I would like the committee to look at the definition carefully and +correct the statement in 27.4.2.2</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Remove from 27.5.2.2 [fmtflags.state], paragraph 9, the text +"(number of digits after the decimal point)".</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="193"></a>193. Heap operations description incorrect</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.4.6 [alg.heap.operations] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Markus Mauhart <b>Opened:</b> 1999-09-24 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#216">216</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>25.3.6 [lib.alg.heap.operations] states two key properties of a heap [a,b), the first of them +is<br> +<br> + `"(1) *a is the largest element"<br> +<br> +I think this is incorrect and should be changed to the wording in the proposed +resolution.</p> +<p>Actually there are two independent changes:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>A-"part of largest equivalence class" instead of "largest", cause 25.3 + [lib.alg.sorting] asserts "strict weak ordering" for all its sub clauses.</p> + <p>B-Take 'an oldest' from that equivalence class, otherwise the heap functions could not be used for a + priority queue as explained in 23.2.3.2.2 [lib.priqueue.members] (where I assume that a "priority queue" respects priority AND time).</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change 25.4.6 [alg.heap.operations] property (1) from:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>(1) *a is the largest element</p> +</blockquote> +<p>to:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>(1) There is no element greater than <tt>*a</tt></p> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="195"></a>195. Should <tt>basic_istream::sentry</tt>'s constructor ever set eofbit?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.1.1.3 [istream::sentry] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 1999-10-13 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#istream::sentry">issues</a> in [istream::sentry].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Suppose that <tt>is.flags() & ios_base::skipws</tt> is nonzero. +What should <tt>basic_istream<>::sentry</tt>'s constructor do if it +reaches eof while skipping whitespace? 27.6.1.1.2/5 suggests it +should set failbit. Should it set eofbit as well? The standard +doesn't seem to answer that question.</p> + +<p>On the one hand, nothing in 27.7.1.1.3 [istream::sentry] says that +<tt>basic_istream<>::sentry</tt> should ever set eofbit. On the +other hand, 27.7.1.1 [istream] paragraph 4 says that if +extraction from a <tt>streambuf</tt> "returns +<tt>traits::eof()</tt>, then the input function, except as explicitly +noted otherwise, completes its actions and does +<tt>setstate(eofbit)"</tt>. So the question comes down to +whether <tt>basic_istream<>::sentry</tt>'s constructor is an +input function.</p> + +<p>Comments from Jerry Schwarz:</p> +<blockquote> +<p>It was always my intention that eofbit should be set any time that a +virtual returned something to indicate eof, no matter what reason +iostream code had for calling the virtual.</p> +<p> +The motivation for this is that I did not want to require streambufs +to behave consistently if their virtuals are called after they have +signaled eof.</p> +<p> +The classic case is a streambuf reading from a UNIX file. EOF isn't +really a state for UNIX file descriptors. The convention is that a +read on UNIX returns 0 bytes to indicate "EOF", but the file +descriptor isn't shut down in any way and future reads do not +necessarily also return 0 bytes. In particular, you can read from +tty's on UNIX even after they have signaled "EOF". (It +isn't always understood that a ^D on UNIX is not an EOF indicator, but +an EOL indicator. By typing a "line" consisting solely of +^D you cause a read to return 0 bytes, and by convention this is +interpreted as end of file.)</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Add a sentence to the end of 27.6.1.1.2 paragraph 2:</p> +<blockquote> +<p>If <tt>is.rdbuf()->sbumpc()</tt> or <tt>is.rdbuf()->sgetc()</tt> +returns <tt>traits::eof()</tt>, the function calls +<tt>setstate(failbit | eofbit)</tt> (which may throw +<tt>ios_base::failure</tt>). +</p> +</blockquote> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="198"></a>198. Validity of pointers and references unspecified after iterator destruction</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> X [iterator.concepts] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Beman Dawes <b>Opened:</b> 1999-11-03 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#iterator.concepts">issues</a> in [iterator.concepts].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Is a pointer or reference obtained from an iterator still valid after +destruction of the iterator? +</p> +<p> +Is a pointer or reference obtained from an iterator still valid after the value +of the iterator changes? +</p> +<blockquote> +<pre>#include <iostream> +#include <vector> +#include <iterator> + +int main() +{ + typedef std::vector<int> vec_t; + vec_t v; + v.push_back( 1 ); + + // Is a pointer or reference obtained from an iterator still + // valid after destruction of the iterator? + int * p = &*v.begin(); + std::cout << *p << '\n'; // OK? + + // Is a pointer or reference obtained from an iterator still + // valid after the value of the iterator changes? + vec_t::iterator iter( v.begin() ); + p = &*iter++; + std::cout << *p << '\n'; // OK? + + return 0; +} +</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p>The standard doesn't appear to directly address these +questions. The standard needs to be clarified. At least two real-world +cases have been reported where library implementors wasted +considerable effort because of the lack of clarity in the +standard. The question is important because requiring pointers and +references to remain valid has the effect for practical purposes of +prohibiting iterators from pointing to cached rather than actual +elements of containers.</p> + +<p>The standard itself assumes that pointers and references obtained +from an iterator are still valid after iterator destruction or +change. The definition of reverse_iterator::operator*(), 24.5.1.3.3 [reverse.iter.conv], which returns a reference, defines +effects:</p> + +<blockquote> + <pre>Iterator tmp = current; +return *--tmp;</pre> +</blockquote> +<p>The definition of reverse_iterator::operator->(), 24.5.1.3.4 [reverse.iter.op.star], which returns a pointer, defines effects:</p> +<blockquote> + <pre>return &(operator*());</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p>Because the standard itself assumes pointers and references remain +valid after iterator destruction or change, the standard should say so +explicitly. This will also reduce the chance of user code breaking +unexpectedly when porting to a different standard library +implementation.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Add a new paragraph to X [iterator.concepts]:</p> +<blockquote><p> +Destruction of an iterator may invalidate pointers and references +previously obtained from that iterator. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>Replace paragraph 1 of 24.5.1.3.3 [reverse.iter.conv] with:</p> + +<blockquote> +<p><b>Effects:</b></p> +<pre> this->tmp = current; + --this->tmp; + return *this->tmp; +</pre> + +<p> +[<i>Note:</i> This operation must use an auxiliary member variable, +rather than a temporary variable, to avoid returning a reference that +persists beyond the lifetime of its associated iterator. (See +X [iterator.concepts].) The name of this member variable is shown for +exposition only. <i>--end note</i>] +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[Post-Tokyo: The issue has been reformulated purely +in terms of iterators.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Pre-Toronto: Steve Cleary pointed out the no-invalidation +assumption by reverse_iterator. The issue and proposed resolution was +reformulated yet again to reflect this reality.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Copenhagen: Steve Cleary pointed out that reverse_iterator +assumes its underlying iterator has persistent pointers and +references. Andy Koenig pointed out that it is possible to rewrite +reverse_iterator so that it no longer makes such an assupmption. +However, this issue is related to issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#299">299</a>. If we +decide it is intentional that <tt>p[n]</tt> may return by value +instead of reference when <tt>p</tt> is a Random Access Iterator, +other changes in reverse_iterator will be necessary.]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>This issue has been discussed extensively. Note that it is +<i>not</i> an issue about the behavior of predefined iterators. It is +asking whether or not user-defined iterators are permitted to have +transient pointers and references. Several people presented examples +of useful user-defined iterators that have such a property; examples +include a B-tree iterator, and an "iota iterator" that doesn't point +to memory. Library implementors already seem to be able to cope with +such iterators: they take pains to avoid forming references to memory +that gets iterated past. The only place where this is a problem is +<tt>reverse_iterator</tt>, so this issue changes +<tt>reverse_iterator</tt> to make it work.</p> + +<p>This resolution does not weaken any guarantees provided by +predefined iterators like <tt>list<int>::iterator</tt>. +Clause 23 should be reviewed to make sure that guarantees for +predefined iterators are as strong as users expect.</p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="199"></a>199. What does <tt>allocate(0)</tt> return?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.2.5 [allocator.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 1999-11-19 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#allocator.requirements">issues</a> in [allocator.requirements].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Suppose that <tt>A</tt> is a class that conforms to the +Allocator requirements of Table 32, and <tt>a</tt> is an +object of class <tt>A</tt> What should be the return +value of <tt>a.allocate(0)</tt>? Three reasonable +possibilities: forbid the argument <tt>0</tt>, return +a null pointer, or require that the return value be a +unique non-null pointer. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add a note to the <tt>allocate</tt> row of Table 32: +"[<i>Note:</i> If <tt>n == 0</tt>, the return value is unspecified. <i>--end note</i>]"</p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>A key to understanding this issue is that the ultimate use of +allocate() is to construct an iterator, and that iterator for zero +length sequences must be the container's past-the-end +representation. Since this already implies special case code, it +would be over-specification to mandate the return value. +</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="200"></a>200. Forward iterator requirements don't allow constant iterators</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 24.2.5 [forward.iterators] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 1999-11-19 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#forward.iterators">issues</a> in [forward.iterators].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In table 74, the return type of the expression <tt>*a</tt> is given +as <tt>T&</tt>, where <tt>T</tt> is the iterator's value type. +For constant iterators, however, this is wrong. ("Value type" +is never defined very precisely, but it is clear that the value type +of, say, <tt>std::list<int>::const_iterator</tt> is supposed to be +<tt>int</tt>, not <tt>const int</tt>.) +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In table 74, in the <tt>*a</tt> and <tt>*r++</tt> rows, change the +return type from "<tt>T&</tt>" to "<tt>T&</tt> +if <tt>X</tt> is mutable, otherwise <tt>const T&</tt>". +In the <tt>a->m</tt> row, change the return type from +"<tt>U&</tt>" to "<tt>U&</tt> if <tt>X</tt> is mutable, +otherwise <tt>const U&</tt>". +</p> + +<p><i>[Tokyo: The LWG believes this is the tip of a larger iceberg; +there are multiple const problems with the STL portion of the library +and that these should be addressed as a single package. Note +that issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#180">180</a> has already been declared NAD Future for +that very reason.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Redmond: the LWG thinks this is separable from other constness +issues. This issue is just cleanup; it clarifies language that was +written before we had iterator_traits. Proposed resolution was +modified: the original version only discussed *a. It was pointed out +that we also need to worry about *r++ and a->m.]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="201"></a>201. Numeric limits terminology wrong</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.3.1 [limits] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Stephen Cleary <b>Opened:</b> 1999-12-21 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#limits">issues</a> in [limits].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In some places in this section, the terms "fundamental types" and +"scalar types" are used when the term "arithmetic types" is intended. +The current usage is incorrect because void is a fundamental type and +pointers are scalar types, neither of which should have +specializations of numeric_limits. +</p> +<p><i>[Lillehammer: it remains true that numeric_limits is using + imprecise language. However, none of the proposals for changed + wording are clearer. A redesign of numeric_limits is needed, but this + is more a task than an open issue.]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +Change 18.3 [support.limits] to: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-1- The headers <tt><limits></tt>, <tt><climits></tt>, +<tt><cfloat></tt>, and <tt><cinttypes></tt> supply +characteristics of implementation-dependent <del>fundamental</del> +<ins>arithmetic</ins> types (3.9.1). +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 18.3.1 [limits] to: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-1- The <tt>numeric_limits</tt> component provides a C++ program with +information about various properties of the implementation's +representation of the <del>fundamental</del> <ins>arithmetic</ins> +types. +</p> +<p> +-2- Specializations shall be provided for each <del>fundamental</del> +<ins>arithmetic</ins> type, both floating point and integer, including +<tt>bool</tt>. The member <tt>is_specialized</tt> shall be <tt>true</tt> +for all such specializations of <tt>numeric_limits</tt>. +</p> +<p> +-4- Non-<del>fundamental</del><ins>arithmetic</ins> standard types, such +as <tt>complex<T></tt> (26.3.2), shall not have specializations. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 18.3.1.1 [numeric.limits] to: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<del>-1- The member <tt>is_specialized</tt> makes it possible to distinguish +between fundamental types, which have specializations, and non-scalar types, +which do not.</del> +</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="202"></a>202. unique() effects unclear when predicate not an equivalence relation</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.3.9 [alg.unique] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Andrew Koenig <b>Opened:</b> 2000-01-13 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#alg.unique">issues</a> in [alg.unique].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +What should unique() do if you give it a predicate that is not an +equivalence relation? There are at least two plausible answers: +</p> + +<blockquote> + +<p> + 1. You can't, because 25.2.8 says that it it "eliminates all but + the first element from every consecutive group of equal + elements..." and it wouldn't make sense to interpret "equal" as + meaning anything but an equivalence relation. [It also doesn't + make sense to interpret "equal" as meaning ==, because then there + would never be any sense in giving a predicate as an argument at + all.] +</p> + +<p> + 2. The word "equal" should be interpreted to mean whatever the + predicate says, even if it is not an equivalence relation + (and in particular, even if it is not transitive). +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +The example that raised this question is from Usenet: +</p> + +<blockquote> + +<pre>int f[] = { 1, 3, 7, 1, 2 }; +int* z = unique(f, f+5, greater<int>());</pre> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +If one blindly applies the definition using the predicate +greater<int>, and ignore the word "equal", you get: +</p> + +<blockquote> + +<p> + Eliminates all but the first element from every consecutive group + of elements referred to by the iterator i in the range [first, last) + for which *i > *(i - 1). +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +The first surprise is the order of the comparison. If we wanted to +allow for the predicate not being an equivalence relation, then we +should surely compare elements the other way: pred(*(i - 1), *i). If +we do that, then the description would seem to say: "Break the +sequence into subsequences whose elements are in strictly increasing +order, and keep only the first element of each subsequence". So the +result would be 1, 1, 2. If we take the description at its word, it +would seem to call for strictly DEcreasing order, in which case the +result should be 1, 3, 7, 2.<br> +<br> +In fact, the SGI implementation of unique() does neither: It yields 1, +3, 7. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change 25.3.9 [alg.unique] paragraph 1 to:</p> +<blockquote><p> +For a nonempty range, eliminates all but the first element from every +consecutive group of equivalent elements referred to by the iterator +<tt>i</tt> in the range [first+1, last) for which the following +conditions hold: <tt>*(i-1) == *i</tt> or <tt>pred(*(i-1), *i) != +false</tt>. +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +Also insert a new paragraph, paragraph 2a, that reads: "Requires: The +comparison function must be an equivalence relation." +</p> + +<p><i>[Redmond: discussed arguments for and against requiring the +comparison function to be an equivalence relation. Straw poll: +14-2-5. First number is to require that it be an equivalence +relation, second number is to explicitly not require that it be an +equivalence relation, third number is people who believe they need +more time to consider the issue. A separate issue: Andy Sawyer +pointed out that "i-1" is incorrect, since "i" can refer to the first +iterator in the range. Matt provided wording to address this +problem.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Curaçao: The LWG changed "... the range (first, +last)..." to "... the range [first+1, last)..." for +clarity. They considered this change close enough to editorial to not +require another round of review.]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The LWG also considered an alternative resolution: change +25.3.9 [alg.unique] paragraph 1 to:</p> + +<blockquote><p> +For a nonempty range, eliminates all but the first element from every +consecutive group of elements referred to by the iterator +<tt>i</tt> in the range (first, last) for which the following +conditions hold: <tt>*(i-1) == *i</tt> or <tt>pred(*(i-1), *i) != +false</tt>. +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +Also insert a new paragraph, paragraph 1a, that reads: "Notes: The +comparison function need not be an equivalence relation." +</p> + + +<p>Informally: the proposed resolution imposes an explicit requirement +that the comparison function be an equivalence relation. The +alternative resolution does not, and it gives enough information so +that the behavior of unique() for a non-equivalence relation is +specified. Both resolutions are consistent with the behavior of +existing implementations.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="206"></a>206. operator new(size_t, nothrow) may become unlinked to ordinary operator new if ordinary version replaced</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.6.1.1 [new.delete.single] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 1999-08-29 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#new.delete.single">issues</a> in [new.delete.single].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>As specified, the implementation of the nothrow version of operator +new does not necessarily call the ordinary operator new, but may +instead simply call the same underlying allocator and return a null +pointer instead of throwing an exception in case of failure.</p> + +<p>Such an implementation breaks code that replaces the ordinary +version of new, but not the nothrow version. If the ordinary version +of new/delete is replaced, and if the replaced delete is not +compatible with pointers returned from the library versions of new, +then when the replaced delete receives a pointer allocated by the +library new(nothrow), crash follows.</p> + +<p>The fix appears to be that the lib version of new(nothrow) must +call the ordinary new. Thus when the ordinary new gets replaced, the +lib version will call the replaced ordinary new and things will +continue to work.</p> + +<p>An alternative would be to have the ordinary new call +new(nothrow). This seems sub-optimal to me as the ordinary version of +new is the version most commonly replaced in practice. So one would +still need to replace both ordinary and nothrow versions if one wanted +to replace the ordinary version.</p> + +<p>Another alternative is to put in clear text that if one version is +replaced, then the other must also be replaced to maintain +compatibility. Then the proposed resolution below would just be a +quality of implementation issue. There is already such text in +paragraph 7 (under the new(nothrow) version). But this nuance is +easily missed if one reads only the paragraphs relating to the +ordinary new.</p> + +<p> +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2158.html">N2158</a> +has been written explaining the rationale for the proposed resolution below. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 18.5.1.1 [new.delete.single]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>void* operator new(std::size_t <i>size</i>, const std::nothrow_t&) throw(); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +-5- <i>Effects:</i> Same as above, except that it is called by a placement +version of a <i>new-expression</i> when a C++ program prefers a null pointer result as +an error indication, instead of a <tt>bad_alloc</tt> exception. +</p> + +<p> +-6- <i>Replaceable:</i> a C++ program may define a function with this function +signature that displaces the default version defined by the C++ Standard +library. +</p> + +<p> +-7- <i>Required behavior:</i> Return a non-null pointer to suitably aligned +storage (3.7.4), or else return a null pointer. This nothrow version of operator +new returns a pointer obtained as if acquired from the <ins>(possibly +replaced)</ins> ordinary version. This requirement is binding on a replacement +version of this function. +</p> + +<p> +-8- <i>Default behavior:</i> +</p> +<ul> +<li><ins> +Calls <tt>operator new(<i>size</i>)</tt>. +</ins></li> +<li><ins> +If the call to <tt>operator new(<i>size</i>)</tt> returns normally, returns +the result of that call, else +</ins></li> +<li><ins> +if the call to <tt>operator new(<i>size</i>)</tt> throws an exception, returns +a null pointer. +</ins></li> +<li><del> +Executes a loop: Within the loop, the function first attempts to allocate the +requested storage. Whether the attempt involves a call to the Standard C library +function <tt>malloc</tt> is unspecified. +</del></li> +<li><del> +Returns a pointer to the allocated storage if the attempt is successful. +Otherwise, if the last argument to <tt>set_new_handler()</tt> was a null +pointer, return a null pointer. +</del></li> +<li><del> +Otherwise, the function calls the current <i>new_handler</i> (18.5.2.2). If the +called function returns, the loop repeats. +</del></li> +<li><del> +The loop terminates when an attempt to allocate the requested storage is +successful or when a called <i>new_handler</i> function does not return. If the +called <i>new_handler</i> function terminates by throwing a <tt>bad_alloc +exception</tt>, the function returns a null pointer. +</del></li> +</ul> +<p> +-9- [<i>Example:</i> +</p> +<blockquote><pre>T* p1 = new T; <i>// throws bad_alloc if it fails</i> +T* p2 = new(nothrow) T; <i>// returns 0 if it fails</i> +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +--<i>end example</i>] +</p> +</blockquote> + +<pre>void operator delete(void* <i>ptr</i>) throw(); +<del>void operator delete(void* <i>ptr</i>, const std::nothrow_t&) throw();</del> +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-10- <i>Effects:</i> The <i>deallocation function</i> (3.7.4.2) called by a +<i>delete-expression</i> to render the value of <tt><i>ptr</i></tt> invalid. +</p> +<p> +-11- <i>Replaceable:</i> a C++ program may define a function with this function +signature that displaces the default version defined by the C++ Standard +library. +</p> +<p> +-12- <i>Requires:</i> the value of <tt><i>ptr</i></tt> is null or the value +returned by an earlier call to the <del>default</del> <ins>(possibly +replaced)</ins> <tt>operator new(std::size_t)</tt> or <tt>operator +new(std::size_t, const std::nothrow_t&)</tt>. +</p> +<p> +-13- <i>Default behavior:</i> +</p> +<ul> +<li> +For a null value of <tt><i>ptr</i></tt>, do nothing. +</li> +<li> +Any other value of <tt><i>ptr</i></tt> shall be a value returned earlier by a +call to the default <tt>operator new</tt>, which was not invalidated by an +intervening call to <tt>operator delete(void*)</tt> (17.4.3.7). For such a +non-null value of <tt><i>ptr</i></tt>, reclaims storage allocated by the earlier +call to the default <tt>operator new</tt>. +</li> +</ul> +<p> +-14- <i>Remarks:</i> It is unspecified under what conditions part or all of +such reclaimed storage is allocated by a subsequent call to <tt>operator +new</tt> or any of <tt>calloc</tt>, <tt>malloc</tt>, or <tt>realloc</tt>, +declared in <tt><cstdlib></tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<pre><ins>void operator delete(void* <i>ptr</i>, const std::nothrow_t&) throw();</ins> +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p><ins> +-15- <i>Effects:</i> Same as above, except that it is called by the +implementation when an exception propagates from a nothrow placement version +of the <i>new-expression</i> (i.e. when the constructor throws an exception). +</ins></p> +<p><ins> +-16- <i>Replaceable:</i> a C++ program may define a function with this function +signature that displaces the default version defined by the C++ Standard +library. +</ins></p> +<p><ins> +-17- <i>Requires:</i> the value of <tt><i>ptr</i></tt> is null or the +value returned by an earlier call to the (possibly replaced) <tt>operator +new(std::size_t)</tt> or <tt>operator new(std::size_t, const +std::nothrow_t&)</tt>. </ins></p> +<p><ins> +-18- <i>Default behavior:</i> Calls <tt>operator delete(<i>ptr</i>)</tt>. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 18.5.1.2 [new.delete.array] +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>void* operator new[](std::size_t <i>size</i>, const std::nothrow_t&) throw(); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-5- <i>Effects:</i> Same as above, except that it is called by a placement +version of a <i>new-expression</i> when a C++ program prefers a null pointer result as +an error indication, instead of a <tt>bad_alloc</tt> exception. +</p> + +<p> +-6- <i>Replaceable:</i> a C++ program can define a function with this function +signature that displaces the default version defined by the C++ Standard +library. +</p> + +<p> +-7- <i>Required behavior:</i> <del>Same as for operator <tt>new(std::size_t, +const std::nothrow_t&)</tt>. This nothrow version of operator <tt>new[]</tt> +returns a pointer obtained as if acquired from the ordinary version.</del> +<ins>Return a non-null pointer to suitably aligned storage (3.7.4), or else +return a null pointer. This nothrow version of operator new returns a pointer +obtained as if acquired from the (possibly replaced) <tt>operator +new[](std::size_t <i>size</i>)</tt>. This requirement is binding on a +replacement version of this function.</ins> +</p> + +<p> +-8- <i>Default behavior:</i> <del>Returns <tt>operator new(<i>size</i>, +nothrow)</tt>.</del> +</p> + +<ul> +<li><ins> +Calls <tt>operator new[](<i>size</i>)</tt>. +</ins></li> +<li><ins> +If the call to <tt>operator new[](<i>size</i>)</tt> returns normally, returns +the result of that call, else +</ins></li> +<li><ins> +if the call to <tt>operator new[](<i>size</i>)</tt> throws an exception, returns +a null pointer. +</ins></li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + +<pre>void operator delete[](void* <i>ptr</i>) throw(); +void operator delete[](void* <i>ptr</i>, const std::nothrow_t&) throw(); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-9- <i>Effects:</i> The <i>deallocation function</i> (3.7.4.2) called by the +array form of a <i>delete-expression</i> to render the value of +<tt><i>ptr</i></tt> invalid. +</p> + +<p> +-10- <i>Replaceable:</i> a C++ program can define a function with this function +signature that displaces the default version defined by the C++ Standard +library. +</p> + +<p> +-11- <i>Requires:</i> the value of +<tt><i>ptr</i></tt> is null or the value returned by an earlier call to +<tt>operator new[](std::size_t)</tt> or <tt>operator new[](std::size_t, const +std::nothrow_t&)</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +-12- <i>Default behavior:</i> Calls <tt>operator delete(<i>ptr</i>)</tt> or +<tt>operator delete<ins>[]</ins>(<i>ptr</i><del>, std::nothrow</del>)</tt> respectively. +</p> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>Yes, they may become unlinked, and that is by design. If a user +replaces one, the user should also replace the other.</p> + +<p><i>[ +Reopened due to a gcc conversation between Howard, Martin and Gaby. Forwarding +or not is visible behavior to the client and it would be useful for the client +to know which behavior it could depend on. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Batavia: Robert voiced serious reservations about backwards compatibility for +his customers. +]</i></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="208"></a>208. Unnecessary restriction on past-the-end iterators</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> X [iterator.concepts] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Stephen Cleary <b>Opened:</b> 2000-02-02 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#iterator.concepts">issues</a> in [iterator.concepts].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>In 24.1 paragraph 5, it is stated ". . . Dereferenceable and +past-the-end values are always non-singular."</p> +<p>This places an unnecessary restriction on past-the-end iterators for +containers with forward iterators (for example, a singly-linked list). If the +past-the-end value on such a container was a well-known singular value, it would +still satisfy all forward iterator requirements.</p> +<p>Removing this restriction would allow, for example, a singly-linked list +without a "footer" node.</p> +<p>This would have an impact on existing code that expects past-the-end +iterators obtained from different (generic) containers being not equal.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change X [iterator.concepts] paragraph 5, the last sentence, from:</p> +<blockquote> +<p>Dereferenceable and past-the-end values are always non-singular.</p> +</blockquote> +<p>to:</p> +<blockquote> +<p>Dereferenceable values are always non-singular. </p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>For some kinds of containers, including singly linked lists and +zero-length vectors, null pointers are perfectly reasonable past-the-end +iterators. Null pointers are singular. +</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="209"></a>209. basic_string declarations inconsistent</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.4 [basic.string] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Igor Stauder <b>Opened:</b> 2000-02-11 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#basic.string">issues</a> in [basic.string].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>In Section 21.4 [basic.string] the basic_string member function +declarations use a consistent style except for the following functions:</p> +<blockquote> + <pre>void push_back(const charT); +basic_string& assign(const basic_string&); +void swap(basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>&);</pre> +</blockquote> +<p>- push_back, assign, swap: missing argument name <br> +- push_back: use of const with charT (i.e. POD type passed by value +not by reference - should be charT or const charT& )<br> +- swap: redundant use of template parameters in argument +basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>&</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In Section 21.4 [basic.string] change the basic_string member +function declarations push_back, assign, and swap to:</p> +<blockquote> + <pre>void push_back(charT c); + +basic_string& assign(const basic_string& str); +void swap(basic_string& str);</pre> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>Although the standard is in general not consistent in declaration +style, the basic_string declarations are consistent other than the +above. The LWG felt that this was sufficient reason to merit the +change. +</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="210"></a>210. distance first and last confused</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25 [algorithms] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Lisa Lippincott <b>Opened:</b> 2000-02-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#algorithms">issues</a> in [algorithms].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>In paragraph 9 of section 25 [algorithms], it is written:</p> +<blockquote> + <p> In the description of the algorithms operators + and - are used + for some of the iterator categories for which they do not have to + be defined. In these cases the semantics of [...] a-b is the same + as of<br> + <br> + <tt>return distance(a, b);</tt></p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>On the last line of paragraph 9 of section 25 [algorithms] change +<tt>"a-b"</tt> to <tt>"b-a".</tt></p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>There are two ways to fix the defect; change the description to b-a +or change the return to distance(b,a). The LWG preferred the +former for consistency.</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="211"></a>211. operator>>(istream&, string&) doesn't set failbit</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.4.8.9 [string.io] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Scott Snyder <b>Opened:</b> 2000-02-04 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#string.io">issues</a> in [string.io].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The description of the stream extraction operator for std::string (section +21.3.7.9 [lib.string.io]) does not contain a requirement that failbit be set in +the case that the operator fails to extract any characters from the input +stream.</p> +<p>This implies that the typical construction</p> +<blockquote> + <pre>std::istream is; +std::string str; +... +while (is >> str) ... ;</pre> +</blockquote> +<p>(which tests failbit) is not required to terminate at EOF.</p> +<p>Furthermore, this is inconsistent with other extraction operators, +which do include this requirement. (See sections 27.7.1.2 [istream.formatted] and 27.7.1.3 [istream.unformatted]), where this +requirement is present, either explicitly or implicitly, for the +extraction operators. It is also present explicitly in the description +of getline (istream&, string&, charT) in section 21.4.8.9 [string.io] paragraph 8.)</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Insert new paragraph after paragraph 2 in section 21.4.8.9 [string.io]:</p> +<blockquote> + +<p>If the function extracts no characters, it calls +is.setstate(ios::failbit) which may throw ios_base::failure +(27.4.4.3).</p> +</blockquote> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="212"></a>212. Empty range behavior unclear for several algorithms</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.4.7 [alg.min.max] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nico Josuttis <b>Opened:</b> 2000-02-26 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#alg.min.max">issues</a> in [alg.min.max].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The standard doesn't specify what min_element() and max_element() shall +return if the range is empty (first equals last). The usual implementations +return last. This problem seems also apply to partition(), stable_partition(), +next_permutation(), and prev_permutation().</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 25.4.7 [alg.min.max] - Minimum and maximum, paragraphs 7 and +9, append: Returns last if first==last.</p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The LWG looked in some detail at all of the above mentioned +algorithms, but believes that except for min_element() and +max_element() it is already clear that last is returned if first == +last.</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="214"></a>214. set::find() missing const overload</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.6.3 [set], 23.6.4 [multiset] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Judy Ward <b>Opened:</b> 2000-02-28 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#set">issues</a> in [set].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#450">450</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The specification for the associative container requirements in +Table 69 state that the find member function should "return +iterator; const_iterator for constant a". The map and multimap +container descriptions have two overloaded versions of find, but set +and multiset do not, all they have is:</p> +<blockquote> + <pre>iterator find(const key_type & x) const;</pre> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change the prototypes for find(), lower_bound(), upper_bound(), and +equal_range() in section 23.6.3 [set] and section 23.6.4 [multiset] to each have two overloads:</p> +<blockquote> + <pre>iterator find(const key_type & x); +const_iterator find(const key_type & x) const;</pre> + <pre>iterator lower_bound(const key_type & x); +const_iterator lower_bound(const key_type & x) const;</pre> + <pre>iterator upper_bound(const key_type & x); +const_iterator upper_bound(const key_type & x) const;</pre> + <pre>pair<iterator, iterator> equal_range(const key_type & x); +pair<const_iterator, const_iterator> equal_range(const key_type & x) const;</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[Tokyo: At the request of the LWG, Judy Ward provided wording +extending the proposed resolution to lower_bound, upper_bound, and +equal_range.]</i></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="217"></a>217. Facets example (Classifying Japanese characters) contains errors</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.8 [facets.examples] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2000-02-29 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#facets.examples">issues</a> in [facets.examples].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The example in 22.2.8, paragraph 11 contains the following errors:</p> +<p>1) The member function `My::JCtype::is_kanji()' is non-const; the function +must be const in order for it to be callable on a const object (a reference to +which which is what std::use_facet<>() returns).</p> +<p>2) In file filt.C, the definition of `JCtype::id' must be qualified with the +name of the namespace `My'.</p> +<p>3) In the definition of `loc' and subsequently in the call to use_facet<>() +in main(), the name of the facet is misspelled: it should read `My::JCtype' +rather than `My::JCType'.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Replace the "Classifying Japanese characters" example in 22.2.8, +paragraph 11 with the following:</p> +<pre>#include <locale></pre> +<pre>namespace My { + using namespace std; + class JCtype : public locale::facet { + public: + static locale::id id; // required for use as a new locale facet + bool is_kanji (wchar_t c) const; + JCtype() {} + protected: + ~JCtype() {} + }; +}</pre> +<pre>// file: filt.C +#include <iostream> +#include <locale> +#include "jctype" // above +std::locale::id My::JCtype::id; // the static JCtype member +declared above.</pre> +<pre>int main() +{ + using namespace std; + typedef ctype<wchar_t> wctype; + locale loc(locale(""), // the user's preferred locale... + new My::JCtype); // and a new feature ... + wchar_t c = use_facet<wctype>(loc).widen('!'); + if (!use_facet<My::JCtype>(loc).is_kanji(c)) + cout << "no it isn't!" << endl; + return 0; +}</pre> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="220"></a>220. ~ios_base() usage valid?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.5.2.7 [ios.base.cons] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Jonathan Schilling, Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2000-03-13 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The pre-conditions for the ios_base destructor are described in 27.4.2.7 +paragraph 2:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>Effects: Destroys an object of class ios_base. Calls each registered + callback pair (fn,index) (27.4.2.6) as (*fn)(erase_event,*this,index) at such + time that any ios_base member function called from within fn has well defined + results.</p> +</blockquote> +<p>But what is not clear is: If no callback functions were ever registered, does +it matter whether the ios_base members were ever initialized?</p> +<p>For instance, does this program have defined behavior:</p> +<blockquote> + <pre>#include <ios></pre> + <pre>class D : public std::ios_base { };</pre> + <pre>int main() { D d; }</pre> +</blockquote> +<p>It seems that registration of a callback function would surely affect the +state of an ios_base. That is, when you register a callback function with an +ios_base, the ios_base must record that fact somehow.</p> +<p>But if after construction the ios_base is in an indeterminate state, and that +state is not made determinate before the destructor is called, then how would +the destructor know if any callbacks had indeed been registered? And if the +number of callbacks that had been registered is indeterminate, then is not the +behavior of the destructor undefined?</p> +<p>By comparison, the basic_ios class description in 27.4.4.1 paragraph 2 makes +it explicit that destruction before initialization results in undefined +behavior.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Modify 27.4.2.7 paragraph 1 from</p> +<blockquote> + <p>Effects: Each ios_base member has an indeterminate value after + construction.</p> +</blockquote> +<p>to</p> +<blockquote> + <p>Effects: Each ios_base member has an indeterminate value after + construction. These members must be initialized by calling basic_ios::init. If an ios_base object is destroyed before these initializations + have taken place, the behavior is undefined.</p> +</blockquote> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="221"></a>221. num_get<>::do_get stage 2 processing broken</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.2.1.2 [facet.num.get.virtuals] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 2000-03-14 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#facet.num.get.virtuals">issues</a> in [facet.num.get.virtuals].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Stage 2 processing of numeric conversion is broken.</p> + +<p>Table 55 in 22.2.2.1.2 says that when basefield is 0 the integral +conversion specifier is %i. A %i specifier determines a number's base +by its prefix (0 for octal, 0x for hex), so the intention is clearly +that a 0x prefix is allowed. Paragraph 8 in the same section, +however, describes very precisely how characters are processed. (It +must be done "as if" by a specified code fragment.) That +description does not allow a 0x prefix to be recognized.</p> + +<p>Very roughly, stage 2 processing reads a char_type ct. It converts +ct to a char, not by using narrow but by looking it up in a +translation table that was created by widening the string literal +"0123456789abcdefABCDEF+-". The character "x" is +not found in that table, so it can't be recognized by stage 2 +processing.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 22.2.2.1.2 paragraph 8, replace the line:</p> +<blockquote> + <pre>static const char src[] = "0123456789abcdefABCDEF+-";</pre> +</blockquote> +<p>with the line:</p> +<blockquote> + <pre>static const char src[] = "0123456789abcdefxABCDEFX+-";</pre> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>If we're using the technique of widening a string literal, the +string literal must contain every character we wish to recognize. +This technique has the consequence that alternate representations +of digits will not be recognized. This design decision was made +deliberately, with full knowledge of that limitation.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="222"></a>222. Are throw clauses necessary if a throw is already implied by the effects clause?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17.5.1.4 [structure.specifications] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Judy Ward <b>Opened:</b> 2000-03-17 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#structure.specifications">issues</a> in [structure.specifications].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Section 21.3.6.8 describes the basic_string::compare function this way:</p> +<blockquote> + <pre>21.3.6.8 - basic_string::compare [lib.string::compare] + +int compare(size_type pos1, size_type n1, + const basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>& str , + size_type pos2 , size_type n2 ) const; + +-4- Returns: + + basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>(*this,pos1,n1).compare( + basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>(str,pos2,n2)) .</pre> +</blockquote> +<p>and the constructor that's implicitly called by the above is +defined to throw an out-of-range exception if pos > str.size(). See +section 21.4.1 [string.require] paragraph 4.</p> + +<p>On the other hand, the compare function descriptions themselves don't have +"Throws: " clauses and according to 17.3.1.3, paragraph 3, elements +that do not apply to a function are omitted.</p> +<p>So it seems there is an inconsistency in the standard -- are the +"Effects" clauses correct, or are the "Throws" clauses +missing?</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 17.5.1.4 [structure.specifications] paragraph 3, the footnote 148 attached to +the sentence "Descriptions of function semantics contain the +following elements (as appropriate):", insert the word +"further" so that the foot note reads:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>To save space, items that do not apply to a function are + omitted. For example, if a function does not specify any further + preconditions, there will be no "Requires" paragraph.</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The standard is somewhat inconsistent, but a failure to note a +throw condition in a throws clause does not grant permission not to +throw. The inconsistent wording is in a footnote, and thus +non-normative. The proposed resolution from the LWG clarifies the +footnote.</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="223"></a>223. reverse algorithm should use iter_swap rather than swap</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.3.10 [alg.reverse] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Dave Abrahams <b>Opened:</b> 2000-03-21 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Shouldn't the effects say "applies iter_swap to all pairs..."?</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 25.3.10 [alg.reverse], replace:</p> + <blockquote><p> + Effects: For each non-negative integer i <= (last - first)/2, + applies swap to all pairs of iterators first + i, (last - i) - 1. + </p></blockquote> +<p>with:</p> + <blockquote><p> + Effects: For each non-negative integer i <= (last - first)/2, + applies iter_swap to all pairs of iterators first + i, (last - i) - 1. + </p></blockquote> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="224"></a>224. clear() complexity for associative containers refers to undefined N</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2.4 [associative.reqmts] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Ed Brey <b>Opened:</b> 2000-03-23 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index-open.html#associative.reqmts">active issues</a> in [associative.reqmts].</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#associative.reqmts">issues</a> in [associative.reqmts].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>In the associative container requirements table in 23.1.2 paragraph 7, +a.clear() has complexity "log(size()) + N". However, the meaning of N +is not defined.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In the associative container requirements table in 23.1.2 paragraph +7, the complexity of a.clear(), change "log(size()) + N" to +"linear in <tt>size()</tt>".</p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>It's the "log(size())", not the "N", that is in +error: there's no difference between <i>O(N)</i> and <i>O(N + +log(N))</i>. The text in the standard is probably an incorrect +cut-and-paste from the range version of <tt>erase</tt>.</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="225"></a>225. std:: algorithms use of other unqualified algorithms</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17.6.4.4 [global.functions] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Dave Abrahams <b>Opened:</b> 2000-04-01 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#global.functions">issues</a> in [global.functions].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Are algorithms in std:: allowed to use other algorithms without qualification, so functions in +user namespaces might be found through Koenig lookup?</p> +<p>For example, a popular standard library implementation includes this +implementation of std::unique:</p> +<blockquote> +<pre>namespace std { + template <class _ForwardIter> + _ForwardIter unique(_ForwardIter __first, _ForwardIter __last) { + __first = adjacent_find(__first, __last); + return unique_copy(__first, __last, __first); + } + }</pre> +</blockquote> +<p>Imagine two users on opposite sides of town, each using unique on his own +sequences bounded by my_iterators . User1 looks at his standard library +implementation and says, "I know how to implement a more efficient +unique_copy for my_iterators", and writes:</p> +<blockquote> +<pre>namespace user1 { + class my_iterator; + // faster version for my_iterator + my_iterator unique_copy(my_iterator, my_iterator, my_iterator); + }</pre> +</blockquote> +<p>user1::unique_copy() is selected by Koenig lookup, as he intended.</p> +<p>User2 has other needs, and writes:</p> +<blockquote> +<pre>namespace user2 { + class my_iterator; + // Returns true iff *c is a unique copy of *a and *b. + bool unique_copy(my_iterator a, my_iterator b, my_iterator c); + }</pre> +</blockquote> +<p>User2 is shocked to find later that his fully-qualified use of +std::unique(user2::my_iterator, user2::my_iterator, user2::my_iterator) fails to +compile (if he's lucky). Looking in the standard, he sees the following Effects +clause for unique():</p> +<blockquote> + <p>Effects: Eliminates all but the first element from every consecutive group + of equal elements referred to by the iterator i in the range [first, last) for + which the following corresponding conditions hold: *i == *(i - 1) or pred(*i, + *(i - 1)) != false</p> +</blockquote> +<p>The standard gives user2 absolutely no reason to think he can interfere with +std::unique by defining names in namespace user2. His standard library has been +built with the template export feature, so he is unable to inspect the +implementation. User1 eventually compiles his code with another compiler, and +his version of unique_copy silently stops being called. Eventually, he realizes +that he was depending on an implementation detail of his library and had no +right to expect his unique_copy() to be called portably.</p> +<p>On the face of it, and given above scenario, it may seem obvious that the +implementation of unique() shown is non-conforming because it uses unique_copy() +rather than ::std::unique_copy(). Most standard library implementations, +however, seem to disagree with this notion.</p> +<p> <i>[Tokyo: Steve Adamczyk from +the core working group indicates that "std::" is sufficient; +leading "::" qualification is not required because any namespace +qualification is sufficient to suppress Koenig lookup.]</i></p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Add a paragraph and a note at the end of +17.6.4.4 [global.functions]:</p> +<blockquote> + +<p>Unless otherwise specified, no global or non-member function in the +standard library shall use a function from another namespace which is +found through <i>argument-dependent name lookup</i> (3.4.2 [basic.lookup.argdep]).</p> + +<p>[Note: the phrase "unless otherwise specified" is intended to +allow Koenig lookup in cases like that of ostream_iterators:<br> + +<br> + Effects:</p> + <blockquote> +<p>*out_stream << value;<br> + if(delim != 0) *out_stream << delim;<br> + return (*this);</p> + <p>--end note]</p> + </blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[Tokyo: The LWG agrees that this is a defect in the standard, but +is as yet unsure if the proposed resolution is the best +solution. Furthermore, the LWG believes that the same problem of +unqualified library names applies to wording in the standard itself, +and has opened issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#229">229</a> accordingly. Any resolution of +issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#225">225</a> should be coordinated with the resolution of +issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#229">229</a>.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Toronto: The LWG is not sure if this is a defect in the +standard. Most LWG members believe that an implementation of +<tt>std::unique</tt> like the one quoted in this issue is already +illegal, since, under certain circumstances, its semantics are not +those specified in the standard. The standard's description of +<tt>unique</tt> does not say that overloading <tt>adjacent_find</tt> +should have any effect.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Curaçao: An LWG-subgroup spent an afternoon working on issues +225, 226, and 229. Their conclusion was that the issues should be +separated into an LWG portion (Howard's paper, N1387=02-0045), and a +EWG portion (Dave will write a proposal). The LWG and EWG had +(separate) discussions of this plan the next day. The proposed +resolution for this issue is in accordance with Howard's paper.]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>It could be argued that this proposed isn't strictly necessary, + that the Standard doesn't grant implementors license to write a + standard function that behaves differently than specified in the + Standard just because of an unrelated user-defined name in some + other namespace. However, this is at worst a clarification. It is + surely right that algorithsm shouldn't pick up random names, that + user-defined names should have no effect unless otherwise specified. + Issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#226">226</a> deals with the question of when it is + appropriate for the standard to explicitly specify otherwise.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="226"></a>226. User supplied specializations or overloads of namespace std function templates</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17.6.3.3 [reserved.names] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Dave Abrahams <b>Opened:</b> 2000-04-01 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#reserved.names">issues</a> in [reserved.names].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The issues are: </p> +<p>1. How can a 3rd party library implementor (lib1) write a version of a standard +algorithm which is specialized to work with his own class template? </p> +<p>2. How can another library implementor (lib2) write a generic algorithm which +will take advantage of the specialized algorithm in lib1?</p> +<p>This appears to be the only viable answer under current language rules:</p> +<blockquote> + <pre>namespace lib1 +{ + // arbitrary-precision numbers using T as a basic unit + template <class T> + class big_num { //... + }; + </pre> + <pre> // defining this in namespace std is illegal (it would be an + // overload), so we hope users will rely on Koenig lookup + template <class T> + void swap(big_int<T>&, big_int<T>&); +}</pre> + <pre>#include <algorithm> +namespace lib2 +{ + template <class T> + void generic_sort(T* start, T* end) + { + ... + // using-declaration required so we can work on built-in types + using std::swap; + // use Koenig lookup to find specialized algorithm if available + swap(*x, *y); + } +}</pre> +</blockquote> +<p>This answer has some drawbacks. First of all, it makes writing lib2 difficult +and somewhat slippery. The implementor needs to remember to write the +using-declaration, or generic_sort will fail to compile when T is a built-in +type. The second drawback is that the use of this style in lib2 effectively +"reserves" names in any namespace which defines types which may +eventually be used with lib2. This may seem innocuous at first when applied to +names like swap, but consider more ambiguous names like unique_copy() instead. +It is easy to imagine the user wanting to define these names differently in his +own namespace. A definition with semantics incompatible with the standard +library could cause serious problems (see issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#225">225</a>).</p> +<p>Why, you may ask, can't we just partially specialize std::swap()? It's +because the language doesn't allow for partial specialization of function +templates. If you write:</p> +<blockquote> + <pre>namespace std +{ + template <class T> + void swap(lib1::big_int<T>&, lib1::big_int<T>&); +}</pre> +</blockquote> +<p>You have just overloaded std::swap, which is illegal under the current +language rules. On the other hand, the following full specialization is legal:</p> +<blockquote> + <pre>namespace std +{ + template <> + void swap(lib1::other_type&, lib1::other_type&); +}</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p>This issue reflects concerns raised by the "Namespace issue +with specialized swap" thread on comp.lang.c++.moderated. A +similar set of concerns was earlier raised on the boost.org mailing +list and the ACCU-general mailing list. Also see library reflector +message c++std-lib-7354.</p> + +<p> +J. C. van Winkel points out (in c++std-lib-9565) another unexpected +fact: it's impossible to output a container of std::pair's using copy +and an ostream_iterator, as long as both pair-members are built-in or +std:: types. That's because a user-defined operator<< for (for +example) std::pair<const std::string, int> will not be found: +lookup for operator<< will be performed only in namespace std. +Opinions differed on whether or not this was a defect, and, if so, +whether the defect is that something is wrong with user-defined +functionality and std, or whether it's that the standard library does +not provide an operator<< for std::pair<>. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p>Adopt the wording proposed in Howard Hinnant's paper + N1523=03-0106, "Proposed Resolution To LWG issues 225, 226, 229".</p> + + +<p><i>[Tokyo: Summary, "There is no conforming way to extend +std::swap for user defined templates." The LWG agrees that +there is a problem. Would like more information before +proceeding. This may be a core issue. Core issue 229 has been opened +to discuss the core aspects of this problem. It was also noted that +submissions regarding this issue have been received from several +sources, but too late to be integrated into the issues list. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Post-Tokyo: A paper with several proposed resolutions, +J16/00-0029==WG21/N1252, "Shades of namespace std functions +" by Alan Griffiths, is in the Post-Tokyo mailing. It +should be considered a part of this issue.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Toronto: Dave Abrahams and Peter Dimov have proposed a +resolution that involves core changes: it would add partial +specialization of function template. The Core Working Group is +reluctant to add partial specialization of function templates. It is +viewed as a large change, CWG believes that proposal presented leaves +some syntactic issues unanswered; if the CWG does add partial +specialization of function templates, it wishes to develop its own +proposal. The LWG continues to believe that there is a serious +problem: there is no good way for users to force the library to use +user specializations of generic standard library functions, and in +certain cases (e.g. transcendental functions called by +<tt>valarray</tt> and <tt>complex</tt>) this is important. Koenig +lookup isn't adequate, since names within the library must be +qualified with <tt>std</tt> (see issue 225), specialization doesn't +work (we don't have partial specialization of function templates), and +users aren't permitted to add overloads within namespace std. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Copenhagen: Discussed at length, with no consensus. Relevant +papers in the pre-Copenhagen mailing: N1289, N1295, N1296. Discussion +focused on four options. (1) Relax restrictions on overloads within +namespace std. (2) Mandate that the standard library use unqualified +calls for <tt>swap</tt> and possibly other functions. (3) Introduce +helper class templates for <tt>swap</tt> and possibly other functions. +(4) Introduce partial specialization of function templates. Every +option had both support and opposition. Straw poll (first number is +support, second is strongly opposed): (1) 6, 4; (2) 6, 7; (3) 3, 8; +(4) 4, 4.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Redmond: Discussed, again no consensus. Herb presented an +argument that a user who is defining a type <tt>T</tt> with an +associated <tt>swap</tt> should not be expected to put that +<tt>swap</tt> in namespace std, either by overloading or by partial +specialization. The argument is that <tt>swap</tt> is part of +<tt>T</tt>'s interface, and thus should to in the same namespace as +<tt>T</tt> and only in that namespace. If we accept this argument, +the consequence is that standard library functions should use +unqualified call of <tt>swap</tt>. (And which other functions? Any?) +A small group (Nathan, Howard, Jeremy, Dave, Matt, Walter, Marc) will +try to put together a proposal before the next meeting.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Curaçao: An LWG-subgroup spent an afternoon working on issues +225, 226, and 229. Their conclusion was that the issues should be +separated into an LWG portion (Howard's paper, N1387=02-0045), and a +EWG portion (Dave will write a proposal). The LWG and EWG had +(separate) discussions of this plan the next day. The proposed +resolution is the one proposed by Howard.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Santa Cruz: the LWG agreed with the general direction of + Howard's paper, N1387. (Roughly: Koenig lookup is disabled unless + we say otherwise; this issue is about when we do say otherwise.) + However, there were concerns about wording. Howard will provide new + wording. Bill and Jeremy will review it.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Kona: Howard proposed the new wording. The LWG accepted his + proposed resolution.]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>Informally: introduce a Swappable concept, and specify that the + value types of the iterators passed to certain standard algorithms + (such as iter_swap, swap_ranges, reverse, rotate, and sort) conform + to that concept. The Swappable concept will make it clear that + these algorithms use unqualified lookup for the calls + to <tt>swap</tt>. Also, in 26.6.3.3 [valarray.transcend] paragraph 1, + state that the valarray transcendentals use unqualified lookup.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="227"></a>227. std::swap() should require CopyConstructible or DefaultConstructible arguments</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.3.3 [alg.swap] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TC1">TC1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Dave Abrahams <b>Opened:</b> 2000-04-09 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#alg.swap">issues</a> in [alg.swap].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TC1">TC1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>25.2.2 reads:</p> +<blockquote> + <p><tt> template<class T> void swap(T& a, T& b);</tt><br> + <br> + Requires: Type T is Assignable (_lib.container.requirements_).<br> + Effects: Exchanges values stored in two locations.</p> +</blockquote> +<p>The only reasonable** generic implementation of swap requires construction of a + new temporary copy of one of its arguments:</p> +<blockquote> +<pre>template<class T> void swap(T& a, T& b); + { + T tmp(a); + a = b; + b = tmp; + }</pre> +</blockquote> +<p>But a type which is only Assignable cannot be swapped by this implementation.</p> +<p>**Yes, there's also an unreasonable implementation which would require T to be + DefaultConstructible instead of CopyConstructible. I don't think this is worthy + of consideration:</p> +<blockquote> +<pre>template<class T> void swap(T& a, T& b); +{ + T tmp; + tmp = a; + a = b; + b = tmp; +}</pre> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change 25.2.2 paragraph 1 from:</p> +<blockquote> +<p> Requires: Type T is Assignable (23.1).</p> +</blockquote> +<p>to:</p> +<blockquote> +<p> Requires: Type T is CopyConstructible (20.1.3) and Assignable (23.1)</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="228"></a>228. Incorrect specification of "..._byname" facets</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4 [locale.categories] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Dietmar Kühl <b>Opened:</b> 2000-04-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#locale.categories">issues</a> in [locale.categories].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The sections 22.4.1.2 [locale.ctype.byname], 22.4.1.5 [locale.codecvt.byname], +sref ref="22.2.1.6", 22.4.3.2 [locale.numpunct.byname], 22.4.4.2 [locale.collate.byname], 22.4.5.4 [locale.time.put.byname], 22.4.6.4 [locale.moneypunct.byname], and 22.4.7.2 [locale.messages.byname] overspecify the +definitions of the "..._byname" classes by listing a bunch +of virtual functions. At the same time, no semantics of these +functions are defined. Real implementations do not define these +functions because the functional part of the facets is actually +implemented in the corresponding base classes and the constructor of +the "..._byname" version just provides suitable date used by +these implementations. For example, the 'numpunct' methods just return +values from a struct. The base class uses a statically initialized +struct while the derived version reads the contents of this struct +from a table. However, no virtual function is defined in +'numpunct_byname'.</p> + +<p>For most classes this does not impose a problem but specifically +for 'ctype' it does: The specialization for 'ctype_byname<char>' +is required because otherwise the semantics would change due to the +virtual functions defined in the general version for 'ctype_byname': +In 'ctype<char>' the method 'do_is()' is not virtual but it is +made virtual in both 'ctype<cT>' and 'ctype_byname<cT>'. +Thus, a class derived from 'ctype_byname<char>' can tell whether +this class is specialized or not under the current specification: +Without the specialization, 'do_is()' is virtual while with +specialization it is not virtual.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> Change section 22.2.1.2 (lib.locale.ctype.byname) to become:</p> +<pre> namespace std { + template <class charT> + class ctype_byname : public ctype<charT> { + public: + typedef ctype<charT>::mask mask; + explicit ctype_byname(const char*, size_t refs = 0); + protected: + ~ctype_byname(); // virtual + }; + }</pre> +<p> Change section 22.2.1.6 (lib.locale.codecvt.byname) to become:</p> +<pre> namespace std { + template <class internT, class externT, class stateT> + class codecvt_byname : public codecvt<internT, externT, stateT> { + public: + explicit codecvt_byname(const char*, size_t refs = 0); + protected: + ~codecvt_byname(); // virtual + }; + } +</pre> +<p> Change section 22.2.3.2 (lib.locale.numpunct.byname) to become:</p> +<pre> namespace std { + template <class charT> + class numpunct_byname : public numpunct<charT> { + // this class is specialized for char and wchar_t. + public: + typedef charT char_type; + typedef basic_string<charT> string_type; + explicit numpunct_byname(const char*, size_t refs = 0); + protected: + ~numpunct_byname(); // virtual + }; + }</pre> +<p> Change section 22.2.4.2 (lib.locale.collate.byname) to become:</p> +<pre> namespace std { + template <class charT> + class collate_byname : public collate<charT> { + public: + typedef basic_string<charT> string_type; + explicit collate_byname(const char*, size_t refs = 0); + protected: + ~collate_byname(); // virtual + }; + }</pre> +<p> Change section 22.2.5.2 (lib.locale.time.get.byname) to become:</p> +<pre> namespace std { + template <class charT, class InputIterator = istreambuf_iterator<charT> > + class time_get_byname : public time_get<charT, InputIterator> { + public: + typedef time_base::dateorder dateorder; + typedef InputIterator iter_type</pre> +<pre> explicit time_get_byname(const char*, size_t refs = 0); + protected: + ~time_get_byname(); // virtual + }; + }</pre> +<p> Change section 22.2.5.4 (lib.locale.time.put.byname) to become:</p> +<pre> namespace std { + template <class charT, class OutputIterator = ostreambuf_iterator<charT> > + class time_put_byname : public time_put<charT, OutputIterator> + { + public: + typedef charT char_type; + typedef OutputIterator iter_type;</pre> +<pre> explicit time_put_byname(const char*, size_t refs = 0); + protected: + ~time_put_byname(); // virtual + }; + }"</pre> +<p> Change section 22.2.6.4 (lib.locale.moneypunct.byname) to become:</p> +<pre> namespace std { + template <class charT, bool Intl = false> + class moneypunct_byname : public moneypunct<charT, Intl> { + public: + typedef money_base::pattern pattern; + typedef basic_string<charT> string_type;</pre> +<pre> explicit moneypunct_byname(const char*, size_t refs = 0); + protected: + ~moneypunct_byname(); // virtual + }; + }</pre> +<p> Change section 22.2.7.2 (lib.locale.messages.byname) to become:</p> +<pre> namespace std { + template <class charT> + class messages_byname : public messages<charT> { + public: + typedef messages_base::catalog catalog; + typedef basic_string<charT> string_type;</pre> +<pre> explicit messages_byname(const char*, size_t refs = 0); + protected: + ~messages_byname(); // virtual + }; + }</pre> +<p>Remove section 22.4.1.4 [locale.codecvt] completely (because in +this case only those members are defined to be virtual which are +defined to be virtual in 'ctype<cT>'.)</p> + +<p><i>[Post-Tokyo: Dietmar Kühl submitted this issue at the request of +the LWG to solve the underlying problems raised by issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#138">138</a>.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Copenhagen: proposed resolution was revised slightly, to remove +three last virtual functions from <tt>messages_byname</tt>.]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="229"></a>229. Unqualified references of other library entities</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17.6.1.1 [contents] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Steve Clamage <b>Opened:</b> 2000-04-19 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#contents">issues</a> in [contents].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Throughout the library chapters, the descriptions of library entities refer +to other library entities without necessarily qualifying the names.</p> + +<p>For example, section 25.2.2 "Swap" describes the effect of +swap_ranges in terms of the unqualified name "swap". This section +could reasonably be interpreted to mean that the library must be implemented so +as to do a lookup of the unqualified name "swap", allowing users to +override any ::std::swap function when Koenig lookup applies.</p> + +<p>Although it would have been best to use explicit qualification with +"::std::" throughout, too many lines in the standard would have to be +adjusted to make that change in a Technical Corrigendum.</p> + +<p>Issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#182">182</a>, which addresses qualification of +<tt>size_t</tt>, is a special case of this. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>To section 17.4.1.1 "Library contents" Add the following paragraph:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>Whenever a name x defined in the standard library is mentioned, the name x + is assumed to be fully qualified as ::std::x, unless explicitly described + otherwise. For example, if the Effects section for library function F is + described as calling library function G, the function ::std::G is meant.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[Post-Tokyo: Steve Clamage submitted this issue at the request of +the LWG to solve a problem in the standard itself similar to the +problem within implementations of library identified by issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#225">225</a>. Any resolution of issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#225">225</a> should be +coordinated with the resolution of this issue.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[post-Toronto: Howard is undecided about whether it is +appropriate for all standard library function names referred to in +other standard library functions to be explicitly qualified by +<tt>std</tt>: it is common advice that users should define global +functions that operate on their class in the same namespace as the +class, and this requires argument-dependent lookup if those functions +are intended to be called by library code. Several LWG members are +concerned that valarray appears to require argument-dependent lookup, +but that the wording may not be clear enough to fall under +"unless explicitly described otherwise".]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Curaçao: An LWG-subgroup spent an afternoon working on issues +225, 226, and 229. Their conclusion was that the issues should be +separated into an LWG portion (Howard's paper, N1387=02-0045), and a +EWG portion (Dave will write a proposal). The LWG and EWG had +(separate) discussions of this plan the next day. This paper resolves +issues 225 and 226. In light of that resolution, the proposed +resolution for the current issue makes sense.]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="230"></a>230. Assignable specified without also specifying CopyConstructible</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17 [library] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Beman Dawes <b>Opened:</b> 2000-04-26 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index-open.html#library">active issues</a> in [library].</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#library">issues</a> in [library].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#227">227</a> identified an instance (std::swap) where +Assignable was specified without also specifying +CopyConstructible. The LWG asked that the standard be searched to +determine if the same defect existed elsewhere.</p> + +<p>There are a number of places (see proposed resolution below) where +Assignable is specified without also specifying +CopyConstructible. There are also several cases where both are +specified. For example, 26.5.1 [rand.req].</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 23.2 [container.requirements] table 65 for value_type: +change "T is Assignable" to "T is CopyConstructible and +Assignable" +</p> + +<p>In 23.2.4 [associative.reqmts] table 69 X::key_type; change +"Key is Assignable" to "Key is +CopyConstructible and Assignable"<br> +</p> + +<p>In 24.2.4 [output.iterators] paragraph 1, change: +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> A class or a built-in type X satisfies the requirements of an +output iterator if X is an Assignable type (23.1) and also the +following expressions are valid, as shown in Table 73: +</p> +</blockquote> +<p>to: +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> A class or a built-in type X satisfies the requirements of an +output iterator if X is a CopyConstructible (20.1.3) and Assignable +type (23.1) and also the following expressions are valid, as shown in +Table 73: +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[Post-Tokyo: Beman Dawes submitted this issue at the request of +the LWG. He asks that the 25.3.5 [alg.replace] and 25.3.6 [alg.fill] changes be studied carefully, as it is not clear that +CopyConstructible is really a requirement and may be +overspecification.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Portions of the resolution for issue 230 have been superceded by +the resolution of issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#276">276</a>.]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The original proposed resolution also included changes to input +iterator, fill, and replace. The LWG believes that those changes are +not necessary. The LWG considered some blanket statement, where an +Assignable type was also required to be Copy Constructible, but +decided against this because fill and replace really don't require the +Copy Constructible property.</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="231"></a>231. Precision in iostream?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.2.2.2 [facet.num.put.virtuals] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> James Kanze, Stephen Clamage <b>Opened:</b> 2000-04-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#facet.num.put.virtuals">issues</a> in [facet.num.put.virtuals].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>What is the following program supposed to output?</p> +<pre>#include <iostream> + + int + main() + { + std::cout.setf( std::ios::scientific , std::ios::floatfield ) ; + std::cout.precision( 0 ) ; + std::cout << 1.00 << '\n' ; + return 0 ; + }</pre> +<p>From my C experience, I would expect "1e+00"; this is what +<tt>printf("%.0e" , 1.00 );</tt> does. G++ outputs +"1.000000e+00".</p> + +<p>The only indication I can find in the standard is 22.2.2.2.2/11, +where it says "For conversion from a floating-point type, if +(flags & fixed) != 0 or if str.precision() > 0, then +str.precision() is specified in the conversion specification." +This is an obvious error, however, fixed is not a mask for a field, +but a value that a multi-bit field may take -- the results of and'ing +fmtflags with ios::fixed are not defined, at least not if +ios::scientific has been set. G++'s behavior corresponds to what might +happen if you do use (flags & fixed) != 0 with a typical +implementation (floatfield == 3 << something, fixed == 1 +<< something, and scientific == 2 << something).</p> + +<p>Presumably, the intent is either (flags & floatfield) != 0, or +(flags & floatfield) == fixed; the first gives something more or +less like the effect of precision in a printf floating point +conversion. Only more or less, of course. In order to implement printf +formatting correctly, you must know whether the precision was +explicitly set or not. Say by initializing it to -1, instead of 6, and +stating that for floating point conversions, if precision < -1, 6 +will be used, for fixed point, if precision < -1, 1 will be used, +etc. Plus, of course, if precision == 0 and flags & floatfield == +0, 1 should be = used. But it probably isn't necessary to emulate all +of the anomalies of printf:-).</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Replace 22.4.2.2.2 [facet.num.put.virtuals], paragraph 11, with the following +sentence: +</p> +<blockquote><p> +For conversion from a floating-point type, +<tt><i>str</i>.precision()</tt> is specified in the conversion +specification. +</p></blockquote> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The floatfield determines whether numbers are formatted as if +with %f, %e, or %g. If the <tt>fixed</tt> bit is set, it's %f, +if <tt>scientific</tt> it's %e, and if both bits are set, or +neither, it's %g.</p> +<p>Turning to the C standard, a precision of 0 is meaningful +for %f and %e. For %g, precision 0 is taken to be the same as +precision 1.</p> +<p>The proposed resolution has the effect that if neither +<tt>fixed</tt> nor <tt>scientific</tt> is set we'll be +specifying a precision of 0, which will be internally +turned into 1. There's no need to call it out as a special +case.</p> +<p>The output of the above program will be "1e+00".</p> + +<p><i>[Post-Curaçao: Howard provided improved wording covering the case +where precision is 0 and mode is %g.]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="232"></a>232. "depends" poorly defined in 17.4.3.1</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17.6.3.3 [reserved.names] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Peter Dimov <b>Opened:</b> 2000-04-18 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#reserved.names">issues</a> in [reserved.names].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>17.4.3.1/1 uses the term "depends" to limit the set of allowed +specializations of standard templates to those that "depend on a +user-defined name of external linkage."</p> +<p>This term, however, is not adequately defined, making it possible to +construct a specialization that is, I believe, technically legal according to +17.4.3.1/1, but that specializes a standard template for a built-in type such as +'int'.</p> +<p>The following code demonstrates the problem:</p> +<blockquote> + <pre>#include <algorithm></pre> + <pre>template<class T> struct X +{ + typedef T type; +};</pre> + <pre>namespace std +{ + template<> void swap(::X<int>::type& i, ::X<int>::type& j); +}</pre> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change "user-defined name" to "user-defined +type".</p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>This terminology is used in section 2.5.2 and 4.1.1 of <i>The C++ +Programming Language</i>. It disallows the example in the issue, +since the underlying type itself is not user-defined. The only +possible problem I can see is for non-type templates, but there's no +possible way for a user to come up with a specialization for bitset, +for example, that might not have already been specialized by the +implementor?</p> + +<p><i>[Toronto: this may be related to issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#120">120</a>.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[post-Toronto: Judy provided the above proposed resolution and +rationale.]</i></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="233"></a>233. Insertion hints in associative containers</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2.4 [associative.reqmts] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Andrew Koenig <b>Opened:</b> 2000-04-30 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index-open.html#associative.reqmts">active issues</a> in [associative.reqmts].</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#associative.reqmts">issues</a> in [associative.reqmts].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#192">192</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#246">246</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +If <tt>mm</tt> is a multimap and <tt>p</tt> is an iterator +into the multimap, then <tt>mm.insert(p, x)</tt> inserts +<tt>x</tt> into <tt>mm</tt> with <tt>p</tt> as a hint as +to where it should go. Table 69 claims that the execution time is +amortized constant if the insert winds up taking place adjacent to +<tt>p</tt>, but does not say when, if ever, this is guaranteed to +happen. All it says it that <tt>p</tt> is a hint as to where to +insert. +</p> +<p> +The question is whether there is any guarantee about the relationship +between <tt>p</tt> and the insertion point, and, if so, what it +is. +</p> +<p> +I believe the present state is that there is no guarantee: The user +can supply <tt>p</tt>, and the implementation is allowed to +disregard it entirely. +</p> + +<p><b>Additional comments from Nathan:</b><br> + +The vote [in Redmond] was on whether to elaborately specify the use of +the hint, or to require behavior only if the value could be inserted +adjacent to the hint. I would like to ensure that we have a chance to +vote for a deterministic treatment: "before, if possible, otherwise +after, otherwise anywhere appropriate", as an alternative to the +proposed "before or after, if possible, otherwise [...]". +</p> + +<p><i>[Toronto: there was general agreement that this is a real defect: +when inserting an element x into a multiset that already contains +several copies of x, there is no way to know whether the hint will be +used. The proposed resolution was that the new element should always +be inserted as close to the hint as possible. So, for example, if +there is a subsequence of equivalent values, then providing a.begin() +as the hint means that the new element should be inserted before the +subsequence even if a.begin() is far away. JC van Winkel supplied +precise wording for this proposed resolution, and also for an +alternative resolution in which hints are only used when they are +adjacent to the insertion point.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Copenhagen: the LWG agreed to the original proposed resolution, +in which an insertion hint would be used even when it is far from the +insertion point. This was contingent on seeing a example +implementation showing that it is possible to implement this +requirement without loss of efficiency. John Potter provided such a +example implementation.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Redmond: The LWG was reluctant to adopt the proposal that +emerged from Copenhagen: it seemed excessively complicated, and went +beyond fixing the defect that we identified in Toronto. PJP provided +the new wording described in this issue. Nathan agrees that we +shouldn't adopt the more detailed semantics, and notes: "we know that +you can do it efficiently enough with a red-black tree, but there are +other (perhaps better) balanced tree techniques that might differ +enough to make the detailed semantics hard to satisfy."]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Curaçao: Nathan should give us the alternative wording he +suggests so the LWG can decide between the two options.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Lillehammer: The LWG previously rejected the more detailed + semantics, because it seemed more loike a new feature than like + defect fixing. We're now more sympathetic to it, but we (especially + Bill) are still worried about performance. N1780 describes a naive + algorithm, but it's not clear whether there is a non-naive + implementation. Is it possible to implement this as efficently as + the current version of insert?]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Post Lillehammer: +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2005/n1780.html">N1780</a> +updated in post meeting mailing with +feedback from Lillehammer with more information regarding performance. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Batavia: +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2005/n1780.html">1780</a> +accepted with minor wording changes in the proposed wording (reflected in the +proposed resolution below). Concerns about the performance of the algorithm +were satisfactorily met by +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2005/n1780.html">1780</a>. +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#371">371</a> already handles the stability of equal ranges +and so that part of the resolution from +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2005/n1780.html">1780</a> +is no longer needed (or reflected in the proposed wording below). +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +Change the indicated rows of the "Associative container requirements" Table in +23.2.4 [associative.reqmts] to: +</p> + +<p></p><center> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Associative container requirements</caption> +<tbody><tr><th>expression</th> <th>return type</th> +<th>assertion/note<br>pre/post-condition</th> +<th>complexity</th></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a_eq.insert(t)</tt></td> +<td><tt>iterator</tt></td> +<td> +inserts <tt>t</tt> and returns the iterator pointing to the newly inserted +element. <ins>If a range containing elements equivalent to <tt>t</tt> exists in +<tt>a_eq</tt>, <tt>t</tt> is inserted at the end of that range.</ins> +</td> +<td> +logarithmic +</td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a.insert(p,t)</tt></td> +<td><tt>iterator</tt></td> +<td> +inserts <tt>t</tt> if and only if there is no element with key equivalent to the +key of <tt>t</tt> in containers with unique keys; always inserts <tt>t</tt> in containers +with equivalent keys. always returns the iterator pointing to the element with key +equivalent to the key of <tt>t</tt>. <del>iterator <tt>p</tt> is a hint pointing to where +the insert should start to search.</del> <ins><tt>t</tt> is inserted as close as possible +to the position just prior to <tt>p</tt>.</ins> +</td> +<td> +logarithmic in general, but amortized constant if <tt>t</tt> is inserted right <del>after</del> + <ins>before</ins> <tt>p</tt>. +</td></tr> +</tbody></table> +</center><p></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="234"></a>234. Typos in allocator definition</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.5.1 [allocator.members] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Dietmar Kühl <b>Opened:</b> 2000-04-24 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#allocator.members">issues</a> in [allocator.members].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>In paragraphs 12 and 13 the effects of <tt>construct()</tt> and +<tt>destruct()</tt> are described as returns but the functions actually +return <tt>void</tt>.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Substitute "Returns" by "Effect".</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="235"></a>235. No specification of default ctor for reverse_iterator</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 24.5.1.1 [reverse.iterator] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Dietmar Kühl <b>Opened:</b> 2000-04-24 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The declaration of <tt>reverse_iterator</tt> lists a default +constructor. However, no specification is given what this constructor +should do.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + <p>In section 24.5.1.3.1 [reverse.iter.cons] add the following + paragraph:</p> + <blockquote> + <p><tt>reverse_iterator()</tt></p> + + <p>Default initializes <tt>current</tt>. Iterator operations + applied to the resulting iterator have defined behavior if and + only if the corresponding operations are defined on a default + constructed iterator of type <tt>Iterator</tt>.</p> + </blockquote> + <p><i>[pre-Copenhagen: Dietmar provide wording for proposed + resolution.]</i></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="237"></a>237. Undefined expression in complexity specification</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.3.2.1 [deque.cons] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Dietmar Kühl <b>Opened:</b> 2000-04-24 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#deque.cons">issues</a> in [deque.cons].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The complexity specification in paragraph 6 says that the complexity +is linear in <tt>first - last</tt>. Even if <tt>operator-()</tt> is +defined on iterators this term is in general undefined because it +would have to be <tt>last - first</tt>.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + <p>Change paragraph 6 from</p> + <blockquote><p>Linear in <i>first - last</i>.</p></blockquote> + <p>to become</p> + <blockquote><p>Linear in <i>distance(first, last)</i>.</p></blockquote> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="238"></a>238. Contradictory results of stringbuf initialization.</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.8.1.1 [stringbuf.cons] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Dietmar Kühl <b>Opened:</b> 2000-05-11 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#stringbuf.cons">issues</a> in [stringbuf.cons].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>In 27.7.1.1 paragraph 4 the results of calling the constructor of +'basic_stringbuf' are said to be <tt>str() == str</tt>. This is fine +that far but consider this code:</p> + +<pre> std::basic_stringbuf<char> sbuf("hello, world", std::ios_base::openmode(0)); + std::cout << "'" << sbuf.str() << "'\n"; +</pre> + +<p>Paragraph 3 of 27.7.1.1 basically says that in this case neither +the output sequence nor the input sequence is initialized and +paragraph 2 of 27.7.1.2 basically says that <tt>str()</tt> either +returns the input or the output sequence. None of them is initialized, +ie. both are empty, in which case the return from <tt>str()</tt> is +defined to be <tt>basic_string<cT>()</tt>.</p> + +<p>However, probably only test cases in some testsuites will detect this +"problem"...</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Remove 27.7.1.1 paragraph 4.</p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>We could fix 27.7.1.1 paragraph 4, but there would be no point. If +we fixed it, it would say just the same thing as text that's already +in the standard.</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="239"></a>239. Complexity of unique() and/or unique_copy incorrect</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.3.9 [alg.unique] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Angelika Langer <b>Opened:</b> 2000-05-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#alg.unique">issues</a> in [alg.unique].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The complexity of unique and unique_copy are inconsistent with each +other and inconsistent with the implementations. The standard +specifies:</p> + +<p>for unique():</p> + +<blockquote><p>-3- Complexity: If the range (last - first) is not empty, exactly +(last - first) - 1 applications of the corresponding predicate, otherwise +no applications of the predicate.</p></blockquote> + +<p>for unique_copy():</p> + +<blockquote><p>-7- Complexity: Exactly last - first applications of the corresponding +predicate.</p></blockquote> + +<p> +The implementations do it the other way round: unique() applies the +predicate last-first times and unique_copy() applies it last-first-1 +times.</p> + +<p>As both algorithms use the predicate for pair-wise comparison of +sequence elements I don't see a justification for unique_copy() +applying the predicate last-first times, especially since it is not +specified to which pair in the sequence the predicate is applied +twice.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change both complexity sections in 25.3.9 [alg.unique] to:</p> + +<blockquote><p>Complexity: For nonempty ranges, exactly last - first - 1 +applications of the corresponding predicate.</p></blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="240"></a>240. Complexity of adjacent_find() is meaningless</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.2.8 [alg.adjacent.find] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Angelika Langer <b>Opened:</b> 2000-05-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#alg.adjacent.find">issues</a> in [alg.adjacent.find].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The complexity section of adjacent_find is defective:</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template <class ForwardIterator> +ForwardIterator adjacent_find(ForwardIterator first, ForwardIterator last + BinaryPredicate pred); +</pre> + +<p>-1- Returns: The first iterator i such that both i and i + 1 are in +the range [first, last) for which the following corresponding +conditions hold: *i == *(i + 1), pred(*i, *(i + 1)) != false. Returns +last if no such iterator is found.</p> + +<p>-2- Complexity: Exactly find(first, last, value) - first applications +of the corresponding predicate. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>In the Complexity section, it is not defined what "value" +is supposed to mean. My best guess is that "value" means an +object for which one of the conditions pred(*i,value) or +pred(value,*i) is true, where i is the iterator defined in the Returns +section. However, the value type of the input sequence need not be +equality-comparable and for this reason the term find(first, last, +value) - first is meaningless.</p> + +<p>A term such as find_if(first, last, bind2nd(pred,*i)) - first or +find_if(first, last, bind1st(pred,*i)) - first might come closer to +the intended specification. Binders can only be applied to function +objects that have the function call operator declared const, which is +not required of predicates because they can have non-const data +members. For this reason, a specification using a binder could only be +an "as-if" specification.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change the complexity section in 25.2.8 [alg.adjacent.find] to:</p> +<blockquote><p> +For a nonempty range, exactly <tt>min((<i>i</i> - <i>first</i>) + 1, +(<i>last</i> - <i>first</i>) - 1)</tt> applications of the +corresponding predicate, where <i>i</i> is <tt>adjacent_find</tt>'s +return value. +</p></blockquote> + +<p><i>[Copenhagen: the original resolution specified an upper +bound. The LWG preferred an exact count.]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="241"></a>241. Does unique_copy() require CopyConstructible and Assignable?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.3.9 [alg.unique] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Angelika Langer <b>Opened:</b> 2000-05-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#alg.unique">issues</a> in [alg.unique].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p>Some popular implementations of unique_copy() create temporary +copies of values in the input sequence, at least if the input iterator +is a pointer. Such an implementation is built on the assumption that +the value type is CopyConstructible and Assignable.</p> + +<p>It is common practice in the standard that algorithms explicitly +specify any additional requirements that they impose on any of the +types used by the algorithm. An example of an algorithm that creates +temporary copies and correctly specifies the additional requirements +is accumulate(), 26.5.1 [rand.req].</p> + +<p>Since the specifications of unique() and unique_copy() do not +require CopyConstructible and Assignable of the InputIterator's value +type the above mentioned implementations are not standard-compliant. I +cannot judge whether this is a defect in the standard or a defect in +the implementations.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 25.2.8 change:</p> + +<blockquote><p> +-4- Requires: The ranges [first, last) and [result, result+(last-first)) +shall not overlap. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>to:</p> + +<blockquote> + <p>-4- Requires: The ranges [first, last) and [result, + result+(last-first)) shall not overlap. The expression *result = + *first must be valid. If neither InputIterator nor OutputIterator + meets the requirements of forward iterator then the value type of + InputIterator must be copy constructible. Otherwise copy + constructible is not required. </p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[Redmond: the original proposed resolution didn't impose an +explicit requirement that the iterator's value type must be copy +constructible, on the grounds that an input iterator's value type must +always be copy constructible. Not everyone in the LWG thought that +this requirement was clear from table 72. It has been suggested that +it might be possible to implement <tt>unique_copy</tt> without +requiring assignability, although current implementations do impose +that requirement. Howard provided new wording.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Curaçao: The LWG changed the PR editorially to specify +"neither...nor...meet..." as clearer than +"both...and...do not meet...". Change believed to be so +minor as not to require re-review. +]</i></p> + + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="242"></a>242. Side effects of function objects</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.3.4 [alg.transform], 26.5 [rand] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Angelika Langer <b>Opened:</b> 2000-05-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#alg.transform">issues</a> in [alg.transform].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The algorithms transform(), accumulate(), inner_product(), +partial_sum(), and adjacent_difference() require that the function +object supplied to them shall not have any side effects.</p> + +<p>The standard defines a side effect in 1.9 [intro.execution] as:</p> +<blockquote><p>-7- Accessing an object designated by a volatile lvalue (basic.lval), +modifying an object, calling a library I/O function, or calling a function +that does any of those operations are all side effects, which are changes +in the state of the execution environment.</p></blockquote> + +<p>As a consequence, the function call operator of a function object supplied +to any of the algorithms listed above cannot modify data members, cannot +invoke any function that has a side effect, and cannot even create and +modify temporary objects. It is difficult to imagine a function object +that is still useful under these severe limitations. For instance, any +non-trivial transformator supplied to transform() might involve creation +and modification of temporaries, which is prohibited according to the current +wording of the standard.</p> + +<p>On the other hand, popular implementations of these algorithms exhibit +uniform and predictable behavior when invoked with a side-effect-producing +function objects. It looks like the strong requirement is not needed for +efficient implementation of these algorithms.</p> + +<p>The requirement of side-effect-free function objects could be +replaced by a more relaxed basic requirement (which would hold for all +function objects supplied to any algorithm in the standard library):</p> +<blockquote><p>A function objects supplied to an algorithm shall not invalidate +any iterator or sequence that is used by the algorithm. Invalidation of +the sequence includes destruction of the sorting order if the algorithm +relies on the sorting order (see section 25.3 - Sorting and related operations +[lib.alg.sorting]).</p></blockquote> + +<p>I can't judge whether it is intended that the function objects supplied +to transform(), accumulate(), inner_product(), partial_sum(), or adjacent_difference() +shall not modify sequence elements through dereferenced iterators.</p> + +<p>It is debatable whether this issue is a defect or a change request. +Since the consequences for user-supplied function objects are drastic and +limit the usefulness of the algorithms significantly I would consider it +a defect.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p><i>Things to notice about these changes:</i></p> + +<ol> +<li> <i>The fully-closed ("[]" as opposed to half-closed "[)" ranges + are intentional. we want to prevent side-effects from + invalidating the end iterators.</i></li> + +<li> <i>That has the unintentional side-effect of prohibiting + modification of the end element as a side-effect. This could + conceivably be significant in some cases.</i></li> + +<li> <i>The wording also prevents side-effects from modifying elements + of the output sequence. I can't imagine why anyone would want + to do this, but it is arguably a restriction that implementors + don't need to place on users.</i></li> + +<li> <i>Lifting the restrictions imposed in #2 and #3 above is possible + and simple, but would require more verbiage.</i></li> +</ol> + +<p>Change 25.2.3/2 from:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + -2- Requires: op and binary_op shall not have any side effects. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>to:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + -2- Requires: in the ranges [first1, last1], [first2, first2 + + (last1 - first1)] and [result, result + (last1- first1)], op and + binary_op shall neither modify elements nor invalidate iterators or + subranges. + [Footnote: The use of fully closed ranges is intentional --end footnote] +</p></blockquote> + + +<p>Change 25.2.3/2 from:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + -2- Requires: op and binary_op shall not have any side effects. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>to:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + -2- Requires: op and binary_op shall not invalidate iterators or + subranges, or modify elements in the ranges [first1, last1], + [first2, first2 + (last1 - first1)], and [result, result + (last1 + - first1)]. + [Footnote: The use of fully closed ranges is intentional --end footnote] +</p></blockquote> + + +<p>Change 26.4.1/2 from:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + -2- Requires: T must meet the requirements of CopyConstructible + (lib.copyconstructible) and Assignable (lib.container.requirements) + types. binary_op shall not cause side effects. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>to:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + -2- Requires: T must meet the requirements of CopyConstructible + (lib.copyconstructible) and Assignable + (lib.container.requirements) types. In the range [first, last], + binary_op shall neither modify elements nor invalidate iterators + or subranges. + [Footnote: The use of a fully closed range is intentional --end footnote] +</p></blockquote> + +<p>Change 26.4.2/2 from:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + -2- Requires: T must meet the requirements of CopyConstructible + (lib.copyconstructible) and Assignable (lib.container.requirements) + types. binary_op1 and binary_op2 shall not cause side effects. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>to:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + -2- Requires: T must meet the requirements of CopyConstructible + (lib.copyconstructible) and Assignable (lib.container.requirements) + types. In the ranges [first, last] and [first2, first2 + (last - + first)], binary_op1 and binary_op2 shall neither modify elements + nor invalidate iterators or subranges. + [Footnote: The use of fully closed ranges is intentional --end footnote] +</p></blockquote> + + +<p>Change 26.4.3/4 from:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + -4- Requires: binary_op is expected not to have any side effects. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>to:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + -4- Requires: In the ranges [first, last] and [result, result + + (last - first)], binary_op shall neither modify elements nor + invalidate iterators or subranges. + [Footnote: The use of fully closed ranges is intentional --end footnote] +</p></blockquote> + +<p>Change 26.4.4/2 from:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + -2- Requires: binary_op shall not have any side effects. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>to:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + -2- Requires: In the ranges [first, last] and [result, result + + (last - first)], binary_op shall neither modify elements nor + invalidate iterators or subranges. + [Footnote: The use of fully closed ranges is intentional --end footnote] +</p></blockquote> + +<p><i>[Toronto: Dave Abrahams supplied wording.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Copenhagen: Proposed resolution was modified slightly. Matt +added footnotes pointing out that the use of closed ranges was +intentional.]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="243"></a>243. <tt>get</tt> and <tt>getline</tt> when sentry reports failure</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.1.3 [istream.unformatted] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2000-05-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#istream.unformatted">issues</a> in [istream.unformatted].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>basic_istream<>::get(), and basic_istream<>::getline(), +are unclear with respect to the behavior and side-effects of the named +functions in case of an error.</p> + +<p>27.6.1.3, p1 states that "... If the sentry object returns +true, when converted to a value of type bool, the function endeavors +to obtain the requested input..." It is not clear from this (or +the rest of the paragraph) what precisely the behavior should be when +the sentry ctor exits by throwing an exception or when the sentry +object returns false. In particular, what is the number of characters +extracted that gcount() returns supposed to be?</p> + +<p>27.6.1.3 p8 and p19 say about the effects of get() and getline(): +"... In any case, it then stores a null character (using +charT()) into the next successive location of the array." Is not +clear whether this sentence applies if either of the conditions above +holds (i.e., when sentry fails).</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Add to 27.6.1.3, p1 after the sentence</p> + +<blockquote><p> +"... If the sentry object returns true, when converted to a value of +type bool, the function endeavors to obtain the requested input." +</p></blockquote> + +<p>the following</p> + + +<blockquote><p> +"Otherwise, if the sentry constructor exits by throwing an exception or +if the sentry object returns false, when converted to a value of type +bool, the function returns without attempting to obtain any input. In +either case the number of extracted characters is set to 0; unformatted +input functions taking a character array of non-zero size as an argument +shall also store a null character (using charT()) in the first location +of the array." +</p></blockquote> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>Although the general philosophy of the input functions is that the +argument should not be modified upon failure, <tt>getline</tt> +historically added a terminating null unconditionally. Most +implementations still do that. Earlier versions of the draft standard +had language that made this an unambiguous requirement; those words +were moved to a place where their context made them less clear. See +Jerry Schwarz's message c++std-lib-7618.</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="247"></a>247. <tt>vector</tt>, <tt>deque::insert</tt> complexity</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.4.1.4 [vector.modifiers] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Lisa Lippincott <b>Opened:</b> 2000-06-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#vector.modifiers">issues</a> in [vector.modifiers].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Paragraph 2 of 23.4.1.4 [vector.modifiers] describes the complexity +of <tt>vector::insert</tt>:</p> + + <blockquote><p> + Complexity: If first and last are forward iterators, bidirectional + iterators, or random access iterators, the complexity is linear in + the number of elements in the range [first, last) plus the distance + to the end of the vector. If they are input iterators, the complexity + is proportional to the number of elements in the range [first, last) + times the distance to the end of the vector. + </p></blockquote> + +<p>First, this fails to address the non-iterator forms of +<tt>insert</tt>.</p> + +<p>Second, the complexity for input iterators misses an edge case -- +it requires that an arbitrary number of elements can be added at +the end of a <tt>vector</tt> in constant time.</p> + +<p>I looked to see if <tt>deque</tt> had a similar problem, and was +surprised to find that <tt>deque</tt> places no requirement on the +complexity of inserting multiple elements (23.3.2.3 [deque.modifiers], +paragraph 3):</p> + + <blockquote><p> + Complexity: In the worst case, inserting a single element into a + deque takes time linear in the minimum of the distance from the + insertion point to the beginning of the deque and the distance + from the insertion point to the end of the deque. Inserting a + single element either at the beginning or end of a deque always + takes constant time and causes a single call to the copy constructor + of T. + </p></blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p>Change Paragraph 2 of 23.4.1.4 [vector.modifiers] to</p> + <blockquote><p> + Complexity: The complexity is linear in the number of elements + inserted plus the distance to the end of the vector. + </p></blockquote> + + <p><i>[For input iterators, one may achieve this complexity by first + inserting at the end of the <tt>vector</tt>, and then using + <tt>rotate</tt>.]</i></p> + + +<p>Change 23.3.2.3 [deque.modifiers], paragraph 3, to:</p> + + <blockquote><p> + Complexity: The complexity is linear in the number of elements + inserted plus the shorter of the distances to the beginning and + end of the deque. Inserting a single element at either the + beginning or the end of a deque causes a single call to the copy + constructor of T. + </p></blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>This is a real defect, and proposed resolution fixes it: some + complexities aren't specified that should be. This proposed + resolution does constrain deque implementations (it rules out the + most naive possible implementations), but the LWG doesn't see a + reason to permit that implementation.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="248"></a>248. time_get fails to set eofbit</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.5 [category.time] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2000-06-22 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>There is no requirement that any of time_get member functions set +ios::eofbit when they reach the end iterator while parsing their input. +Since members of both the num_get and money_get facets are required to +do so (22.2.2.1.2, and 22.2.6.1.2, respectively), time_get members +should follow the same requirement for consistency.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Add paragraph 2 to section 22.2.5.1 with the following text:</p> + +<blockquote><p> +If the end iterator is reached during parsing by any of the get() +member functions, the member sets ios_base::eofbit in err. +</p></blockquote> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>Two alternative resolutions were proposed. The LWG chose this one +because it was more consistent with the way eof is described for other +input facets.</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="250"></a>250. splicing invalidates iterators</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.3.4.4 [list.ops] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Brian Parker <b>Opened:</b> 2000-07-14 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#list.ops">issues</a> in [list.ops].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Section 23.3.4.4 [list.ops] states that +</p> +<pre> void splice(iterator position, list<T, Allocator>& x); +</pre> +<p> +<i>invalidates</i> all iterators and references to list <tt>x</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +This is unnecessary and defeats an important feature of splice. In +fact, the SGI STL guarantees that iterators to <tt>x</tt> remain valid +after <tt>splice</tt>. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p>Add a footnote to 23.3.4.4 [list.ops], paragraph 1:</p> +<blockquote><p> +[<i>Footnote:</i> As specified in [default.con.req], paragraphs +4-5, the semantics described in this clause applies only to the case +where allocators compare equal. --end footnote] +</p></blockquote> + +<p>In 23.3.4.4 [list.ops], replace paragraph 4 with:</p> +<blockquote><p> +Effects: Inserts the contents of x before position and x becomes +empty. Pointers and references to the moved elements of x now refer to +those same elements but as members of *this. Iterators referring to the +moved elements will continue to refer to their elements, but they now +behave as iterators into *this, not into x. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>In 23.3.4.4 [list.ops], replace paragraph 7 with:</p> +<blockquote><p> +Effects: Inserts an element pointed to by i from list x before +position and removes the element from x. The result is unchanged if +position == i or position == ++i. Pointers and references to *i continue +to refer to this same element but as a member of *this. Iterators to *i +(including i itself) continue to refer to the same element, but now +behave as iterators into *this, not into x. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>In 23.3.4.4 [list.ops], replace paragraph 12 with:</p> +<blockquote><p> +Requires: [first, last) is a valid range in x. The result is +undefined if position is an iterator in the range [first, last). +Pointers and references to the moved elements of x now refer to those +same elements but as members of *this. Iterators referring to the moved +elements will continue to refer to their elements, but they now behave as +iterators into *this, not into x. +</p></blockquote> + +<p><i>[pre-Copenhagen: Howard provided wording.]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The original proposed resolution said that iterators and references +would remain "valid". The new proposed resolution clarifies what that +means. Note that this only applies to the case of equal allocators. +From [default.con.req] paragraph 4, the behavior of list when +allocators compare nonequal is outside the scope of the standard.</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="251"></a>251. basic_stringbuf missing allocator_type</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.8.1 [stringbuf] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2000-07-28 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The synopsis for the template class <tt>basic_stringbuf</tt> +doesn't list a typedef for the template parameter +<tt>Allocator</tt>. This makes it impossible to determine the type of +the allocator at compile time. It's also inconsistent with all other +template classes in the library that do provide a typedef for the +<tt>Allocator</tt> parameter.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Add to the synopses of the class templates basic_stringbuf (27.7.1), +basic_istringstream (27.7.2), basic_ostringstream (27.7.3), and +basic_stringstream (27.7.4) the typedef:</p> +<pre> typedef Allocator allocator_type; +</pre> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="252"></a>252. missing casts/C-style casts used in iostreams</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.8 [string.streams] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2000-07-28 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#string.streams">issues</a> in [string.streams].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>27.7.2.2, p1 uses a C-style cast rather than the more appropriate +const_cast<> in the Returns clause for basic_istringstream<>::rdbuf(). +The same C-style cast is being used in 27.7.3.2, p1, D.7.2.2, p1, and +D.7.3.2, p1, and perhaps elsewhere. 27.7.6, p1 and D.7.2.2, p1 are missing +the cast altogether.</p> + +<p>C-style casts have not been deprecated, so the first part of this +issue is stylistic rather than a matter of correctness.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 27.7.2.2, p1 replace </p> +<pre> -1- Returns: (basic_stringbuf<charT,traits,Allocator>*)&sb.</pre> + +<p>with</p> +<pre> -1- Returns: const_cast<basic_stringbuf<charT,traits,Allocator>*>(&sb).</pre> + + +<p>In 27.7.3.2, p1 replace</p> +<pre> -1- Returns: (basic_stringbuf<charT,traits,Allocator>*)&sb.</pre> + +<p>with</p> +<pre> -1- Returns: const_cast<basic_stringbuf<charT,traits,Allocator>*>(&sb).</pre> + +<p>In 27.7.6, p1, replace</p> +<pre> -1- Returns: &sb</pre> + +<p>with</p> +<pre> -1- Returns: const_cast<basic_stringbuf<charT,traits,Allocator>*>(&sb).</pre> + +<p>In D.7.2.2, p1 replace</p> +<pre> -2- Returns: &sb. </pre> + +<p>with</p> +<pre> -2- Returns: const_cast<strstreambuf*>(&sb).</pre> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="253"></a>253. valarray helper functions are almost entirely useless</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.6.2.1 [valarray.cons], 26.6.2.2 [valarray.assign] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Robert Klarer <b>Opened:</b> 2000-07-31 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#valarray.cons">issues</a> in [valarray.cons].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>This discussion is adapted from message c++std-lib-7056 posted +November 11, 1999. I don't think that anyone can reasonably claim +that the problem described below is NAD.</p> + +<p>These valarray constructors can never be called:</p> + +<pre> template <class T> + valarray<T>::valarray(const slice_array<T> &); + template <class T> + valarray<T>::valarray(const gslice_array<T> &); + template <class T> + valarray<T>::valarray(const mask_array<T> &); + template <class T> + valarray<T>::valarray(const indirect_array<T> &); +</pre> + +<p>Similarly, these valarray assignment operators cannot be +called:</p> + +<pre> template <class T> + valarray<T> valarray<T>::operator=(const slice_array<T> &); + template <class T> + valarray<T> valarray<T>::operator=(const gslice_array<T> &); + template <class T> + valarray<T> valarray<T>::operator=(const mask_array<T> &); + template <class T> + valarray<T> valarray<T>::operator=(const indirect_array<T> &); +</pre> + +<p>Please consider the following example:</p> + +<pre> #include <valarray> + using namespace std; + + int main() + { + valarray<double> va1(12); + valarray<double> va2(va1[slice(1,4,3)]); // line 1 + } +</pre> + + +<p>Since the valarray va1 is non-const, the result of the sub-expression +va1[slice(1,4,3)] at line 1 is an rvalue of type const +std::slice_array<double>. This slice_array rvalue is then used to +construct va2. The constructor that is used to construct va2 is +declared like this:</p> + +<pre> template <class T> + valarray<T>::valarray(const slice_array<T> &); +</pre> + +<p>Notice the constructor's const reference parameter. When the +constructor is called, a slice_array must be bound to this reference. +The rules for binding an rvalue to a const reference are in 8.5.3, +paragraph 5 (see also 13.3.3.1.4). Specifically, paragraph 5 +indicates that a second slice_array rvalue is constructed (in this +case copy-constructed) from the first one; it is this second rvalue +that is bound to the reference parameter. Paragraph 5 also requires +that the constructor that is used for this purpose be callable, +regardless of whether the second rvalue is elided. The +copy-constructor in this case is not callable, however, because it is +private. Therefore, the compiler should report an error.</p> + +<p>Since slice_arrays are always rvalues, the valarray constructor that has a +parameter of type const slice_array<T> & can never be called. The +same reasoning applies to the three other constructors and the four +assignment operators that are listed at the beginning of this post. +Furthermore, since these functions cannot be called, the valarray helper +classes are almost entirely useless.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>slice_array:</p> +<ul> +<li> Make the copy constructor and copy-assignment operator declarations + public in the slice_array class template definition in 26.6.5 [template.slice.array] </li> +<li> remove paragraph 3 of 26.6.5 [template.slice.array]</li> +<li> remove the copy constructor declaration from [cons.slice.arr]</li> +<li> change paragraph 1 of [cons.slice.arr] to read "This constructor is declared + to be private. This constructor need not be defined."</li> +<li> remove the first sentence of paragraph 1 of 26.6.5.1 [slice.arr.assign]</li> +<li> Change the first three words of the second sentence of paragraph 1 of + 26.6.5.1 [slice.arr.assign] to "These assignment operators have"</li> +</ul> + +<p>gslice_array:</p> +<ul> +<li> Make the copy constructor and copy-assignment operator declarations + public in the gslice_array class template definition in 26.6.7 [template.gslice.array] </li> +<li> remove the note in paragraph 3 of 26.6.7 [template.gslice.array]</li> +<li> remove the copy constructor declaration from [gslice.array.cons]</li> +<li> change paragraph 1 of [gslice.array.cons] to read "This constructor is declared + to be private. This constructor need not be defined."</li> +<li> remove the first sentence of paragraph 1 of 26.6.7.1 [gslice.array.assign]</li> +<li> Change the first three words of the second sentence of paragraph 1 of + 26.6.7.1 [gslice.array.assign] to "These assignment operators have"</li> +</ul> + +<p>mask_array:</p> +<ul> +<li> Make the copy constructor and copy-assignment operator declarations + public in the mask_array class template definition in 26.6.8 [template.mask.array] </li> +<li> remove the note in paragraph 2 of 26.6.8 [template.mask.array]</li> +<li> remove the copy constructor declaration from [mask.array.cons]</li> +<li> change paragraph 1 of [mask.array.cons] to read "This constructor is declared + to be private. This constructor need not be defined."</li> +<li> remove the first sentence of paragraph 1 of 26.6.8.1 [mask.array.assign]</li> +<li> Change the first three words of the second sentence of paragraph 1 of + 26.6.8.1 [mask.array.assign] to "These assignment operators have"</li> +</ul> + +<p>indirect_array:</p> +<ul> +<li>Make the copy constructor and copy-assignment operator declarations + public in the indirect_array class definition in 26.6.9 [template.indirect.array]</li> +<li> remove the note in paragraph 2 of 26.6.9 [template.indirect.array]</li> +<li> remove the copy constructor declaration from [indirect.array.cons]</li> +<li> change the descriptive text in [indirect.array.cons] to read "This constructor is + declared to be private. This constructor need not be defined."</li> +<li> remove the first sentence of paragraph 1 of 26.6.9.1 [indirect.array.assign]</li> +<li> Change the first three words of the second sentence of paragraph 1 of + 26.6.9.1 [indirect.array.assign] to "These assignment operators have"</li> +</ul> +<p><i>[Proposed resolution was modified in Santa Cruz: explicitly make +copy constructor and copy assignment operators public, instead of +removing them.]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>Keeping the valarray constructors private is untenable. Merely +making valarray a friend of the helper classes isn't good enough, +because access to the copy constructor is checked in the user's +environment.</p> + +<p>Making the assignment operator public is not strictly necessary to +solve this problem. A majority of the LWG <i>(straw poll: 13-4)</i> +believed we should make the assignment operators public, in addition +to the copy constructors, for reasons of symmetry and user +expectation.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="254"></a>254. Exception types in clause 19 are constructed from <tt>std::string</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 19.2 [std.exceptions], 27.5.2.1.1 [ios::failure] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Dave Abrahams <b>Opened:</b> 2000-08-01 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Many of the standard exception types which implementations are +required to throw are constructed with a const std::string& +parameter. For example: +</p> + +<pre> 19.1.5 Class out_of_range [lib.out.of.range] + namespace std { + class out_of_range : public logic_error { + public: + explicit out_of_range(const string& what_arg); + }; + } + + 1 The class out_of_range defines the type of objects thrown as excep- + tions to report an argument value not in its expected range. + + out_of_range(const string& what_arg); + + Effects: + Constructs an object of class out_of_range. + Postcondition: + strcmp(what(), what_arg.c_str()) == 0. +</pre> + +<p> +There are at least two problems with this: +</p> +<ol> +<li>A program which is low on memory may end up throwing +std::bad_alloc instead of out_of_range because memory runs out while +constructing the exception object.</li> +<li>An obvious implementation which stores a std::string data member +may end up invoking terminate() during exception unwinding because the +exception object allocates memory (or rather fails to) as it is being +copied.</li> +</ol> + +<p> +There may be no cure for (1) other than changing the interface to +out_of_range, though one could reasonably argue that (1) is not a +defect. Personally I don't care that much if out-of-memory is reported +when I only have 20 bytes left, in the case when out_of_range would +have been reported. People who use exception-specifications might care +a lot, though. +</p> + +<p> +There is a cure for (2), but it isn't completely obvious. I think a +note for implementors should be made in the standard. Avoiding +possible termination in this case shouldn't be left up to chance. The +cure is to use a reference-counted "string" implementation +in the exception object. I am not necessarily referring to a +std::string here; any simple reference-counting scheme for a NTBS +would do. +</p> + +<p><b>Further discussion, in email:</b></p> + +<p> +...I'm not so concerned about (1). After all, a library implementation +can add const char* constructors as an extension, and users don't +<i>need</i> to avail themselves of the standard exceptions, though this is +a lame position to be forced into. FWIW, std::exception and +std::bad_alloc don't require a temporary basic_string. +</p> + +<p> +...I don't think the fixed-size buffer is a solution to the problem, +strictly speaking, because you can't satisfy the postcondition +<br> + <tt> strcmp(what(), what_arg.c_str()) == 0</tt> +<br> +For all values of what_arg (i.e. very long values). That means that +the only truly conforming solution requires a dynamic allocation. +</p> + +<p><b>Further discussion, from Redmond:</b></p> + +<p>The most important progress we made at the Redmond meeting was +realizing that there are two separable issues here: the const +string& constructor, and the copy constructor. If a user writes +something like <tt>throw std::out_of_range("foo")</tt>, the const +string& constructor is invoked before anything gets thrown. The +copy constructor is potentially invoked during stack unwinding.</p> + +<p>The copy constructor is a more serious problem, becuase failure +during stack unwinding invokes <tt>terminate</tt>. The copy +constructor must be nothrow. <i>Curaçao: Howard thinks this +requirement may already be present.</i></p> + +<p>The fundamental problem is that it's difficult to get the nothrow +requirement to work well with the requirement that the exception +objects store a string of unbounded size, particularly if you also try +to make the const string& constructor nothrow. Options discussed +include:</p> + +<ul> +<li>Limit the size of a string that exception objects are required to +throw: change the postconditions of 19.2.2 [domain.error] paragraph 3 +and 19.2.6 [runtime.error] paragraph 3 to something like this: +"strncmp(what(), what_arg._str(), N) == 0, where N is an +implementation defined constant no smaller than 256".</li> +<li>Allow the const string& constructor to throw, but not the +copy constructor. It's the implementor's responsibility to get it +right. (An implementor might use a simple refcount class.)</li> +<li>Compromise between the two: an implementation is not allowed to +throw if the string's length is less than some N, but, if it doesn't +throw, the string must compare equal to the argument.</li> +<li>Add a new constructor that takes a const char*</li> +</ul> + +<p>(Not all of these options are mutually exclusive.)</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +Change 19.2.1 [logic.error] +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>namespace std { + class logic_error : public exception { + public: + explicit logic_error(const string& <i>what_arg</i>); + <ins>explicit logic_error(const char* <i>what_arg</i>);</ins> + }; +} +</pre> +<p>...</p> +<p> +<ins><tt>logic_error(const char* <i>what_arg</i>);</tt></ins> +</p> +<blockquote> +<p><ins> +-4- <i>Effects:</i> Constructs an object of class <tt>logic_error</tt>. +</ins></p> +<p><ins> +-5- <i>Postcondition:</i> <tt>strcmp(what(), <i>what_arg</i>) == 0</tt>. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 19.2.2 [domain.error] +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>namespace std { + class domain_error : public logic_error { + public: + explicit domain_error(const string& <i>what_arg</i>); + <ins>explicit domain_error(const char* <i>what_arg</i>);</ins> + }; +} +</pre> +<p>...</p> +<p> +<ins><tt>domain_error(const char* <i>what_arg</i>);</tt></ins> +</p> +<blockquote> +<p><ins> +-4- <i>Effects:</i> Constructs an object of class <tt>domain_error</tt>. +</ins></p> +<p><ins> +-5- <i>Postcondition:</i> <tt>strcmp(what(), <i>what_arg</i>) == 0</tt>. +</ins></p> + +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 19.2.3 [invalid.argument] +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>namespace std { + class invalid_argument : public logic_error { + public: + explicit invalid_argument(const string& <i>what_arg</i>); + <ins>explicit invalid_argument(const char* <i>what_arg</i>);</ins> + }; +} +</pre> +<p>...</p> +<p> +<ins><tt>invalid_argument(const char* <i>what_arg</i>);</tt></ins> +</p> +<blockquote> +<p><ins> +-4- <i>Effects:</i> Constructs an object of class <tt>invalid_argument</tt>. +</ins></p> +<p><ins> +-5- <i>Postcondition:</i> <tt>strcmp(what(), <i>what_arg</i>) == 0</tt>. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 19.2.4 [length.error] +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>namespace std { + class length_error : public logic_error { + public: + explicit length_error(const string& <i>what_arg</i>); + <ins>explicit length_error(const char* <i>what_arg</i>);</ins> + }; +} +</pre> +<p>...</p> +<p> +<ins><tt>length_error(const char* <i>what_arg</i>);</tt></ins> +</p> +<blockquote> +<p><ins> +-4- <i>Effects:</i> Constructs an object of class <tt>length_error</tt>. +</ins></p> +<p><ins> +-5- <i>Postcondition:</i> <tt>strcmp(what(), <i>what_arg</i>) == 0</tt>. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 19.2.5 [out.of.range] +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>namespace std { + class out_of_range : public logic_error { + public: + explicit out_of_range(const string& <i>what_arg</i>); + <ins>explicit out_of_range(const char* <i>what_arg</i>);</ins> + }; +} +</pre> +<p>...</p> +<p> +<ins><tt>out_of_range(const char* <i>what_arg</i>);</tt></ins> +</p> +<blockquote> +<p><ins> +-4- <i>Effects:</i> Constructs an object of class <tt>out_of_range</tt>. +</ins></p> +<p><ins> +-5- <i>Postcondition:</i> <tt>strcmp(what(), <i>what_arg</i>) == 0</tt>. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 19.2.6 [runtime.error] +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>namespace std { + class runtime_error : public exception { + public: + explicit runtime_error(const string& <i>what_arg</i>); + <ins>explicit runtime_error(const char* <i>what_arg</i>);</ins> + }; +} +</pre> +<p>...</p> +<p> +<ins><tt>runtime_error(const char* <i>what_arg</i>);</tt></ins> +</p> +<blockquote> +<p><ins> +-4- <i>Effects:</i> Constructs an object of class <tt>runtime_error</tt>. +</ins></p> +<p><ins> +-5- <i>Postcondition:</i> <tt>strcmp(what(), <i>what_arg</i>) == 0</tt>. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 19.2.7 [range.error] +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>namespace std { + class range_error : public runtime_error { + public: + explicit range_error(const string& <i>what_arg</i>); + <ins>explicit range_error(const char* <i>what_arg</i>);</ins> + }; +} +</pre> +<p>...</p> +<p> +<ins><tt>range_error(const char* <i>what_arg</i>);</tt></ins> +</p> +<blockquote> +<p><ins> +-4- <i>Effects:</i> Constructs an object of class <tt>range_error</tt>. +</ins></p> +<p><ins> +-5- <i>Postcondition:</i> <tt>strcmp(what(), <i>what_arg</i>) == 0</tt>. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 19.2.8 [overflow.error] +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>namespace std { + class overflow_error : public runtime_error { + public: + explicit overflow_error(const string& <i>what_arg</i>); + <ins>explicit overflow_error(const char* <i>what_arg</i>);</ins> + }; +} +</pre> +<p>...</p> +<p> +<ins><tt>overflow_error(const char* <i>what_arg</i>);</tt></ins> +</p> +<blockquote> +<p><ins> +-4- <i>Effects:</i> Constructs an object of class <tt>overflow_error</tt>. +</ins></p> +<p><ins> +-5- <i>Postcondition:</i> <tt>strcmp(what(), <i>what_arg</i>) == 0</tt>. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 19.2.9 [underflow.error] +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>namespace std { + class underflow_error : public runtime_error { + public: + explicit underflow_error(const string& <i>what_arg</i>); + <ins>explicit underflow_error(const char* <i>what_arg</i>);</ins> + }; +} +</pre> +<p>...</p> +<p> +<ins><tt>underflow_error(const char* <i>what_arg</i>);</tt></ins> +</p> +<blockquote> +<p><ins> +-4- <i>Effects:</i> Constructs an object of class <tt>underflow_error</tt>. +</ins></p> +<p><ins> +-5- <i>Postcondition:</i> <tt>strcmp(what(), <i>what_arg</i>) == 0</tt>. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 27.5.2.1.1 [ios::failure] +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>namespace std { + class ios_base::failure : public exception { + public: + explicit failure(const string& <i>msg</i>); + <ins>explicit failure(const char* <i>msg</i>);</ins> + virtual const char* what() const throw(); +}; +} +</pre> +<p>...</p> +<p> +<ins><tt>failure(const char* <i>msg</i>);</tt></ins> +</p> +<blockquote> +<p><ins> +-4- <i>Effects:</i> Constructs an object of class <tt>failure</tt>. +</ins></p> +<p><ins> +-5- <i>Postcondition:</i> <tt>strcmp(what(), <i>msg</i>) == 0</tt>. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> + +<p>Throwing a bad_alloc while trying to construct a message for another +exception-derived class is not necessarily a bad thing. And the +bad_alloc constructor already has a no throw spec on it (18.4.2.1).</p> + +<p><b>Future:</b></p> + +<p>All involved would like to see const char* constructors added, but +this should probably be done for C++0X as opposed to a DR.</p> + +<p>I believe the no throw specs currently decorating these functions +could be improved by some kind of static no throw spec checking +mechanism (in a future C++ language). As they stand, the copy +constructors might fail via a call to unexpected. I think what is +intended here is that the copy constructors can't fail.</p> + +<p><i>[Pre-Sydney: reopened at the request of Howard Hinnant. + Post-Redmond: James Kanze noticed that the copy constructors of + exception-derived classes do not have nothrow clauses. Those + classes have no copy constructors declared, meaning the + compiler-generated implicit copy constructors are used, and those + compiler-generated constructors might in principle throw anything.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Batavia: Merged copy constructor and assignment operator spec into <tt>exception</tt> +and added <tt>ios::failure</tt> into the proposed resolution. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Oxford: The proposed resolution simply addresses the issue of constructing +the exception objects with <tt>const char*</tt> and string literals without +the need to explicit include or construct a <tt>std::string</tt>. +]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="256"></a>256. typo in 27.4.4.2, p17: copy_event does not exist</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.5.4.2 [basic.ios.members] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2000-08-21 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#basic.ios.members">issues</a> in [basic.ios.members].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +27.4.4.2, p17 says +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +-17- Before copying any parts of rhs, calls each registered callback +pair (fn,index) as (*fn)(erase_event,*this,index). After all parts but +exceptions() have been replaced, calls each callback pair that was +copied from rhs as (*fn)(copy_event,*this,index). +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +The name copy_event isn't defined anywhere. The intended name was +copyfmt_event. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Replace copy_event with copyfmt_event in the named paragraph.</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="258"></a>258. Missing allocator requirement</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.2.5 [allocator.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 2000-08-22 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#allocator.requirements">issues</a> in [allocator.requirements].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +From lib-7752: +</p> + +<p> +I've been assuming (and probably everyone else has been assuming) that +allocator instances have a particular property, and I don't think that +property can be deduced from anything in Table 32. +</p> + +<p> +I think we have to assume that allocator type conversion is a +homomorphism. That is, if x1 and x2 are of type X, where +X::value_type is T, and if type Y is X::template +rebind<U>::other, then Y(x1) == Y(x2) if and only if x1 == x2. +</p> + +<p> +Further discussion: Howard Hinnant writes, in lib-7757: +</p> + +<p> +I think I can prove that this is not provable by Table 32. And I agree +it needs to be true except for the "and only if". If x1 != x2, I see no +reason why it can't be true that Y(x1) == Y(x2). Admittedly I can't +think of a practical instance where this would happen, or be valuable. +But I also don't see a need to add that extra restriction. I think we +only need: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> + if (x1 == x2) then Y(x1) == Y(x2) +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +If we decide that == on allocators is transitive, then I think I can +prove the above. But I don't think == is necessarily transitive on +allocators. That is: +</p> + +<p> +Given x1 == x2 and x2 == x3, this does not mean x1 == x3. +</p> + +<p>Example:</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +x1 can deallocate pointers from: x1, x2, x3 <br> +x2 can deallocate pointers from: x1, x2, x4 <br> +x3 can deallocate pointers from: x1, x3 <br> +x4 can deallocate pointers from: x2, x4 +</p> + +<p> +x1 == x2, and x2 == x4, but x1 != x4 +</p> +</blockquote> +<p><i>[Toronto: LWG members offered multiple opinions. One +opinion is that it should not be required that <tt>x1 == x2</tt> +implies <tt>Y(x1) == Y(x2)</tt>, and that it should not even be +required that <tt>X(x1) == x1</tt>. Another opinion is that +the second line from the bottom in table 32 already implies the +desired property. This issue should be considered in light of +other issues related to allocator instances.]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Accept proposed wording from +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2436.pdf">N2436</a> part 3. +</p> + + +<p><i>[Lillehammer: Same conclusion as before: this should be + considered as part of an allocator redesign, not solved on its own.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Batavia: An allocator redesign is not forthcoming and thus we fixed this one issue. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Toronto: Reopened at the request of the project editor (Pete) because the proposed +wording did not fit within the indicated table. The intent of the resolution remains +unchanged. Pablo to work with Pete on improved wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007): The LWG adopted the proposed resolution of N2387 for this issue which +was subsequently split out into a separate paper N2436 for the purposes of voting. +The resolution in N2436 addresses this issue. The LWG voted to accelerate this +issue to Ready status to be voted into the WP at Kona. +]</i></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="259"></a>259. <tt>basic_string::operator[]</tt> and const correctness</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.4.4 [string.capacity] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Chris Newton <b>Opened:</b> 2000-08-27 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#string.capacity">issues</a> in [string.capacity].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +<i>Paraphrased from a message that Chris Newton posted to comp.std.c++:</i> +</p> + +<p> +The standard's description of <tt>basic_string<>::operator[]</tt> +seems to violate const correctness. +</p> + +<p> +The standard (21.3.4/1) says that "If <tt>pos < size()</tt>, +returns <tt>data()[pos]</tt>." The types don't work. The +return value of <tt>data()</tt> is <tt>const charT*</tt>, but +<tt>operator[]</tt> has a non-const version whose return type is <tt>reference</tt>. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In section 21.3.4, paragraph 1, change +"<tt>data()[<i>pos</i>]</tt>" to "<tt>*(begin() + +<i>pos</i>)</tt>". +</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="260"></a>260. Inconsistent return type of <tt>istream_iterator::operator++(int)</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 24.6.1.2 [istream.iterator.ops] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2000-08-27 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#istream.iterator.ops">issues</a> in [istream.iterator.ops].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The synopsis of istream_iterator::operator++(int) in 24.5.1 shows +it as returning the iterator by value. 24.5.1.2, p5 shows the same +operator as returning the iterator by reference. That's incorrect +given the Effects clause below (since a temporary is returned). The +`&' is probably just a typo.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change the declaration in 24.5.1.2, p5 from</p> + <pre> istream_iterator<T,charT,traits,Distance>& operator++(int); + </pre> +<p>to</p> + <pre> istream_iterator<T,charT,traits,Distance> operator++(int); + </pre> +<p>(that is, remove the `&').</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="261"></a>261. Missing description of <tt>istream_iterator::operator!=</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 24.6.1.2 [istream.iterator.ops] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2000-08-27 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#istream.iterator.ops">issues</a> in [istream.iterator.ops].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +24.5.1, p3 lists the synopsis for +</p> + +<pre> template <class T, class charT, class traits, class Distance> + bool operator!=(const istream_iterator<T,charT,traits,Distance>& x, + const istream_iterator<T,charT,traits,Distance>& y); +</pre> + +<p> +but there is no description of what the operator does (i.e., no Effects +or Returns clause) in 24.5.1.2. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add paragraph 7 to the end of section 24.5.1.2 with the following text: +</p> + +<pre> template <class T, class charT, class traits, class Distance> + bool operator!=(const istream_iterator<T,charT,traits,Distance>& x, + const istream_iterator<T,charT,traits,Distance>& y); +</pre> + +<p>-7- Returns: !(x == y).</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="262"></a>262. Bitmask operator ~ specified incorrectly</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17.5.2.1.3 [bitmask.types] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Beman Dawes <b>Opened:</b> 2000-09-03 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#bitmask.types">issues</a> in [bitmask.types].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The ~ operation should be applied after the cast to int_type. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 17.3.2.1.2 [lib.bitmask.types] operator~ from: +</p> + +<pre> bitmask operator~ ( bitmask X ) + { return static_cast< bitmask>(static_cast<int_type>(~ X)); } +</pre> + +<p> +to: +</p> + +<pre> bitmask operator~ ( bitmask X ) + { return static_cast< bitmask>(~static_cast<int_type>(X)); } +</pre> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="263"></a>263. Severe restriction on <tt>basic_string</tt> reference counting</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.4 [basic.string] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Kevlin Henney <b>Opened:</b> 2000-09-04 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#basic.string">issues</a> in [basic.string].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The note in paragraph 6 suggests that the invalidation rules for +references, pointers, and iterators in paragraph 5 permit a reference- +counted implementation (actually, according to paragraph 6, they permit +a "reference counted implementation", but this is a minor editorial fix). +</p> + +<p> +However, the last sub-bullet is so worded as to make a reference-counted +implementation unviable. In the following example none of the +conditions for iterator invalidation are satisfied: +</p> + +<pre> // first example: "*******************" should be printed twice + string original = "some arbitrary text", copy = original; + const string & alias = original; + + string::const_iterator i = alias.begin(), e = alias.end(); + for(string::iterator j = original.begin(); j != original.end(); ++j) + *j = '*'; + while(i != e) + cout << *i++; + cout << endl; + cout << original << endl; +</pre> + +<p> +Similarly, in the following example: +</p> + +<pre> // second example: "some arbitrary text" should be printed out + string original = "some arbitrary text", copy = original; + const string & alias = original; + + string::const_iterator i = alias.begin(); + original.begin(); + while(i != alias.end()) + cout << *i++; +</pre> + +<p> +I have tested this on three string implementations, two of which were +reference counted. The reference-counted implementations gave +"surprising behavior" because they invalidated iterators on +the first call to non-const begin since construction. The current +wording does not permit such invalidation because it does not take +into account the first call since construction, only the first call +since various member and non-member function calls. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change the following sentence in 21.3 paragraph 5 from +</p> + +<blockquote><p> + Subsequent to any of the above uses except the forms of insert() and + erase() which return iterators, the first call to non-const member + functions operator[](), at(), begin(), rbegin(), end(), or rend(). +</p></blockquote> + +<p>to</p> + +<blockquote><p> + Following construction or any of the above uses, except the forms of + insert() and erase() that return iterators, the first call to non- + const member functions operator[](), at(), begin(), rbegin(), end(), + or rend(). +</p></blockquote> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="264"></a>264. Associative container <tt>insert(i, j)</tt> complexity requirements are not feasible.</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2.4 [associative.reqmts] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> John Potter <b>Opened:</b> 2000-09-07 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index-open.html#associative.reqmts">active issues</a> in [associative.reqmts].</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#associative.reqmts">issues</a> in [associative.reqmts].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#102">102</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Table 69 requires linear time if [i, j) is sorted. Sorted is necessary but not sufficient. +Consider inserting a sorted range of even integers into a set<int> containing the odd +integers in the same range. +</p> + +<p><i>Related issue: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#102">102</a></i></p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In Table 69, in section 23.1.2, change the complexity clause for +insertion of a range from "N log(size() + N) (N is the distance +from i to j) in general; linear if [i, j) is sorted according to +value_comp()" to "N log(size() + N), where N is the distance +from i to j". +</p> + +<p><i>[Copenhagen: Minor fix in proposed resolution: fixed unbalanced +parens in the revised wording.]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +Testing for valid insertions could be less efficient than simply +inserting the elements when the range is not both sorted and between +two adjacent existing elements; this could be a QOI issue. +</p> + +<p> +The LWG considered two other options: (a) specifying that the +complexity was linear if [i, j) is sorted according to value_comp() +and between two adjacent existing elements; or (b) changing to +Klog(size() + N) + (N - K) (N is the distance from i to j and K is the +number of elements which do not insert immediately after the previous +element from [i, j) including the first). The LWG felt that, since +we can't guarantee linear time complexity whenever the range to be +inserted is sorted, it's more trouble than it's worth to say that it's +linear in some special cases. +</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="265"></a>265. std::pair::pair() effects overly restrictive</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.3.5 [pairs] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2000-09-11 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#pairs">issues</a> in [pairs].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +I don't see any requirements on the types of the elements of the +std::pair container in 20.2.2. From the descriptions of the member +functions it appears that they must at least satisfy the requirements of +20.1.3 [lib.copyconstructible] and 20.1.4 [lib.default.con.req], and in +the case of the [in]equality operators also the requirements of 20.1.1 +[lib.equalitycomparable] and 20.1.2 [lib.lessthancomparable]. +</p> + +<p> +I believe that the the CopyConstructible requirement is unnecessary in +the case of 20.2.2, p2. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change the Effects clause in 20.2.2, p2 from</p> + +<blockquote><p> +-2- <b>Effects</b>: Initializes its members as if implemented: <tt> pair() : +first(T1()), second(T2()) {} </tt> +</p></blockquote> + +<p>to</p> + +<blockquote><p> +-2- <b>Effects</b>: Initializes its members as if implemented: <tt> pair() : +first(), second() {} </tt> +</p></blockquote> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The existing specification of pair's constructor appears to be a +historical artifact: there was concern that pair's members be properly +zero-initialized when they are built-in types. At one time there was +uncertainty about whether they would be zero-initialized if the +default constructor was written the obvious way. This has been +clarified by core issue 178, and there is no longer any doubt that +the straightforward implementation is correct.</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="266"></a>266. bad_exception::~bad_exception() missing Effects clause</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.8.2 [bad.exception] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2000-09-24 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The synopsis for std::bad_exception lists the function ~bad_exception() +but there is no description of what the function does (the Effects +clause is missing). +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Remove the destructor from the class synopses of +<tt>bad_alloc</tt> (18.6.2.1 [bad.alloc]), +<tt>bad_cast</tt> (18.7.2 [bad.cast]), +<tt>bad_typeid</tt> (18.7.3 [bad.typeid]), +and <tt>bad_exception</tt> (18.8.2 [bad.exception]). +</p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +This is a general problem with the exception classes in clause 18. +The proposed resolution is to remove the destructors from the class +synopses, rather than to document the destructors' behavior, because +removing them is more consistent with how exception classes are +described in clause 19. +</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="268"></a>268. Typo in locale synopsis</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.3.1 [locale] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2000-10-05 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#locale">issues</a> in [locale].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The synopsis of the class std::locale in 22.1.1 contains two typos: +the semicolons after the declarations of the default ctor +locale::locale() and the copy ctor locale::locale(const locale&) +are missing.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Add the missing semicolons, i.e., change</p> + +<pre> // construct/copy/destroy: + locale() throw() + locale(const locale& other) throw() +</pre> + +<p>in the synopsis in 22.1.1 to</p> + +<pre> // construct/copy/destroy: + locale() throw(); + locale(const locale& other) throw(); +</pre> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="270"></a>270. Binary search requirements overly strict</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.4.3 [alg.binary.search] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 2000-10-18 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#alg.binary.search">issues</a> in [alg.binary.search].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#472">472</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Each of the four binary search algorithms (lower_bound, upper_bound, +equal_range, binary_search) has a form that allows the user to pass a +comparison function object. According to 25.3, paragraph 2, that +comparison function object has to be a strict weak ordering. +</p> + +<p> +This requirement is slightly too strict. Suppose we are searching +through a sequence containing objects of type X, where X is some +large record with an integer key. We might reasonably want to look +up a record by key, in which case we would want to write something +like this: +</p> +<pre> struct key_comp { + bool operator()(const X& x, int n) const { + return x.key() < n; + } + } + + std::lower_bound(first, last, 47, key_comp()); +</pre> + +<p> +key_comp is not a strict weak ordering, but there is no reason to +prohibit its use in lower_bound. +</p> + +<p> +There's no difficulty in implementing lower_bound so that it allows +the use of something like key_comp. (It will probably work unless an +implementor takes special pains to forbid it.) What's difficult is +formulating language in the standard to specify what kind of +comparison function is acceptable. We need a notion that's slightly +more general than that of a strict weak ordering, one that can encompass +a comparison function that involves different types. Expressing that +notion may be complicated. +</p> + +<p><i>Additional questions raised at the Toronto meeting:</i></p> +<ul> +<li> Do we really want to specify what ordering the implementor must + use when calling the function object? The standard gives + specific expressions when describing these algorithms, but it also + says that other expressions (with different argument order) are + equivalent.</li> +<li> If we are specifying ordering, note that the standard uses both + orderings when describing <tt>equal_range</tt>.</li> +<li> Are we talking about requiring these algorithms to work properly + when passed a binary function object whose two argument types + are not the same, or are we talking about requirements when + they are passed a binary function object with several overloaded + versions of <tt>operator()</tt>?</li> +<li> The definition of a strict weak ordering does not appear to give + any guidance on issues of overloading; it only discusses expressions, + and all of the values in these expressions are of the same type. + Some clarification would seem to be in order.</li> +</ul> + +<p><i>Additional discussion from Copenhagen:</i></p> +<ul> +<li>It was generally agreed that there is a real defect here: if +the predicate is merely required to be a Strict Weak Ordering, then +it's possible to pass in a function object with an overloaded +operator(), where the version that's actually called does something +completely inappropriate. (Such as returning a random value.)</li> + +<li>An alternative formulation was presented in a paper distributed by +David Abrahams at the meeting, "Binary Search with Heterogeneous +Comparison", J16-01/0027 = WG21 N1313: Instead of viewing the +predicate as a Strict Weak Ordering acting on a sorted sequence, view +the predicate/value pair as something that partitions a sequence. +This is almost equivalent to saying that we should view binary search +as if we are given a unary predicate and a sequence, such that f(*p) +is true for all p below a specific point and false for all p above it. +The proposed resolution is based on that alternative formulation.</li> +</ul> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p>Change 25.3 [lib.alg.sorting] paragraph 3 from:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + 3 For all algorithms that take Compare, there is a version that uses + operator< instead. That is, comp(*i, *j) != false defaults to *i < + *j != false. For the algorithms to work correctly, comp has to + induce a strict weak ordering on the values. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>to:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + 3 For all algorithms that take Compare, there is a version that uses + operator< instead. That is, comp(*i, *j) != false defaults to *i + < *j != false. For algorithms other than those described in + lib.alg.binary.search (25.3.3) to work correctly, comp has to induce + a strict weak ordering on the values. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>Add the following paragraph after 25.3 [lib.alg.sorting] paragraph 5:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + -6- A sequence [start, finish) is partitioned with respect to an + expression f(e) if there exists an integer n such that + for all 0 <= i < distance(start, finish), f(*(begin+i)) is true if + and only if i < n. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>Change 25.3.3 [lib.alg.binary.search] paragraph 1 from:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + -1- All of the algorithms in this section are versions of binary + search and assume that the sequence being searched is in order + according to the implied or explicit comparison function. They work + on non-random access iterators minimizing the number of + comparisons, which will be logarithmic for all types of + iterators. They are especially appropriate for random access + iterators, because these algorithms do a logarithmic number of + steps through the data structure. For non-random access iterators + they execute a linear number of steps. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>to:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + -1- All of the algorithms in this section are versions of binary + search and assume that the sequence being searched is partitioned + with respect to an expression formed by binding the search key to + an argument of the implied or explicit comparison function. They + work on non-random access iterators minimizing the number of + comparisons, which will be logarithmic for all types of + iterators. They are especially appropriate for random access + iterators, because these algorithms do a logarithmic number of + steps through the data structure. For non-random access iterators + they execute a linear number of steps. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>Change 25.3.3.1 [lib.lower.bound] paragraph 1 from:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + -1- Requires: Type T is LessThanComparable + (lib.lessthancomparable). +</p></blockquote> + +<p>to:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + -1- Requires: The elements e of [first, last) are partitioned with + respect to the expression e < value or comp(e, value) +</p></blockquote> + + +<p>Remove 25.3.3.1 [lib.lower.bound] paragraph 2:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + -2- Effects: Finds the first position into which value can be + inserted without violating the ordering. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>Change 25.3.3.2 [lib.upper.bound] paragraph 1 from:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + -1- Requires: Type T is LessThanComparable (lib.lessthancomparable). +</p></blockquote> + +<p>to:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + -1- Requires: The elements e of [first, last) are partitioned with + respect to the expression !(value < e) or !comp(value, e) +</p></blockquote> + +<p>Remove 25.3.3.2 [lib.upper.bound] paragraph 2:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + -2- Effects: Finds the furthermost position into which value can be + inserted without violating the ordering. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>Change 25.3.3.3 [lib.equal.range] paragraph 1 from:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + -1- Requires: Type T is LessThanComparable + (lib.lessthancomparable). +</p></blockquote> + +<p>to:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + -1- Requires: The elements e of [first, last) are partitioned with + respect to the expressions e < value and !(value < e) or + comp(e, value) and !comp(value, e). Also, for all elements e of + [first, last), e < value implies !(value < e) or comp(e, + value) implies !comp(value, e) +</p></blockquote> + +<p>Change 25.3.3.3 [lib.equal.range] paragraph 2 from:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + -2- Effects: Finds the largest subrange [i, j) such that the value + can be inserted at any iterator k in it without violating the + ordering. k satisfies the corresponding conditions: !(*k < value) + && !(value < *k) or comp(*k, value) == false && comp(value, *k) == + false. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>to:</p> + +<pre> -2- Returns: + make_pair(lower_bound(first, last, value), + upper_bound(first, last, value)) + or + make_pair(lower_bound(first, last, value, comp), + upper_bound(first, last, value, comp)) +</pre> + +<p>Change 25.3.3.3 [lib.binary.search] paragraph 1 from:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + -1- Requires: Type T is LessThanComparable + (lib.lessthancomparable). +</p></blockquote> + +<p>to:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + -1- Requires: The elements e of [first, last) are partitioned with + respect to the expressions e < value and !(value < e) or comp(e, + value) and !comp(value, e). Also, for all elements e of [first, + last), e < value implies !(value < e) or comp(e, value) implies + !comp(value, e) +</p></blockquote> + +<p><i>[Copenhagen: Dave Abrahams provided this wording]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Redmond: Minor changes in wording. (Removed "non-negative", and +changed the "other than those described in" wording.) Also, the LWG +decided to accept the "optional" part.]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The proposed resolution reinterprets binary search. Instead of +thinking about searching for a value in a sorted range, we view that +as an important special case of a more general algorithm: searching +for the partition point in a partitioned range.</p> + +<p>We also add a guarantee that the old wording did not: we ensure +that the upper bound is no earlier than the lower bound, that +the pair returned by equal_range is a valid range, and that the first +part of that pair is the lower bound.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="271"></a>271. basic_iostream missing typedefs</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.1.5 [iostreamclass] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2000-11-02 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Class template basic_iostream has no typedefs. The typedefs it +inherits from its base classes can't be used, since (for example) +basic_iostream<T>::traits_type is ambiguous. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p>Add the following to basic_iostream's class synopsis in +27.7.1.5 [iostreamclass], immediately after <tt>public</tt>:</p> + +<pre> // types: + typedef charT char_type; + typedef typename traits::int_type int_type; + typedef typename traits::pos_type pos_type; + typedef typename traits::off_type off_type; + typedef traits traits_type; +</pre> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="272"></a>272. Missing parentheses around subexpression</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.5.4.3 [iostate.flags] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2000-11-02 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#iostate.flags">issues</a> in [iostate.flags].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#569">569</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +27.4.4.3, p4 says about the postcondition of the function: If +rdbuf()!=0 then state == rdstate(); otherwise +rdstate()==state|ios_base::badbit. +</p> + +<p> +The expression on the right-hand-side of the operator==() needs to be +parenthesized in order for the whole expression to ever evaluate to +anything but non-zero. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add parentheses like so: rdstate()==(state|ios_base::badbit). +</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="273"></a>273. Missing ios_base qualification on members of a dependent class</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27 [input.output] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2000-11-02 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#input.output">issues</a> in [input.output].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>27.5.2.4.2, p4, and 27.8.1.6, p2, 27.8.1.7, p3, 27.8.1.9, p2, +27.8.1.10, p3 refer to in and/or out w/o ios_base:: qualification. +That's incorrect since the names are members of a dependent base +class (14.6.2 [temp.dep]) and thus not visible.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Qualify the names with the name of the class of which they are +members, i.e., ios_base.</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="274"></a>274. a missing/impossible allocator requirement</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.2.5 [allocator.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2000-11-02 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#allocator.requirements">issues</a> in [allocator.requirements].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +I see that table 31 in 20.1.5, p3 allows T in std::allocator<T> to be of +any type. But the synopsis in 20.4.1 calls for allocator<>::address() to +be overloaded on reference and const_reference, which is ill-formed for +all T = const U. In other words, this won't work: +</p> + +<p> +template class std::allocator<const int>; +</p> + +<p> +The obvious solution is to disallow specializations of allocators on +const types. However, while containers' elements are required to be +assignable (which rules out specializations on const T's), I think that +allocators might perhaps be potentially useful for const values in other +contexts. So if allocators are to allow const types a partial +specialization of std::allocator<const T> would probably have to be +provided. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change the text in row 1, column 2 of table 32 in 20.1.5, p3 from</p> + + <blockquote><p> + any type + </p></blockquote> + +<p>to</p> + <blockquote><p> + any non-const, non-reference type + </p></blockquote> + +<p><i>[Redmond: previous proposed resolution was "any non-const, +non-volatile, non-reference type". Got rid of the "non-volatile".]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +Two resolutions were originally proposed: one that partially +specialized std::allocator for const types, and one that said an +allocator's value type may not be const. The LWG chose the second. +The first wouldn't be appropriate, because allocators are intended for +use by containers, and const value types don't work in containers. +Encouraging the use of allocators with const value types would only +lead to unsafe code. +</p> +<p> +The original text for proposed resolution 2 was modified so that it +also forbids volatile types and reference types. +</p> + +<p><i>[Curaçao: LWG double checked and believes volatile is correctly +excluded from the PR.]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="275"></a>275. Wrong type in num_get::get() overloads</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.2.1.1 [facet.num.get.members] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 2000-11-02 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#facet.num.get.members">issues</a> in [facet.num.get.members].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In 22.2.2.1.1, we have a list of overloads for num_get<>::get(). +There are eight overloads, all of which are identical except for the +last parameter. The overloads are: +</p> +<ul> +<li> long& </li> +<li> unsigned short& </li> +<li> unsigned int& </li> +<li> unsigned long& </li> +<li> short& </li> +<li> double& </li> +<li> long double& </li> +<li> void*& </li> +</ul> + +<p> +There is a similar list, in 22.2.2.1.2, of overloads for +num_get<>::do_get(). In this list, the last parameter has +the types: +</p> +<ul> +<li> long& </li> +<li> unsigned short& </li> +<li> unsigned int& </li> +<li> unsigned long& </li> +<li> float& </li> +<li> double& </li> +<li> long double& </li> +<li> void*& </li> +</ul> + +<p> +These two lists are not identical. They should be, since +<tt>get</tt> is supposed to call <tt>do_get</tt> with exactly +the arguments it was given. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 22.4.2.1.1 [facet.num.get.members], change</p> +<pre> iter_type get(iter_type in, iter_type end, ios_base& str, + ios_base::iostate& err, short& val) const; +</pre> +<p>to</p> +<pre> iter_type get(iter_type in, iter_type end, ios_base& str, + ios_base::iostate& err, float& val) const; +</pre> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="276"></a>276. Assignable requirement for container value type overly strict</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2 [container.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Peter Dimov <b>Opened:</b> 2000-11-07 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#container.requirements">issues</a> in [container.requirements].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +23.1/3 states that the objects stored in a container must be +Assignable. 23.6.1 [map], paragraph 2, +states that map satisfies all requirements for a container, while in +the same time defining value_type as pair<const Key, T> - a type +that is not Assignable. +</p> + +<p> +It should be noted that there exists a valid and non-contradictory +interpretation of the current text. The wording in 23.1/3 avoids +mentioning value_type, referring instead to "objects stored in a +container." One might argue that map does not store objects of +type map::value_type, but of map::mapped_type instead, and that the +Assignable requirement applies to map::mapped_type, not +map::value_type. +</p> + +<p> +However, this makes map a special case (other containers store objects of +type value_type) and the Assignable requirement is needlessly restrictive in +general. +</p> + +<p> +For example, the proposed resolution of active library issue +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#103">103</a> is to make set::iterator a constant iterator; this +means that no set operations can exploit the fact that the stored +objects are Assignable. +</p> + +<p> +This is related to, but slightly broader than, closed issue +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#140">140</a>. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>23.1/3: Strike the trailing part of the sentence:</p> + <blockquote><p> + , and the additional requirements of Assignable types from 23.1/3 + </p></blockquote> +<p>so that it reads:</p> + <blockquote><p> + -3- The type of objects stored in these components must meet the + requirements of CopyConstructible types (lib.copyconstructible). + </p></blockquote> + +<p>23.1/4: Modify to make clear that this requirement is not for all +containers. Change to:</p> + +<blockquote><p> +-4- Table 64 defines the Assignable requirement. Some containers +require this property of the types to be stored in the container. T is +the type used to instantiate the container. t is a value of T, and u is +a value of (possibly const) T. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>23.1, Table 65: in the first row, change "T is Assignable" to "T is +CopyConstructible".</p> + +<p>23.2.1/2: Add sentence for Assignable requirement. Change to:</p> + +<blockquote><p> +-2- A deque satisfies all of the requirements of a container and of a +reversible container (given in tables in lib.container.requirements) and +of a sequence, including the optional sequence requirements +(lib.sequence.reqmts). In addition to the requirements on the stored +object described in 23.1[lib.container.requirements], the stored object +must also meet the requirements of Assignable. Descriptions are +provided here only for operations on deque that are not described in one +of these tables or for operations where there is additional semantic +information. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>23.2.2/2: Add Assignable requirement to specific methods of list. +Change to:</p> + +<blockquote> +<p>-2- A list satisfies all of the requirements of a container and of a +reversible container (given in two tables in lib.container.requirements) +and of a sequence, including most of the the optional sequence +requirements (lib.sequence.reqmts). The exceptions are the operator[] +and at member functions, which are not provided. + +[Footnote: These member functions are only provided by containers whose +iterators are random access iterators. --- end foonote] +</p> + +<p>list does not require the stored type T to be Assignable unless the +following methods are instantiated: + +[Footnote: Implementors are permitted but not required to take advantage +of T's Assignable properties for these methods. -- end foonote] +</p> +<pre> list<T,Allocator>& operator=(const list<T,Allocator>& x ); + template <class InputIterator> + void assign(InputIterator first, InputIterator last); + void assign(size_type n, const T& t); +</pre> + + +<p>Descriptions are provided here only for operations on list that are not +described in one of these tables or for operations where there is +additional semantic information.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>23.2.4/2: Add sentence for Assignable requirement. Change to:</p> + +<blockquote><p> +-2- A vector satisfies all of the requirements of a container and of a +reversible container (given in two tables in lib.container.requirements) +and of a sequence, including most of the optional sequence requirements +(lib.sequence.reqmts). The exceptions are the push_front and pop_front +member functions, which are not provided. In addition to the +requirements on the stored object described in +23.1[lib.container.requirements], the stored object must also meet the +requirements of Assignable. Descriptions are provided here only for +operations on vector that are not described in one of these tables or +for operations where there is additional semantic information. +</p></blockquote> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>list, set, multiset, map, multimap are able to store non-Assignables. +However, there is some concern about <tt>list<T></tt>: +although in general there's no reason for T to be Assignable, some +implementations of the member functions <tt>operator=</tt> and +<tt>assign</tt> do rely on that requirement. The LWG does not want +to forbid such implementations.</p> + +<p>Note that the type stored in a standard container must still satisfy +the requirements of the container's allocator; this rules out, for +example, such types as "const int". See issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#274">274</a> +for more details. +</p> + +<p>In principle we could also relax the "Assignable" requirement for +individual <tt>vector</tt> member functions, such as +<tt>push_back</tt>. However, the LWG did not see great value in such +selective relaxation. Doing so would remove implementors' freedom to +implement <tt>vector::push_back</tt> in terms of +<tt>vector::insert</tt>.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="278"></a>278. What does iterator validity mean?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.3.4.4 [list.ops] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> P.J. Plauger <b>Opened:</b> 2000-11-27 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#list.ops">issues</a> in [list.ops].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Section 23.3.4.4 [list.ops] states that +</p> +<pre> void splice(iterator position, list<T, Allocator>& x); +</pre> +<p> +<i>invalidates</i> all iterators and references to list <tt>x</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +But what does the C++ Standard mean by "invalidate"? You +can still dereference the iterator to a spliced list element, but +you'd better not use it to delimit a range within the original +list. For the latter operation, it has definitely lost some of its +validity. +</p> + +<p> +If we accept the proposed resolution to issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#250">250</a>, +then we'd better clarify that a "valid" iterator need no +longer designate an element within the same container as it once did. +We then have to clarify what we mean by invalidating a past-the-end +iterator, as when a vector or string grows by reallocation. Clearly, +such an iterator has a different kind of validity. Perhaps we should +introduce separate terms for the two kinds of "validity." +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Add the following text to the end of section X [iterator.concepts], +after paragraph 5:</p> +<blockquote><p> +An <i>invalid</i> iterator is an iterator that may be +singular. [Footnote: This definition applies to pointers, since +pointers are iterators. The effect of dereferencing an iterator that +has been invalidated is undefined.] +</p></blockquote> + +<p><i>[post-Copenhagen: Matt provided wording.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Redmond: General agreement with the intent, some objections to +the wording. Dave provided new wording.]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>This resolution simply defines a term that the Standard uses but + never defines, "invalid", in terms of a term that is defined, + "singular".</p> + +<p>Why do we say "may be singular", instead of "is singular"? That's + becuase a valid iterator is one that is known to be nonsingular. + Invalidating an iterator means changing it in such a way that it's + no longer known to be nonsingular. An example: inserting an + element into the middle of a vector is correctly said to invalidate + all iterators pointing into the vector. That doesn't necessarily + mean they all become singular.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="280"></a>280. Comparison of reverse_iterator to const reverse_iterator</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 24.5.1 [reverse.iterators] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Steve Cleary <b>Opened:</b> 2000-11-27 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +This came from an email from Steve Cleary to Fergus in reference to +issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#179">179</a>. The library working group briefly discussed +this in Toronto and believed it should be a separate issue. There was +also some reservations about whether this was a worthwhile problem to +fix. +</p> + +<p> +Steve said: "Fixing reverse_iterator. std::reverse_iterator can +(and should) be changed to preserve these additional +requirements." He also said in email that it can be done without +breaking user's code: "If you take a look at my suggested +solution, reverse_iterator doesn't have to take two parameters; there +is no danger of breaking existing code, except someone taking the +address of one of the reverse_iterator global operator functions, and +I have to doubt if anyone has ever done that. . . <i>But</i>, just in +case they have, you can leave the old global functions in as well -- +they won't interfere with the two-template-argument functions. With +that, I don't see how <i>any</i> user code could break." +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +<b>Section:</b> 24.5.1.1 [reverse.iterator] +add/change the following declarations:</p> +<pre> A) Add a templated assignment operator, after the same manner + as the templated copy constructor, i.e.: + + template < class U > + reverse_iterator < Iterator >& operator=(const reverse_iterator< U >& u); + + B) Make all global functions (except the operator+) have + two template parameters instead of one, that is, for + operator ==, !=, <, >, <=, >=, - replace: + + template < class Iterator > + typename reverse_iterator< Iterator >::difference_type operator-( + const reverse_iterator< Iterator >& x, + const reverse_iterator< Iterator >& y); + + with: + + template < class Iterator1, class Iterator2 > + typename reverse_iterator < Iterator1 >::difference_type operator-( + const reverse_iterator < Iterator1 > & x, + const reverse_iterator < Iterator2 > & y); +</pre> +<p> +Also make the addition/changes for these signatures in +24.5.1.3 [reverse.iter.ops]. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Copenhagen: The LWG is concerned that the proposed resolution +introduces new overloads. Experience shows that introducing +overloads is always risky, and that it would be inappropriate to +make this change without implementation experience. It may be +desirable to provide this feature in a different way. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Lillehammer: We now have implementation experience, and agree that +this solution is safe and correct. +]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="281"></a>281. std::min() and max() requirements overly restrictive</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.4.7 [alg.min.max] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2000-12-02 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#alg.min.max">issues</a> in [alg.min.max].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#486">486</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The requirements in 25.3.7, p1 and 4 call for T to satisfy the +requirements of <tt>LessThanComparable</tt> ( [lessthancomparable]) +and <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> (20.2.1 [utility.arg.requirements]). +Since the functions take and return their arguments and result by +const reference, I believe the <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> requirement +is unnecessary. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Remove the <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> requirement. Specifically, replace +25.3.7, p1 with</p> +<p><b>-1- Requires:</b> Type T is <tt>LessThanComparable</tt> +( [lessthancomparable]). +</p> +<p>and replace 25.3.7, p4 with</p> +<p><b>-4- Requires:</b> Type T is <tt>LessThanComparable</tt> +( [lessthancomparable]). +</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="282"></a>282. What types does numpunct grouping refer to?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.2.2.2 [facet.num.put.virtuals] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2000-12-05 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#facet.num.put.virtuals">issues</a> in [facet.num.put.virtuals].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Paragraph 16 mistakenly singles out integral types for inserting +thousands_sep() characters. This conflicts with the syntax for floating +point numbers described under 22.2.3.1/2. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change paragraph 16 from:</p> + +<blockquote><p> +For integral types, punct.thousands_sep() characters are inserted into +the sequence as determined by the value returned by punct.do_grouping() +using the method described in 22.4.3.1.2 [facet.numpunct.virtuals]. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>To:</p> + +<blockquote><p> +For arithmetic types, punct.thousands_sep() characters are inserted into +the sequence as determined by the value returned by punct.do_grouping() +using the method described in 22.4.3.1.2 [facet.numpunct.virtuals]. +</p></blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Copenhagen: Opinions were divided about whether this is actually an +inconsistency, but at best it seems to have been unintentional. This +is only an issue for floating-point output: The standard is +unambiguous that implementations must parse thousands_sep characters +when performing floating-point. The standard is also unambiguous that +this requirement does not apply to the "C" locale. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +A survey of existing practice is needed; it is believed that some +implementations do insert thousands_sep characters for floating-point +output and others fail to insert thousands_sep characters for +floating-point input even though this is unambiguously required by the +standard. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Post-Curaçao: the above proposed resolution is the consensus of +Howard, Bill, Pete, Benjamin, Nathan, Dietmar, Boris, and Martin.]</i></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="283"></a>283. std::replace() requirement incorrect/insufficient</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.3.5 [alg.replace] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2000-12-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#alg.replace">issues</a> in [alg.replace].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#483">483</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +(revision of the further discussion) +There are a number of problems with the requires clauses for the +algorithms in 25.1 and 25.2. The requires clause of each algorithm +should describe the necessary and sufficient requirements on the inputs +to the algorithm such that the algorithm compiles and runs properly. +Many of the requires clauses fail to do this. Here is a summary of the kinds +of mistakes: +</p> + +<ol> +<li> +Use of EqualityComparable, which only puts requirements on a single +type, when in fact an equality operator is required between two +different types, typically either T and the iterator's value type +or between the value types of two different iterators. +</li> +<li> +Use of Assignable for T when in fact what was needed is Assignable +for the value_type of the iterator, and convertability from T to the +value_type of the iterator. Or for output iterators, the requirement +should be that T is writable to the iterator (output iterators do +not have value types). +</li> +</ol> + +<p> +Here is the list of algorithms that contain mistakes: +</p> + +<ul> +<li>25.1.2 std::find</li> +<li>25.1.6 std::count</li> +<li>25.1.8 std::equal</li> +<li>25.1.9 std::search, std::search_n</li> +<li>25.2.4 std::replace, std::replace_copy</li> +<li>25.2.5 std::fill</li> +<li>25.2.7 std::remove, std::remove_copy</li> +</ul> + +<p> +Also, in the requirements for EqualityComparable, the requirement that +the operator be defined for const objects is lacking. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p>20.1.1 Change p1 from</p> + +<p>In Table 28, <tt>T</tt> is a type to be supplied by a C++ program +instantiating a template, <tt>a</tt>, <tt>b</tt>, and <tt>c</tt> are +values of type <tt>T</tt>. +</p> + +<p>to</p> + +<p> +In Table 28, <tt>T</tt> is a type to be supplied by a C++ program +instantiating a template, <tt>a</tt>, <tt>b</tt>, and <tt>c</tt> are +values of type <tt>const T</tt>. +</p> + +<p>25 Between p8 and p9</p> + +<p>Add the following sentence:</p> + +<p>When the description of an algorithm gives an expression such as +<tt>*first == value</tt> for a condition, it is required that the expression +evaluate to either true or false in boolean contexts.</p> + +<p>25.1.2 Change p1 by deleting the requires clause.</p> + +<p>25.1.6 Change p1 by deleting the requires clause.</p> + +<p>25.1.9</p> + +<p>Change p4 from</p> + +<p>-4- Requires: Type <tt>T</tt> is <tt>EqualityComparable</tt> +(20.1.1), type Size is convertible to integral type (4.7.12.3). +</p> + +<p>to</p> + +<p>-4- Requires: The type <tt>Size</tt> is convertible to integral +type (4.7.12.3).</p> + +<p>25.2.4 Change p1 from</p> + +<p>-1- Requires: Type <tt>T</tt> is <tt>Assignable</tt> (23.1 ) (and, for <tt>replace()</tt>, <tt>EqualityComparable</tt> (20.1.1 )).</p> + +<p>to</p> + +<p>-1- Requires: The expression <tt>*first = new_value</tt> must be valid.</p> + +<p>and change p4 from</p> + +<p>-4- Requires: Type <tt>T</tt> is <tt>Assignable</tt> (23.1) (and, +for <tt>replace_copy()</tt>, <tt>EqualityComparable</tt> +(20.1.1)). The ranges <tt>[first, last)</tt> and <tt>[result, result + +(last - first))</tt> shall not overlap.</p> + +<p>to</p> + +<p>-4- Requires: The results of the expressions <tt>*first</tt> and +<tt>new_value</tt> must be writable to the result output iterator. The +ranges <tt>[first, last)</tt> and <tt>[result, result + (last - +first))</tt> shall not overlap.</p> + + +<p>25.2.5 Change p1 from</p> + +<p>-1- Requires: Type <tt>T</tt> is <tt>Assignable</tt> (23.1). The +type <tt>Size</tt> is convertible to an integral type (4.7.12.3).</p> + +<p>to</p> + +<p>-1- Requires: The expression <tt>value</tt> must be is writable to +the output iterator. The type <tt>Size</tt> is convertible to an +integral type (4.7.12.3).</p> + +<p>25.2.7 Change p1 from</p> + +<p>-1- Requires: Type <tt>T</tt> is <tt>EqualityComparable</tt> (20.1.1).</p> + +<p>to</p> + +<p> +-1- Requires: The value type of the iterator must be +<tt>Assignable</tt> (23.1). +</p> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +The general idea of the proposed solution is to remove the faulty +requires clauses and let the returns and effects clauses speak for +themselves. That is, the returns clauses contain expressions that must +be valid, and therefore already imply the correct requirements. In +addition, a sentence is added at the beginning of chapter 25 saying +that expressions given as conditions must evaluate to true or false in +a boolean context. An alternative would be to say that the type of +these condition expressions must be literally bool, but that would be +imposing a greater restriction that what the standard currently says +(which is convertible to bool). +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="284"></a>284. unportable example in 20.3.7, p6</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8.6 [comparisons] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2000-12-26 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The example in 20.8.6 [comparisons], p6 shows how to use the C +library function <tt>strcmp()</tt> with the function pointer adapter +<tt>ptr_fun()</tt>. But since it's unspecified whether the C library +functions have <tt>extern "C"</tt> or <tt>extern +"C++"</tt> linkage [17.6.2.3 [using.linkage]], and since +function pointers with different the language linkage specifications +(7.5 [dcl.link]) are incompatible, whether this example is +well-formed is unspecified. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change 20.8.6 [comparisons] paragraph 6 from:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>[<i>Example:</i></p> + <pre> replace_if(v.begin(), v.end(), not1(bind2nd(ptr_fun(strcmp), "C")), "C++"); + </pre> + <p>replaces each <tt>C</tt> with <tt>C++</tt> in sequence <tt>v</tt>.</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p>to:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>[<i>Example:</i></p> + <pre> int compare(const char*, const char*); + replace_if(v.begin(), v.end(), + not1(bind2nd(ptr_fun(compare), "abc")), "def"); + </pre> + <p>replaces each <tt>abc</tt> with <tt>def</tt> in sequence <tt>v</tt>.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>Also, remove footnote 215 in that same paragraph.</p> + +<p><i>[Copenhagen: Minor change in the proposed resolution. Since this +issue deals in part with C and C++ linkage, it was believed to be too +confusing for the strings in the example to be "C" and "C++". +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Redmond: More minor changes. Got rid of the footnote (which +seems to make a sweeping normative requirement, even though footnotes +aren't normative), and changed the sentence after the footnote so that +it corresponds to the new code fragment.]</i></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="285"></a>285. minor editorial errors in fstream ctors</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.9.1.7 [ifstream.cons] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2000-12-31 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>27.9.1.7 [ifstream.cons], p2, 27.9.1.11 [ofstream.cons], p2, and +27.9.1.15 [fstream.cons], p2 say about the effects of each constructor: +</p> + +<p>... If that function returns a null pointer, calls +<tt>setstate(failbit)</tt> (which may throw <tt>ios_base::failure</tt>). +</p> + +<p>The parenthetical note doesn't apply since the ctors cannot throw an +exception due to the requirement in 27.5.4.1 [basic.ios.cons], p3 +that <tt>exceptions()</tt> be initialized to <tt>ios_base::goodbit</tt>. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Strike the parenthetical note from the Effects clause in each of the +paragraphs mentioned above. +</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="286"></a>286. <cstdlib> requirements missing size_t typedef</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.5 [alg.c.library] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Judy Ward <b>Opened:</b> 2000-12-30 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#alg.c.library">issues</a> in [alg.c.library].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The <cstdlib> header file contains prototypes for bsearch and +qsort (C++ Standard section 25.4 paragraphs 3 and 4) and other +prototypes (C++ Standard section 21.4 paragraph 1 table 49) that +require the typedef size_t. Yet size_t is not listed in the +<cstdlib> synopsis table 78 in section 25.4. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add the type size_t to Table 78 (section 25.4) and add +the type size_t <cstdlib> to Table 97 (section C.2). +</p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>Since size_t is in <stdlib.h>, it must also be in <cstdlib>.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="288"></a>288. <cerrno> requirements missing macro EILSEQ</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 19.4 [errno] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Judy Ward <b>Opened:</b> 2000-12-30 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +ISO/IEC 9899:1990/Amendment1:1994 Section 4.3 States: "The list +of macros defined in <errno.h> is adjusted to include a new +macro, EILSEQ" +</p> + +<p> +ISO/IEC 14882:1998(E) section 19.3 does not refer +to the above amendment. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Update Table 26 (section 19.3) "Header <cerrno> synopsis" +and Table 95 (section C.2) "Standard Macros" to include EILSEQ. +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="291"></a>291. Underspecification of set algorithms</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.4.5 [alg.set.operations] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 2001-01-03 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#alg.set.operations">issues</a> in [alg.set.operations].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The standard library contains four algorithms that compute set +operations on sorted ranges: <tt>set_union</tt>, <tt>set_intersection</tt>, +<tt>set_difference</tt>, and <tt>set_symmetric_difference</tt>. Each +of these algorithms takes two sorted ranges as inputs, and writes the +output of the appropriate set operation to an output range. The elements +in the output range are sorted. +</p> + +<p> +The ordinary mathematical definitions are generalized so that they +apply to ranges containing multiple copies of a given element. Two +elements are considered to be "the same" if, according to an +ordering relation provided by the user, neither one is less than the +other. So, for example, if one input range contains five copies of an +element and another contains three, the output range of <tt>set_union</tt> +will contain five copies, the output range of +<tt>set_intersection</tt> will contain three, the output range of +<tt>set_difference</tt> will contain two, and the output range of +<tt>set_symmetric_difference</tt> will contain two. +</p> + +<p> +Because two elements can be "the same" for the purposes +of these set algorithms, without being identical in other respects +(consider, for example, strings under case-insensitive comparison), +this raises a number of unanswered questions: +</p> + +<ul> +<li>If we're copying an element that's present in both of the +input ranges, which one do we copy it from?</li> +<li>If there are <i>n</i> copies of an element in the relevant +input range, and the output range will contain fewer copies (say +<i>m</i>) which ones do we choose? The first <i>m</i>, or the last +<i>m</i>, or something else?</li> +<li>Are these operations stable? That is, does a run of equivalent +elements appear in the output range in the same order as as it +appeared in the input range(s)?</li> +</ul> + +<p> +The standard should either answer these questions, or explicitly +say that the answers are unspecified. I prefer the former option, +since, as far as I know, all existing implementations behave the +same way. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p>Add the following to the end of 25.4.5.2 [set.union] paragraph 5:</p> +<blockquote><p> +If [first1, last1) contains <i>m</i> elements that are equivalent to +each other and [first2, last2) contains <i>n</i> elements that are +equivalent to them, then max(<i>m</i>, <i>n</i>) of these elements +will be copied to the output range: all <i>m</i> of these elements +from [first1, last1), and the last max(<i>n-m</i>, 0) of them from +[first2, last2), in that order. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>Add the following to the end of 25.4.5.3 [set.intersection] paragraph 5:</p> +<blockquote><p> +If [first1, last1) contains <i>m</i> elements that are equivalent to each +other and [first2, last2) contains <i>n</i> elements that are +equivalent to them, the first min(<i>m</i>, <i>n</i>) of those +elements from [first1, last1) are copied to the output range. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>Add a new paragraph, <b>Notes</b>, after 25.4.5.4 [set.difference] +paragraph 4:</p> +<blockquote><p> +If [first1, last1) contains <i>m</i> elements that are equivalent to each +other and [first2, last2) contains <i>n</i> elements that are +equivalent to them, the last max(<i>m-n</i>, 0) elements from +[first1, last1) are copied to the output range. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>Add a new paragraph, <b>Notes</b>, after 25.4.5.5 [set.symmetric.difference] +paragraph 4:</p> +<blockquote><p> +If [first1, last1) contains <i>m</i> elements that are equivalent to +each other and [first2, last2) contains <i>n</i> elements that are +equivalent to them, then |<i>m - n</i>| of those elements will be +copied to the output range: the last <i>m - n</i> of these elements +from [first1, last1) if <i>m</i> > <i>n</i>, and the last <i>n - +m</i> of these elements from [first2, last2) if <i>m</i> < <i>n</i>. +</p></blockquote> + +<p><i>[Santa Cruz: it's believed that this language is clearer than + what's in the Standard. However, it's also believed that the + Standard may already make these guarantees (although not quite in + these words). Bill and Howard will check and see whether they think + that some or all of these changes may be redundant. If so, we may + close this issue as NAD.]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>For simple cases, these descriptions are equivalent to what's + already in the Standard. For more complicated cases, they describe + the behavior of existing implementations.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="292"></a>292. effects of a.copyfmt (a)</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.5.4.2 [basic.ios.members] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2001-01-05 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#basic.ios.members">issues</a> in [basic.ios.members].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The Effects clause of the member function <tt>copyfmt()</tt> in +27.4.4.2, p15 doesn't consider the case where the left-hand side +argument is identical to the argument on the right-hand side, that is +<tt>(this == &rhs)</tt>. If the two arguments are identical there +is no need to copy any of the data members or call any callbacks +registered with <tt>register_callback()</tt>. Also, as Howard Hinnant +points out in message c++std-lib-8149 it appears to be incorrect to +allow the object to fire <tt>erase_event</tt> followed by +<tt>copyfmt_event</tt> since the callback handling the latter event +may inadvertently attempt to access memory freed by the former. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change the Effects clause in 27.4.4.2, p15 from</p> + +<blockquote><p> +<b>-15- Effects:</b>Assigns to the member objects of <tt>*this</tt> +the corresponding member objects of <tt>rhs</tt>, except that... +</p></blockquote> + +<p>to</p> + +<blockquote><p> +<b>-15- Effects:</b>If <tt>(this == &rhs)</tt> does nothing. Otherwise +assigns to the member objects of <tt>*this</tt> the corresponding member +objects of <tt>rhs</tt>, except that... +</p></blockquote> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="294"></a>294. User defined macros and standard headers</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17.6.3.3.1 [macro.names] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> James Kanze <b>Opened:</b> 2001-01-11 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#macro.names">issues</a> in [macro.names].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Paragraph 2 of 17.6.3.3.1 [macro.names] reads: "A +translation unit that includes a header shall not contain any macros +that define names declared in that header." As I read this, it +would mean that the following program is legal:</p> + +<pre> #define npos 3.14 + #include <sstream> +</pre> + +<p>since npos is not defined in <sstream>. It is, however, defined +in <string>, and it is hard to imagine an implementation in +which <sstream> didn't include <string>.</p> + +<p>I think that this phrase was probably formulated before it was +decided that a standard header may freely include other standard +headers. The phrase would be perfectly appropriate for C, for +example. In light of 17.6.4.2 [res.on.headers] paragraph 1, however, +it isn't stringent enough.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>For 17.6.3.3.1 [macro.names], replace the current wording, which reads:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>Each name defined as a macro in a header is reserved to the + implementation for any use if the translation unit includes + the header.168)</p> + + <p>A translation unit that includes a header shall not contain any + macros that define names declared or defined in that header. Nor shall + such a translation unit define macros for names lexically + identical to keywords.</p> + + <p>168) It is not permissible to remove a library macro definition by + using the #undef directive.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>with the wording:</p> + +<blockquote> + <p>A translation unit that includes a standard library header shall not + #define or #undef names declared in any standard library header.</p> + + <p>A translation unit shall not #define or #undef names lexically + identical to keywords.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[Lillehammer: Beman provided new wording]</i></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="295"></a>295. Is abs defined in <cmath>?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.8 [c.math] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Jens Maurer <b>Opened:</b> 2001-01-12 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#c.math">issues</a> in [c.math].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Table 80 lists the contents of the <cmath> header. It does not +list <tt>abs()</tt>. However, 26.5, paragraph 6, which lists added +signatures present in <cmath>, does say that several overloads +of <tt>abs()</tt> should be defined in <cmath>. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add <tt>abs</tt> to Table 80. Also, remove the parenthetical list +of functions "(abs(), div(), rand(), srand())" from 26.6 [numarray], +paragraph 1. +</p> + +<p><i>[Copenhagen: Modified proposed resolution so that it also gets +rid of that vestigial list of functions in paragraph 1.]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>All this DR does is fix a typo; it's uncontroversial. A +separate question is whether we're doing the right thing in +putting some overloads in <cmath> that we aren't also +putting in <cstdlib>. That's issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#323">323</a>.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="296"></a>296. Missing descriptions and requirements of pair operators</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.3.5 [pairs] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2001-01-14 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#pairs">issues</a> in [pairs].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The synopsis of the header <tt><utility></tt> in 20.3 [utility] +lists the complete set of equality and relational operators for <tt>pair</tt> +but the section describing the template and the operators only describes +<tt>operator==()</tt> and <tt>operator<()</tt>, and it fails to mention +any requirements on the template arguments. The remaining operators are +not mentioned at all. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-09-27 Alisdair reopens. +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +The issue is a lack of wording specifying the semantics of <tt>std::pair</tt> +relational operators. The rationale is that this is covered by +catch-all wording in the relops component, and that as relops directly +precedes <tt>pair</tt> in the document this is an easy connection to make. +</p> + +<p> +Reading the current working paper I make two observations: +</p> + +<ol type="i"> +<li> +relops no longer immediately precedes <tt>pair</tt> in the order of +specification. However, even if it did, there is a lot of <tt>pair</tt> +specification itself between the (apparently) unrelated relops and the +relational operators for <tt>pair</tt>. (The catch-all still requires +<tt>operator==</tt> and <tt>operator<</tt> to be specified +explicitly) +</li> + +<li> +No other library component relies on the catch-all clause. The following +all explicitly document all six relational operators, usually in a +manner that could have deferred to the relops clause. +</li> +</ol> + +<blockquote><pre>tuple +unique_ptr +duration +time_point +basic_string +queue +stack +move_iterator +reverse_iterator +regex submatch +thread::id +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +The container components provide their own (equivalent) definition in +23.2.1 [container.requirements.general] Table 90 -- Container +requirements and do so do not defer to relops. +</p> + +<p> +<tt>Shared_ptr</tt> explicitly documents <tt>operator!=</tt> and does +not supply the other 3 missing operators +(<tt>></tt>,<tt>>=</tt>,<tt><=</tt>) so does not meet the +reqirements of the relops clause. +</p> + +<p> +<tt>Weak_ptr</tt> only supports <tt>operator<</tt> so would not be +covered by relops. +</p> + +<p> +At the very least I would request a note pointing to the relops clause +we rely on to provide this definition. If this route is taken, I would +recommend reducing many of the above listed clauses to a similar note +rather than providing redundant specification. +</p> + +<p> +My preference would be to supply the 4 missing specifications consistent +with the rest of the library. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10-11 Daniel opens <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1233">1233</a> which deals with the same issue as +it pertains to <tt>unique_ptr</tt>. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +After p20 20.3.5 [pairs] add: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T1, class T2> +bool operator!=(const pair<T1,T2>& x, const pair<T1,T2>& y); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt>!(x==y)</tt> +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class T1, class T2> +bool operator> (const pair<T1,T2>& x, const pair<T1,T2>& y); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt>y < x</tt> +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class T1, class T2> +bool operator>=(const pair<T1,T2>& x, const pair<T1,T2>& y); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt>!(x < y)</tt> +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class T1, class T2> +bool operator<=(const pair<T1,T2>& x, const pair<T1,T2>& y); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt>!(y < x)</tt> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>20.3.1 [operators] paragraph 10 already specifies the semantics. +That paragraph says that, if declarations of operator!=, operator>, +operator<=, and operator>= appear without definitions, they are +defined as specified in 20.3.1 [operators]. There should be no user +confusion, since that paragraph happens to immediately precede the +specification of <tt>pair</tt>.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="297"></a>297. const_mem_fun_t<>::argument_type should be const T*</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8.7 [logical.operations] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2001-01-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The class templates <tt>const_mem_fun_t</tt> in 20.5.8, p8 and +<tt>const_mem_fun1_t</tt> +in 20.5.8, p9 derive from <tt>unary_function<T*, S></tt>, and +<tt>binary_function<T*, +A, S></tt>, respectively. Consequently, their <tt>argument_type</tt>, and +<tt>first_argument_type</tt> +members, respectively, are both defined to be <tt>T*</tt> (non-const). +However, their function call member operator takes a <tt>const T*</tt> +argument. It is my opinion that <tt>argument_type</tt> should be <tt>const +T*</tt> instead, so that one can easily refer to it in generic code. The +example below derived from existing code fails to compile due to the +discrepancy: +</p> + +<p><tt>template <class T></tt> +<br><tt>void foo (typename T::argument_type arg) // #1</tt> +<br><tt>{</tt> +<br><tt> typename T::result_type (T::*pf) (typename +T::argument_type) +const = // #2</tt> +<br><tt> &T::operator();</tt> +<br><tt>}</tt> +</p> + +<p><tt>struct X { /* ... */ };</tt></p> + +<p><tt>int main ()</tt> +<br><tt>{</tt> +<br><tt> const X x;</tt> +<br><tt> foo<std::const_mem_fun_t<void, X> +>(&x); +// #3</tt> +<br><tt>}</tt> +</p> + +<p>#1 <tt>foo()</tt> takes a plain unqualified <tt>X*</tt> as an argument +<br>#2 the type of the pointer is incompatible with the type of the member +function +<br>#3 the address of a constant being passed to a function taking a non-const +<tt>X*</tt> +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Replace the top portion of the definition of the class template +const_mem_fun_t in 20.5.8, p8 +</p> +<p><tt>template <class S, class T> class const_mem_fun_t</tt> +<br><tt> : public +unary_function<T*, S> {</tt> +</p> +<p>with</p> +<p><tt>template <class S, class T> class const_mem_fun_t</tt> +<br><tt> : public +unary_function<<b>const</b> T*, S> {</tt> +</p> +<p>Also replace the top portion of the definition of the class template +const_mem_fun1_t in 20.5.8, p9</p> +<p><tt>template <class S, class T, class A> class const_mem_fun1_t</tt> +<br><tt> : public +binary_function<T*, A, S> {</tt> +</p> +<p>with</p> +<p><tt>template <class S, class T, class A> class const_mem_fun1_t</tt> +<br><tt> : public +binary_function<<b>const</b> T*, A, S> {</tt> +</p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>This is simply a contradiction: the <tt>argument_type</tt> typedef, +and the argument type itself, are not the same.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="298"></a>298. ::operator delete[] requirement incorrect/insufficient</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.6.1.2 [new.delete.array] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> John A. Pedretti <b>Opened:</b> 2001-01-10 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The default behavior of <tt>operator delete[]</tt> described in 18.5.1.2, p12 - +namely that for non-null value of <i>ptr</i>, the operator reclaims storage +allocated by the earlier call to the default <tt>operator new[]</tt> - is not +correct in all cases. Since the specified <tt>operator new[]</tt> default +behavior is to call <tt>operator new</tt> (18.5.1.2, p4, p8), which can be +replaced, along with <tt>operator delete</tt>, by the user, to implement their +own memory management, the specified default behavior of<tt> operator +delete[]</tt> must be to call <tt>operator delete</tt>. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change 18.5.1.2, p12 from</p> +<blockquote><p> +<b>-12-</b> <b>Default behavior:</b></p> +<ul> +<li> +For a null value of <i><tt>ptr</tt></i> , does nothing. +</li> +<li> +Any other value of <i><tt>ptr</tt></i> shall be a value returned +earlier by a call to the default <tt>operator new[](std::size_t)</tt>. +[Footnote: The value must not have been invalidated by an intervening +call to <tt>operator delete[](void*)</tt> (17.6.3.9 [res.on.arguments]). +--- end footnote] +For such a non-null value of <i><tt>ptr</tt></i> , reclaims storage +allocated by the earlier call to the default <tt>operator new[]</tt>. +</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + +<p>to</p> + +<blockquote><p> +<b>-12-</b> <b>Default behavior: </b>Calls <tt>operator +delete(</tt><i>ptr</i>) +or <tt>operator delete(<i>ptr</i>, std::nothrow)</tt> respectively. +</p></blockquote> +<p>and expunge paragraph 13.</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="300"></a>300. list::merge() specification incomplete</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.3.4.4 [list.ops] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> John Pedretti <b>Opened:</b> 2001-01-23 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#list.ops">issues</a> in [list.ops].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The "Effects" clause for list::merge() (23.3.4.4 [list.ops], p23) +appears to be incomplete: it doesn't cover the case where the argument +list is identical to *this (i.e., this == &x). The requirement in the +note in p24 (below) is that x be empty after the merge which is surely +unintended in this case. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 23.3.4.4 [list.ops], replace paragraps 23-25 with:</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +23 Effects: if (&x == this) does nothing; otherwise, merges the two +sorted ranges [begin(), end()) and [x.begin(), x.end()). The result +is a range in which the elements will be sorted in non-decreasing +order according to the ordering defined by comp; that is, for every +iterator i in the range other than the first, the condition comp(*i, +*(i - 1)) will be false. +</p> + +<p> +24 Notes: Stable: if (&x != this), then for equivalent elements in the +two original ranges, the elements from the original range [begin(), +end()) always precede the elements from the original range [x.begin(), +x.end()). If (&x != this) the range [x.begin(), x.end()) is empty +after the merge. +</p> + +<p> +25 Complexity: At most size() + x.size() - 1 applications of comp if +(&x ! = this); otherwise, no applications of comp are performed. If +an exception is thrown other than by a comparison there are no +effects. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[Copenhagen: The original proposed resolution did not fix all of +the problems in 23.3.4.4 [list.ops], p22-25. Three different +paragraphs (23, 24, 25) describe the effects of <tt>merge</tt>. +Changing p23, without changing the other two, appears to introduce +contradictions. Additionally, "merges the argument list into the +list" is excessively vague.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Post-Curaçao: Robert Klarer provided new wording.]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="301"></a>301. basic_string template ctor effects clause omits allocator argument</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.4.1 [string.require] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2001-01-27 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#string.require">issues</a> in [string.require].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The effects clause for the basic_string template ctor in 21.3.1, p15 +leaves out the third argument of type Allocator. I believe this to be +a mistake. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Replace</p> + +<blockquote> + <p><b>-15- Effects:</b> If <i><tt>InputIterator</tt></i> is an integral + type, equivalent to</p> + + <blockquote><p><tt>basic_string(static_cast<size_type>(begin), + static_cast<value_type>(end))</tt></p></blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p>with</p> + +<blockquote> + <p><b>-15- Effects:</b> If <i><tt>InputIterator</tt></i> is an integral + type, equivalent to</p> + + <blockquote><p><tt>basic_string(static_cast<size_type>(begin), + static_cast<value_type>(end), <b>a</b>)</tt></p></blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="303"></a>303. Bitset input operator underspecified</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.5.4 [bitset.operators] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 2001-02-05 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In 23.3.5.3, we are told that <tt>bitset</tt>'s input operator +"Extracts up to <i>N</i> (single-byte) characters from +<i>is</i>.", where <i>is</i> is a stream of type +<tt>basic_istream<charT, traits></tt>. +</p> + +<p> +The standard does not say what it means to extract single byte +characters from a stream whose character type, <tt>charT</tt>, is in +general not a single-byte character type. Existing implementations +differ. +</p> + +<p> +A reasonable solution will probably involve <tt>widen()</tt> and/or +<tt>narrow()</tt>, since they are the supplied mechanism for +converting a single character between <tt>char</tt> and +arbitrary <tt>charT</tt>. +</p> + +<p>Narrowing the input characters is not the same as widening the +literals <tt>'0'</tt> and <tt>'1'</tt>, because there may be some +locales in which more than one wide character maps to the narrow +character <tt>'0'</tt>. Narrowing means that alternate +representations may be used for bitset input, widening means that +they may not be.</p> + +<p>Note that for numeric input, <tt>num_get<></tt> +(22.2.2.1.2/8) compares input characters to widened version of narrow +character literals.</p> + +<p>From Pete Becker, in c++std-lib-8224:</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +Different writing systems can have different representations for the +digits that represent 0 and 1. For example, in the Unicode representation +of the Devanagari script (used in many of the Indic languages) the digit 0 +is 0x0966, and the digit 1 is 0x0967. Calling narrow would translate those +into '0' and '1'. But Unicode also provides the ASCII values 0x0030 and +0x0031 for for the Latin representations of '0' and '1', as well as code +points for the same numeric values in several other scripts (Tamil has no +character for 0, but does have the digits 1-9), and any of these values +would also be narrowed to '0' and '1'. +</p> + +<p>...</p> + +<p> +It's fairly common to intermix both native and Latin +representations of numbers in a document. So I think the rule has to be +that if a wide character represents a digit whose value is 0 then the bit +should be cleared; if it represents a digit whose value is 1 then the bit +should be set; otherwise throw an exception. So in a Devanagari locale, +both 0x0966 and 0x0030 would clear the bit, and both 0x0967 and 0x0031 +would set it. Widen can't do that. It would pick one of those two values, +and exclude the other one. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<p>From Jens Maurer, in c++std-lib-8233:</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Whatever we decide, I would find it most surprising if +bitset conversion worked differently from int conversion +with regard to alternate local representations of +numbers. +</p> + +<p>Thus, I think the options are:</p> +<ul> + <li> Have a new defect issue for 22.2.2.1.2/8 so that it will +require the use of narrow().</li> + + <li> Have a defect issue for bitset() which describes clearly +that widen() is to be used.</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + + <p>Replace the first two sentences of paragraph 5 with:</p> + + <blockquote><p> + Extracts up to <i>N</i> characters from <i>is</i>. Stores these + characters in a temporary object <i>str</i> of type + <tt>basic_string<charT, traits></tt>, then evaluates the + expression <tt><i>x</i> = bitset<N>(<i>str</i>)</tt>. + </p></blockquote> + + <p>Replace the third bullet item in paragraph 5 with:</p> + <ul><li> + the next input character is neither <tt><i>is</i>.widen(0)</tt> + nor <tt><i>is</i>.widen(1)</tt> (in which case the input character + is not extracted). + </li></ul> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>Input for <tt>bitset</tt> should work the same way as numeric +input. Using <tt>widen</tt> does mean that alternative digit +representations will not be recognized, but this was a known +consequence of the design choice.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="305"></a>305. Default behavior of codecvt<wchar_t, char, mbstate_t>::length()</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.1.5 [locale.codecvt.byname] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2001-01-24 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#locale.codecvt.byname">issues</a> in [locale.codecvt.byname].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>22.2.1.5/3 introduces codecvt in part with:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + codecvt<wchar_t,char,mbstate_t> converts between the native + character sets for tiny and wide characters. Instantiations on + mbstate_t perform conversion between encodings known to the library + implementor. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>But 22.2.1.5.2/10 describes do_length in part with:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + ... codecvt<wchar_t, char, mbstate_t> ... return(s) the lesser of max and + (from_end-from). +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +The semantics of do_in and do_length are linked. What one does must +be consistent with what the other does. 22.2.1.5/3 leads me to +believe that the vendor is allowed to choose the algorithm that +codecvt<wchar_t,char,mbstate_t>::do_in performs so that it makes +his customers happy on a given platform. But 22.2.1.5.2/10 explicitly +says what codecvt<wchar_t,char,mbstate_t>::do_length must +return. And thus indirectly specifies the algorithm that +codecvt<wchar_t,char,mbstate_t>::do_in must perform. I believe +that this is not what was intended and is a defect. +</p> + +<p>Discussion from the -lib reflector: + +<br>This proposal would have the effect of making the semantics of +all of the virtual functions in <tt>codecvt<wchar_t, char, +mbstate_t></tt> implementation specified. Is that what we want, or +do we want to mandate specific behavior for the base class virtuals +and leave the implementation specified behavior for the codecvt_byname +derived class? The tradeoff is that former allows implementors to +write a base class that actually does something useful, while the +latter gives users a way to get known and specified---albeit +useless---behavior, and is consistent with the way the standard +handles other facets. It is not clear what the original intention +was.</p> + +<p> +Nathan has suggest a compromise: a character that is a widened version +of the characters in the basic execution character set must be +converted to a one-byte sequence, but there is no such requirement +for characters that are not part of the basic execution character set. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 22.2.1.5.2/5 from: +</p> +<p> +The instantiations required in Table 51 (lib.locale.category), namely +codecvt<wchar_t,char,mbstate_t> and +codecvt<char,char,mbstate_t>, store no characters. Stores no more +than (to_limit-to) destination elements. It always leaves the to_next +pointer pointing one beyond the last element successfully stored. +</p> +<p> +to: +</p> +<p> +Stores no more than (to_limit-to) destination elements, and leaves the +to_next pointer pointing one beyond the last element successfully +stored. codecvt<char,char,mbstate_t> stores no characters. +</p> + +<p>Change 22.2.1.5.2/10 from:</p> + +<blockquote><p> +-10- Returns: (from_next-from) where from_next is the largest value in +the range [from,from_end] such that the sequence of values in the +range [from,from_next) represents max or fewer valid complete +characters of type internT. The instantiations required in Table 51 +(21.1.1.1.1), namely codecvt<wchar_t, char, mbstate_t> and +codecvt<char, char, mbstate_t>, return the lesser of max and +(from_end-from). +</p></blockquote> + +<p>to:</p> + +<blockquote><p> +-10- Returns: (from_next-from) where from_next is the largest value in +the range [from,from_end] such that the sequence of values in the range +[from,from_next) represents max or fewer valid complete characters of +type internT. The instantiation codecvt<char, char, mbstate_t> returns +the lesser of max and (from_end-from). +</p></blockquote> + +<p><i>[Redmond: Nathan suggested an alternative resolution: same as +above, but require that, in the default encoding, a character from the +basic execution character set would map to a single external +character. The straw poll was 8-1 in favor of the proposed +resolution.]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The default encoding should be whatever users of a given platform +would expect to be the most natural. This varies from platform to +platform. In many cases there is a preexisting C library, and users +would expect the default encoding to be whatever C uses in the default +"C" locale. We could impose a guarantee like the one Nathan suggested +(a character from the basic execution character set must map to a +single external character), but this would rule out important +encodings that are in common use: it would rule out JIS, for +example, and it would rule out a fixed-width encoding of UCS-4.</p> + +<p><i>[Curaçao: fixed rationale typo at the request of Ichiro Koshida; +"shift-JIS" changed to "JIS".]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="306"></a>306. offsetof macro and non-POD types</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.2 [support.types] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Steve Clamage <b>Opened:</b> 2001-02-21 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#support.types">issues</a> in [support.types].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Spliced together from reflector messages c++std-lib-8294 and -8295:</p> + +<p>18.1, paragraph 5, reads: "The macro <tt>offsetof</tt> +accepts a restricted set of <i>type</i> arguments in this +International Standard. <i>type</i> shall be a POD structure or a POD +union (clause 9). The result of applying the offsetof macro to a field +that is a static data member or a function member is +undefined."</p> + +<p>For the POD requirement, it doesn't say "no diagnostic +required" or "undefined behavior". I read 1.4 [intro.compliance], paragraph 1, to mean that a diagnostic is required. +It's not clear whether this requirement was intended. While it's +possible to provide such a diagnostic, the extra complication doesn't +seem to add any value. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change 18.1, paragraph 5, to "If <i>type</i> is not a POD +structure or a POD union the results are undefined."</p> + +<p><i>[Copenhagen: straw poll was 7-4 in favor. It was generally +agreed that requiring a diagnostic was inadvertent, but some LWG +members thought that diagnostics should be required whenever +possible.]</i></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="307"></a>307. Lack of reference typedefs in container adaptors</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.3.4 [list] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2001-03-13 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p>From reflector message c++std-lib-8330. See also lib-8317.</p> + +<p> +The standard is currently inconsistent in 23.3.4.2 [list.capacity] +paragraph 1 and 23.3.4.3 [list.modifiers] paragraph 1. +23.2.3.3/1, for example, says: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +-1- Any sequence supporting operations back(), push_back() and pop_back() +can be used to instantiate stack. In particular, vector (lib.vector), list +(lib.list) and deque (lib.deque) can be used. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>But this is false: vector<bool> can not be used, because the +container adaptors return a T& rather than using the underlying +container's reference type.</p> + +<p>This is a contradiction that can be fixed by:</p> + +<ol> +<li>Modifying these paragraphs to say that vector<bool> + is an exception.</li> +<li>Removing the vector<bool> specialization.</li> +<li>Changing the return types of stack and priority_queue to use + reference typedef's.</li> +</ol> + +<p> +I propose 3. This does not preclude option 2 if we choose to do it +later (see issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#96">96</a>); the issues are independent. Option +3 offers a small step towards support for proxied containers. This +small step fixes a current contradiction, is easy for vendors to +implement, is already implemented in at least one popular lib, and +does not break any code. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Summary: Add reference and const_reference typedefs to queue, +priority_queue and stack. Change return types of "value_type&" to +"reference". Change return types of "const value_type&" to +"const_reference". Details:</p> + +<p>Change 23.2.3.1/1 from:</p> + +<pre> namespace std { + template <class T, class Container = deque<T> > + class queue { + public: + typedef typename Container::value_type value_type; + typedef typename Container::size_type size_type; + typedef Container container_type; + protected: + Container c; + + public: + explicit queue(const Container& = Container()); + + bool empty() const { return c.empty(); } + size_type size() const { return c.size(); } + value_type& front() { return c.front(); } + const value_type& front() const { return c.front(); } + value_type& back() { return c.back(); } + const value_type& back() const { return c.back(); } + void push(const value_type& x) { c.push_back(x); } + void pop() { c.pop_front(); } + }; +</pre> + +<p>to:</p> + +<pre> namespace std { + template <class T, class Container = deque<T> > + class queue { + public: + typedef typename Container::value_type value_type; + typedef typename Container::reference reference; + typedef typename Container::const_reference const_reference; + typedef typename Container::value_type value_type; + typedef typename Container::size_type size_type; + typedef Container container_type; + protected: + Container c; + + public: + explicit queue(const Container& = Container()); + + bool empty() const { return c.empty(); } + size_type size() const { return c.size(); } + reference front() { return c.front(); } + const_reference front() const { return c.front(); } + reference back() { return c.back(); } + const_reference back() const { return c.back(); } + void push(const value_type& x) { c.push_back(x); } + void pop() { c.pop_front(); } + }; +</pre> + +<p>Change 23.2.3.2/1 from:</p> + +<pre> namespace std { + template <class T, class Container = vector<T>, + class Compare = less<typename Container::value_type> > + class priority_queue { + public: + typedef typename Container::value_type value_type; + typedef typename Container::size_type size_type; + typedef Container container_type; + protected: + Container c; + Compare comp; + + public: + explicit priority_queue(const Compare& x = Compare(), + const Container& = Container()); + template <class InputIterator> + priority_queue(InputIterator first, InputIterator last, + const Compare& x = Compare(), + const Container& = Container()); + + bool empty() const { return c.empty(); } + size_type size() const { return c.size(); } + const value_type& top() const { return c.front(); } + void push(const value_type& x); + void pop(); + }; + // no equality is provided + } +</pre> + +<p>to:</p> + +<pre> namespace std { + template <class T, class Container = vector<T>, + class Compare = less<typename Container::value_type> > + class priority_queue { + public: + typedef typename Container::value_type value_type; + typedef typename Container::reference reference; + typedef typename Container::const_reference const_reference; + typedef typename Container::size_type size_type; + typedef Container container_type; + protected: + Container c; + Compare comp; + + public: + explicit priority_queue(const Compare& x = Compare(), + const Container& = Container()); + template <class InputIterator> + priority_queue(InputIterator first, InputIterator last, + const Compare& x = Compare(), + const Container& = Container()); + + bool empty() const { return c.empty(); } + size_type size() const { return c.size(); } + const_reference top() const { return c.front(); } + void push(const value_type& x); + void pop(); + }; + // no equality is provided + } +</pre> + +<p>And change 23.2.3.3/1 from:</p> + +<pre> namespace std { + template <class T, class Container = deque<T> > + class stack { + public: + typedef typename Container::value_type value_type; + typedef typename Container::size_type size_type; + typedef Container container_type; + protected: + Container c; + + public: + explicit stack(const Container& = Container()); + + bool empty() const { return c.empty(); } + size_type size() const { return c.size(); } + value_type& top() { return c.back(); } + const value_type& top() const { return c.back(); } + void push(const value_type& x) { c.push_back(x); } + void pop() { c.pop_back(); } + }; + + template <class T, class Container> + bool operator==(const stack<T, Container>& x, + const stack<T, Container>& y); + template <class T, class Container> + bool operator< (const stack<T, Container>& x, + const stack<T, Container>& y); + template <class T, class Container> + bool operator!=(const stack<T, Container>& x, + const stack<T, Container>& y); + template <class T, class Container> + bool operator> (const stack<T, Container>& x, + const stack<T, Container>& y); + template <class T, class Container> + bool operator>=(const stack<T, Container>& x, + const stack<T, Container>& y); + template <class T, class Container> + bool operator<=(const stack<T, Container>& x, + const stack<T, Container>& y); + } +</pre> + +<p>to:</p> + +<pre> namespace std { + template <class T, class Container = deque<T> > + class stack { + public: + typedef typename Container::value_type value_type; + typedef typename Container::reference reference; + typedef typename Container::const_reference const_reference; + typedef typename Container::size_type size_type; + typedef Container container_type; + protected: + Container c; + + public: + explicit stack(const Container& = Container()); + + bool empty() const { return c.empty(); } + size_type size() const { return c.size(); } + reference top() { return c.back(); } + const_reference top() const { return c.back(); } + void push(const value_type& x) { c.push_back(x); } + void pop() { c.pop_back(); } + }; + + template <class T, class Container> + bool operator==(const stack<T, Container>& x, + const stack<T, Container>& y); + template <class T, class Container> + bool operator< (const stack<T, Container>& x, + const stack<T, Container>& y); + template <class T, class Container> + bool operator!=(const stack<T, Container>& x, + const stack<T, Container>& y); + template <class T, class Container> + bool operator> (const stack<T, Container>& x, + const stack<T, Container>& y); + template <class T, class Container> + bool operator>=(const stack<T, Container>& x, + const stack<T, Container>& y); + template <class T, class Container> + bool operator<=(const stack<T, Container>& x, + const stack<T, Container>& y); + } +</pre> + +<p><i>[Copenhagen: This change was discussed before the IS was released +and it was deliberately not adopted. Nevertheless, the LWG believes +(straw poll: 10-2) that it is a genuine defect.]</i></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="308"></a>308. Table 82 mentions unrelated headers</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27 [input.output] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2001-03-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#input.output">issues</a> in [input.output].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Table 82 in section 27 mentions the header <cstdlib> for String +streams (27.8 [string.streams]) and the headers <cstdio> and +<cwchar> for File streams (27.9 [file.streams]). It's not clear +why these headers are mentioned in this context since they do not +define any of the library entities described by the +subclauses. According to 17.6.1.1 [contents], only such headers +are to be listed in the summary. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Remove <cstdlib> and <cwchar> from +Table 82.</p> + +<p><i>[Copenhagen: changed the proposed resolution slightly. The +original proposed resolution also said to remove <cstdio> from +Table 82. However, <cstdio> is mentioned several times within +section 27.9 [file.streams], including 27.9.2 [c.files].]</i></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="310"></a>310. Is errno a macro?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17.6.1.2 [headers], 19.4 [errno] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Steve Clamage <b>Opened:</b> 2001-03-21 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#headers">issues</a> in [headers].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + <p> + Exactly how should errno be declared in a conforming C++ header? + </p> + + <p> + The C standard says in 7.1.4 that it is unspecified whether errno is a + macro or an identifier with external linkage. In some implementations + it can be either, depending on compile-time options. (E.g., on + Solaris in multi-threading mode, errno is a macro that expands to a + function call, but is an extern int otherwise. "Unspecified" allows + such variability.) + </p> + + <p>The C++ standard:</p> + <ul> + <li>17.4.1.2 says in a note that errno must be macro in C. (false)</li> + <li>17.4.3.1.3 footnote 166 says errno is reserved as an external + name (true), and implies that it is an identifier.</li> + <li>19.3 simply lists errno as a macro (by what reasoning?) and goes + on to say that the contents of of C++ <errno.h> are the + same as in C, begging the question.</li> + <li>C.2, table 95 lists errno as a macro, without comment.</li> + </ul> + + <p>I find no other references to errno.</p> + + <p>We should either explicitly say that errno must be a macro, even + though it need not be a macro in C, or else explicitly leave it + unspecified. We also need to say something about namespace std. + A user who includes <cerrno> needs to know whether to write + <tt>errno</tt>, or <tt>::errno</tt>, or <tt>std::errno</tt>, or + else <cerrno> is useless.</p> + + <p>Two acceptable fixes:</p> + <ul> + <li><p>errno must be a macro. This is trivially satisfied by adding<br> + #define errno (::std::errno)<br> + to the headers if errno is not already a macro. You then always + write errno without any scope qualification, and it always expands + to a correct reference. Since it is always a macro, you know to + avoid using errno as a local identifer.</p></li> + <li><p>errno is in the global namespace. This fix is inferior, because + ::errno is not guaranteed to be well-formed.</p></li> + </ul> + + <p><i>[ + This issue was first raised in 1999, but it slipped through + the cracks. + ]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + <p>Change the Note in section 17.4.1.2p5 from</p> + + <blockquote><p> + Note: the names defined as macros in C include the following: + assert, errno, offsetof, setjmp, va_arg, va_end, and va_start. + </p></blockquote> + + <p>to</p> + + <blockquote><p> + Note: the names defined as macros in C include the following: + assert, offsetof, setjmp, va_arg, va_end, and va_start. + </p></blockquote> + + <p>In section 19.3, change paragraph 2 from</p> + + <blockquote><p> + The contents are the same as the Standard C library header + <errno.h>. + </p></blockquote> + + <p>to</p> + + <blockquote><p> + The contents are the same as the Standard C library header + <errno.h>, except that errno shall be defined as a macro. + </p></blockquote> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>C++ must not leave it up to the implementation to decide whether or +not a name is a macro; it must explicitly specify exactly which names +are required to be macros. The only one that really works is for it +to be a macro.</p> + +<p><i>[Curaçao: additional rationale added.]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="311"></a>311. Incorrect wording in basic_ostream class synopsis</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.2.1 [ostream] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Andy Sawyer <b>Opened:</b> 2001-03-21 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#ostream">issues</a> in [ostream].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p>In 27.7.2.1 [ostream], the synopsis of class basic_ostream says:</p> + +<pre> // partial specializationss + template<class traits> + basic_ostream<char,traits>& operator<<( basic_ostream<char,traits>&, + const char * ); +</pre> + +<p>Problems:</p> +<ul> +<li>Too many 's's at the end of "specializationss" </li> +<li>This is an overload, not a partial specialization</li> +</ul> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In the synopsis in 27.7.2.1 [ostream], remove the +<i>// partial specializationss</i> comment. Also remove the same +comment (correctly spelled, but still incorrect) from the synopsis in +27.7.2.6.4 [ostream.inserters.character]. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Pre-Redmond: added 27.7.2.6.4 [ostream.inserters.character] because of Martin's +comment in c++std-lib-8939. +]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="312"></a>312. Table 27 is missing headers</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20 [utilities] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2001-03-29 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#utilities">issues</a> in [utilities].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Table 27 in section 20 lists the header <memory> (only) for +Memory (lib.memory) but neglects to mention the headers +<cstdlib> and <cstring> that are discussed in 20.7.6 [meta.rel].</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Add <cstdlib> and <cstring> to Table 27, in the same row +as <memory>.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="315"></a>315. Bad "range" in list::unique complexity</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.3.4.4 [list.ops] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Andy Sawyer <b>Opened:</b> 2001-05-01 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#list.ops">issues</a> in [list.ops].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +23.3.4.4 [list.ops], Para 21 describes the complexity of +list::unique as: "If the range (last - first) is not empty, exactly +(last - first) -1 applications of the corresponding predicate, +otherwise no applications of the predicate)". +</p> + +<p> +"(last - first)" is not a range. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change the "range" from (last - first) to [first, last). +</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="316"></a>316. Vague text in Table 69</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2.4 [associative.reqmts] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2001-05-04 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index-open.html#associative.reqmts">active issues</a> in [associative.reqmts].</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#associative.reqmts">issues</a> in [associative.reqmts].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Table 69 says this about a_uniq.insert(t):</p> + +<blockquote><p> +inserts t if and only if there is no element in the container with key +equivalent to the key of t. The bool component of the returned pair +indicates whether the insertion takes place and the iterator component of the +pair points to the element with key equivalent to the key of t. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>The description should be more specific about exactly how the bool component +indicates whether the insertion takes place.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change the text in question to</p> + +<blockquote><p> +...The bool component of the returned pair is true if and only if the insertion +takes place... +</p></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="317"></a>317. Instantiation vs. specialization of facets</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22 [localization] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2001-05-04 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#localization">issues</a> in [localization].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The localization section of the standard refers to specializations of +the facet templates as instantiations even though the required facets +are typically specialized rather than explicitly (or implicitly) +instantiated. In the case of ctype<char> and +ctype_byname<char> (and the wchar_t versions), these facets are +actually required to be specialized. The terminology should be +corrected to make it clear that the standard doesn't mandate explicit +instantiation (the term specialization encompasses both explicit +instantiations and specializations). +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In the following paragraphs, replace all occurrences of the word +instantiation or instantiations with specialization or specializations, +respectively: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +22.1.1.1.1, p4, Table 52, 22.2.1.1, p2, 22.2.1.5, p3, 22.2.1.5.1, p5, +22.2.1.5.2, p10, 22.2.2, p2, 22.2.3.1, p1, 22.2.3.1.2, p1, p2 and p3, +22.2.4.1, p1, 22.2.4.1.2, p1, 22,2,5, p1, 22,2,6, p2, 22.2.6.3.2, p7, and +Footnote 242. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>And change the text in 22.1.1.1.1, p4 from</p> + +<blockquote><p> + An implementation is required to provide those instantiations + for facet templates identified as members of a category, and + for those shown in Table 52: +</p></blockquote> + +<p>to</p> + +<blockquote><p> + An implementation is required to provide those specializations... +</p></blockquote> + +<p><i>[Nathan will review these changes, and will look for places where +explicit specialization is necessary.]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>This is a simple matter of outdated language. The language to +describe templates was clarified during the standardization process, +but the wording in clause 22 was never updated to reflect that +change.</p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="318"></a>318. Misleading comment in definition of numpunct_byname</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.3.2 [locale.numpunct.byname] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2001-05-12 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The definition of the numpunct_byname template contains the following +comment:</p> + +<pre> namespace std { + template <class charT> + class numpunct_byname : public numpunct<charT> { + // this class is specialized for char and wchar_t. + ... +</pre> + +<p>There is no documentation of the specializations and it seems +conceivable that an implementation will not explicitly specialize the +template at all, but simply provide the primary template.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Remove the comment from the text in 22.2.3.2 and from the proposed +resolution of library issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#228">228</a>.</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="319"></a>319. Storage allocation wording confuses "Required behavior", "Requires"</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.6.1.1 [new.delete.single], 18.6.1.2 [new.delete.array] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Beman Dawes <b>Opened:</b> 2001-05-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#new.delete.single">issues</a> in [new.delete.single].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The standard specifies 17.5.1.4 [structure.specifications] that "Required +behavior" elements describe "the semantics of a function definition +provided by either the implementation or a C++ program."</p> + +<p>The standard specifies 17.5.1.4 [structure.specifications] that "Requires" +elements describe "the preconditions for calling the function."</p> + +<p>In the sections noted below, the current wording specifies +"Required Behavior" for what are actually preconditions, and thus +should be specified as "Requires".</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p>In 18.6.1.1 [new.delete.single] Para 12 Change:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>Required behavior: accept a value of ptr that is null or that was + returned by an earlier call ...</p> +</blockquote> +<p>to:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>Requires: the value of ptr is null or the value returned by an + earlier call ...</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>In 18.6.1.2 [new.delete.array] Para 11 Change:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>Required behavior: accept a value of ptr that is null or that was + returned by an earlier call ...</p> +</blockquote> +<p>to:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>Requires: the value of ptr is null or the value returned by an + earlier call ...</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="320"></a>320. list::assign overspecified</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.3.4.1 [list.cons] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2001-05-17 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#list.cons">issues</a> in [list.cons].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Section 23.3.4.1 [list.cons], paragraphs 6-8 specify that list assign (both forms) have +the "effects" of a call to erase followed by a call to insert. +</p> + +<p> +I would like to document that implementers have the freedom to implement +assign by other methods, as long as the end result is the same and the +exception guarantee is as good or better than the basic guarantee. +</p> + +<p> +The motivation for this is to use T's assignment operator to recycle +existing nodes in the list instead of erasing them and reallocating +them with new values. It is also worth noting that, with careful +coding, most common cases of assign (everything but assignment with +true input iterators) can elevate the exception safety to strong if +T's assignment has a nothrow guarantee (with no extra memory cost). +Metrowerks does this. However I do not propose that this subtlety be +standardized. It is a QoI issue. </p> + +<p>Existing practise: +Metrowerks and SGI recycle nodes, Dinkumware and Rogue Wave don't. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change 23.3.4.1 [list.cons]/7 from:</p> + +<blockquote> +<p>Effects:</p> + +<pre> erase(begin(), end()); + insert(begin(), first, last); +</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p>to:</p> + +<blockquote> +<p>Effects: Replaces the contents of the list with the range [first, last).</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>In 23.2.3 [sequence.reqmts], in Table 67 (sequence requirements), +add two new rows:</p> +<pre> a.assign(i,j) void pre: i,j are not iterators into a. + Replaces elements in a with a copy + of [i, j). + + a.assign(n,t) void pre: t is not a reference into a. + Replaces elements in a with n copies + of t. +</pre> + +<p>Change 23.3.4.1 [list.cons]/8 from:</p> + +<blockquote> +<p>Effects:</p> +<pre> erase(begin(), end()); + insert(begin(), n, t); +</pre> +</blockquote> +<p>to:</p> + +<blockquote> +<p>Effects: Replaces the contents of the list with n copies of t.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[Redmond: Proposed resolution was changed slightly. Previous +version made explicit statement about exception safety, which wasn't +consistent with the way exception safety is expressed elsewhere. +Also, the change in the sequence requirements is new. Without that +change, the proposed resolution would have required that assignment of +a subrange would have to work. That too would have been +overspecification; it would effectively mandate that assignment use a +temporary. Howard provided wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Curaçao: Made editorial improvement in wording; changed +"Replaces elements in a with copies of elements in [i, j)." +with "Replaces the elements of a with a copy of [i, j)." +Changes not deemed serious enough to requre rereview.]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="321"></a>321. Typo in num_get</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.2.1.2 [facet.num.get.virtuals] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Kevin Djang <b>Opened:</b> 2001-05-17 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#facet.num.get.virtuals">issues</a> in [facet.num.get.virtuals].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Section 22.2.2.1.2 at p7 states that "A length specifier is added to +the conversion function, if needed, as indicated in Table 56." +However, Table 56 uses the term "length modifier", not "length +specifier". +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 22.2.2.1.2 at p7, change the text "A length specifier is added ..." +to be "A length modifier is added ..." +</p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>C uses the term "length modifier". We should be consistent.</p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="322"></a>322. iterator and const_iterator should have the same value type</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2 [container.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 2001-05-17 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#container.requirements">issues</a> in [container.requirements].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +It's widely assumed that, if X is a container, +iterator_traits<X::iterator>::value_type and +iterator_traits<X::const_iterator>::value_type should both be +X::value_type. However, this is nowhere stated. The language in +Table 65 is not precise about the iterators' value types (it predates +iterator_traits), and could even be interpreted as saying that +iterator_traits<X::const_iterator>::value_type should be "const +X::value_type". +</p> + +<p>Related issue: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#279">279</a>.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In Table 65 ("Container Requirements"), change the return type for +X::iterator to "iterator type whose value type is T". Change the +return type for X::const_iterator to "constant iterator type whose +value type is T".</p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +This belongs as a container requirement, rather than an iterator +requirement, because the whole notion of iterator/const_iterator +pairs is specific to containers' iterator. +</p> +<p> +It is existing practice that (for example) +iterator_traits<list<int>::const_iterator>::value_type +is "int", rather than "const int". This is consistent with +the way that const pointers are handled: the standard already +requires that iterator_traits<const int*>::value_type is int. +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="324"></a>324. Do output iterators have value types?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 24.2.4 [output.iterators] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Dave Abrahams <b>Opened:</b> 2001-06-07 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#output.iterators">issues</a> in [output.iterators].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p>Table 73 suggests that output iterators have value types. It +requires the expression "*a = t". Additionally, although Table 73 +never lists "a = t" or "X(a) = t" in the "expressions" column, it +contains a note saying that "a = t" and "X(a) = t" have equivalent +(but nowhere specified!) semantics.</p> + +<p>According to 24.1/9, t is supposed to be "a value of value type +T":</p> + + <blockquote><p> + In the following sections, a and b denote values of X, n denotes a + value of the difference type Distance, u, tmp, and m denote + identifiers, r denotes a value of X&, t denotes a value of + value type T. + </p></blockquote> + +<p>Two other parts of the standard that are relevant to whether +output iterators have value types:</p> + +<ul> + <li>24.1/1 says "All iterators i support the expression *i, + resulting in a value of some class, enumeration, or built-in type + T, called the value type of the iterator".</li> + + <li> + 24.3.1/1, which says "In the case of an output iterator, the types + iterator_traits<Iterator>::difference_type + iterator_traits<Iterator>::value_type are both defined as void." + </li> +</ul> + +<p>The first of these passages suggests that "*i" is supposed to +return a useful value, which contradicts the note in 24.1.2/2 saying +that the only valid use of "*i" for output iterators is in an +expression of the form "*i = t". The second of these passages appears +to contradict Table 73, because it suggests that "*i"'s return value +should be void. The second passage is also broken in the case of a an +iterator type, like non-const pointers, that satisfies both the output +iterator requirements and the forward iterator requirements.</p> + +<p>What should the standard say about <tt>*i</tt>'s return value when +i is an output iterator, and what should it say about that t is in the +expression "*i = t"? Finally, should the standard say anything about +output iterators' pointer and reference types?</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>24.1 p1, change</p> + +<blockquote> +<p>All iterators <tt>i</tt> support the expression <tt>*i</tt>, resulting +in a value of some class, enumeration, or built-in type <tt>T</tt>, +called the value type of the iterator.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>to</p> + +<blockquote> +<p>All input iterators <tt>i</tt> support the expression <tt>*i</tt>, +resulting in a value of some class, enumeration, or built-in type +<tt>T</tt>, called the value type of the iterator. All output +iterators support the expression <tt>*i = o</tt> where <tt>o</tt> is a +value of some type that is in the set of types that are <i>writable</i> to +the particular iterator type of <tt>i</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>24.1 p9, add</p> + +<blockquote> +<p><tt>o</tt> denotes a value of some type that is writable to the +output iterator. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>Table 73, change</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>*a = t +</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p>to</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>*r = o +</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p>and change</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>*r++ = t +</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p>to</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>*r++ = o +</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[post-Redmond: Jeremy provided wording]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The LWG considered two options: change all of the language that +seems to imply that output iterators have value types, thus making it +clear that output iterators have no value types, or else define value +types for output iterator consistently. The LWG chose the former +option, because it seems clear that output iterators were never +intended to have value types. This was a deliberate design decision, +and any language suggesting otherwise is simply a mistake.</p> + +<p>A future revision of the standard may wish to revisit this design +decision.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="325"></a>325. Misleading text in moneypunct<>::do_grouping</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.6.3.2 [locale.moneypunct.virtuals] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2001-07-02 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#locale.moneypunct.virtuals">issues</a> in [locale.moneypunct.virtuals].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The Returns clause in 22.2.6.3.2, p3 says about +moneypunct<charT>::do_grouping() +</p> + +<blockquote><p> + Returns: A pattern defined identically as the result of + numpunct<charT>::do_grouping().241) +</p></blockquote> + +<p>Footnote 241 then reads</p> + +<blockquote><p> + This is most commonly the value "\003" (not "3"). +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +The returns clause seems to imply that the two member functions must +return an identical value which in reality may or may not be true, +since the facets are usually implemented in terms of struct std::lconv +and return the value of the grouping and mon_grouping, respectively. +The footnote also implies that the member function of the moneypunct +facet (rather than the overridden virtual functions in moneypunct_byname) +most commonly return "\003", which contradicts the C standard which +specifies the value of "" for the (most common) C locale. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Replace the text in Returns clause in 22.2.6.3.2, p3 with the following:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + Returns: A pattern defined identically as, but not necessarily + equal to, the result of numpunct<charT>::do_grouping().241) +</p></blockquote> + +<p>and replace the text in Footnote 241 with the following:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + To specify grouping by 3s the value is "\003", not "3". +</p></blockquote> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +The fundamental problem is that the description of the locale facet +virtuals serves two purposes: describing the behavior of the base +class, and describing the meaning of and constraints on the behavior +in arbitrary derived classes. The new wording makes that separation a +little bit clearer. The footnote (which is nonnormative) is not +supposed to say what the grouping is in the "C" locale or in any other +locale. It is just a reminder that the values are interpreted as small +integers, not ASCII characters. +</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="327"></a>327. Typo in time_get facet in table 52</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.3.1.1.1 [locale.category] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Tiki Wan <b>Opened:</b> 2001-07-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#locale.category">issues</a> in [locale.category].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#447">447</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The <tt>wchar_t</tt> versions of <tt>time_get</tt> and +<tt>time_get_byname</tt> are listed incorrectly in table 52, +required instantiations. In both cases the second template +parameter is given as OutputIterator. It should instead be +InputIterator, since these are input facets.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In table 52, required instantiations, in +22.3.1.1.1 [locale.category], change</p> +<pre> time_get<wchar_t, OutputIterator> + time_get_byname<wchar_t, OutputIterator> +</pre> +<p>to</p> +<pre> time_get<wchar_t, InputIterator> + time_get_byname<wchar_t, InputIterator> +</pre> + +<p><i>[Redmond: Very minor change in proposed resolution. Original had +a typo, wchart instead of wchar_t.]</i></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="328"></a>328. Bad sprintf format modifier in money_put<>::do_put()</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.6.2.2 [locale.money.put.virtuals] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2001-07-07 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The sprintf format string , "%.01f" (that's the digit one), in the +description of the do_put() member functions of the money_put facet in +22.2.6.2.2, p1 is incorrect. First, the f format specifier is wrong +for values of type long double, and second, the precision of 01 +doesn't seem to make sense. What was most likely intended was +"%.0Lf"., that is a precision of zero followed by the L length +modifier.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change the format string to "%.0Lf".</p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p><p>Fixes an obvious typo</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="329"></a>329. vector capacity, reserve and reallocation</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.4.1.2 [vector.capacity], 23.4.1.4 [vector.modifiers] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Anthony Williams <b>Opened:</b> 2001-07-13 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#vector.capacity">issues</a> in [vector.capacity].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +There is an apparent contradiction about which circumstances can cause +a reallocation of a vector in Section 23.4.1.2 [vector.capacity] and +section 23.4.1.4 [vector.modifiers]. +</p> + +<p>23.4.1.2 [vector.capacity],p5 says:</p> +<blockquote><p> +Notes: Reallocation invalidates all the references, pointers, and iterators +referring to the elements in the sequence. It is guaranteed that no +reallocation takes place during insertions that happen after a call to +reserve() until the time when an insertion would make the size of the vector +greater than the size specified in the most recent call to reserve(). +</p></blockquote> + +<p>Which implies if I do</p> + +<pre> std::vector<int> vec; + vec.reserve(23); + vec.reserve(0); + vec.insert(vec.end(),1); +</pre> + +<p>then the implementation may reallocate the vector for the insert, +as the size specified in the previous call to reserve was zero.</p> + +<p>However, the previous paragraphs (23.4.1.2 [vector.capacity], p1-2) state:</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +(capacity) Returns: The total number of elements the vector +can hold without requiring reallocation +</p> +<p> +...After reserve(), capacity() is greater or equal to the +argument of reserve if reallocation happens; and equal to the previous value +of capacity() otherwise... +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +This implies that vec.capacity() is still 23, and so the insert() +should not require a reallocation, as vec.size() is 0. This is backed +up by 23.4.1.4 [vector.modifiers], p1: +</p> +<blockquote><p> +(insert) Notes: Causes reallocation if the new size is greater than the old +capacity. +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +Though this doesn't rule out reallocation if the new size is less +than the old capacity, I think the intent is clear. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change the wording of 23.4.1.2 [vector.capacity] paragraph 5 to:</p> + +<blockquote><p> +Notes: Reallocation invalidates all the references, pointers, and +iterators referring to the elements in the sequence. It is guaranteed +that no reallocation takes place during insertions that happen after a +call to reserve() until the time when an insertion would make the size +of the vector greater than the value of capacity(). +</p></blockquote> + +<p><i>[Redmond: original proposed resolution was modified slightly. In +the original, the guarantee was that there would be no reallocation +until the size would be greater than the value of capacity() after the +most recent call to reserve(). The LWG did not believe that the +"after the most recent call to reserve()" added any useful +information.]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>There was general agreement that, when reserve() is called twice in +succession and the argument to the second invocation is smaller than +the argument to the first, the intent was for the second invocation to +have no effect. Wording implying that such cases have an effect on +reallocation guarantees was inadvertant.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="331"></a>331. bad declaration of destructor for ios_base::failure</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.5.2.1.1 [ios::failure] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> PremAnand M. Rao <b>Opened:</b> 2001-08-23 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#ios::failure">issues</a> in [ios::failure].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +With the change in 17.6.4.12 [res.on.exception.handling] to state + "An implementation may strengthen the exception-specification for a + non-virtual function by removing listed exceptions." +(issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#119">119</a>) +and the following declaration of ~failure() in ios_base::failure +</p> +<pre> namespace std { + class ios_base::failure : public exception { + public: + ... + virtual ~failure(); + ... + }; + } +</pre> +<p>the class failure cannot be implemented since in 18.7.1 [type.info] the destructor of class exception has an empty +exception specification:</p> +<pre> namespace std { + class exception { + public: + ... + virtual ~exception() throw(); + ... + }; + } +</pre> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Remove the declaration of ~failure().</p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The proposed resolution is consistent with the way that destructors +of other classes derived from <tt>exception</tt> are handled.</p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="333"></a>333. does endl imply synchronization with the device?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.2.8 [ostream.manip] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> PremAnand M. Rao <b>Opened:</b> 2001-08-27 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>A footnote in 27.7.2.8 [ostream.manip] states:</p> +<blockquote><p> + [Footnote: The effect of executing cout << endl is to insert a + newline character in the output sequence controlled by cout, then + synchronize it with any external file with which it might be + associated. --- end foonote] +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +Does the term "file" here refer to the external device? +This leads to some implementation ambiguity on systems with fully +buffered files where a newline does not cause a flush to the device. +</p> + +<p> +Choosing to sync with the device leads to significant performance +penalties for each call to endl, while not sync-ing leads to +errors under special circumstances. +</p> + +<p> +I could not find any other statement that explicitly defined +the behavior one way or the other. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Remove footnote 300 from section 27.7.2.8 [ostream.manip].</p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>We already have normative text saying what <tt>endl</tt> does: it +inserts a newline character and calls <tt>flush</tt>. This footnote +is at best redundant, at worst (as this issue says) misleading, +because it appears to make promises about what <tt>flush</tt> +does.</p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="334"></a>334. map::operator[] specification forces inefficient implementation</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.6.1.2 [map.access] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Andrea Griffini <b>Opened:</b> 2001-09-02 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#map.access">issues</a> in [map.access].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The current standard describes map::operator[] using a +code example. That code example is however quite +inefficient because it requires several useless copies +of both the passed key_type value and of default +constructed mapped_type instances. +My opinion is that was not meant by the comitee to +require all those temporary copies. +</p> + +<p>Currently map::operator[] behaviour is specified as: </p> +<pre> Returns: + (*((insert(make_pair(x, T()))).first)).second. +</pre> + +<p> +This specification however uses make_pair that is a +template function of which parameters in this case +will be deduced being of type const key_type& and +const T&. This will create a pair<key_type,T> that +isn't the correct type expected by map::insert so +another copy will be required using the template +conversion constructor available in pair to build +the required pair<const key_type,T> instance. +</p> + +<p>If we consider calling of key_type copy constructor +and mapped_type default constructor and copy +constructor as observable behaviour (as I think we +should) then the standard is in this place requiring +two copies of a key_type element plus a default +construction and two copy construction of a mapped_type +(supposing the addressed element is already present +in the map; otherwise at least another copy +construction for each type). +</p> + +<p>A simple (half) solution would be replacing the description with:</p> +<pre> Returns: + (*((insert(value_type(x, T()))).first)).second. +</pre> + +<p>This will remove the wrong typed pair construction that +requires one extra copy of both key and value.</p> + +<p>However still the using of map::insert requires temporary +objects while the operation, from a logical point of view, +doesn't require any. </p> + +<p>I think that a better solution would be leaving free an +implementer to use a different approach than map::insert +that, because of its interface, forces default constructed +temporaries and copies in this case. +The best solution in my opinion would be just requiring +map::operator[] to return a reference to the mapped_type +part of the contained element creating a default element +with the specified key if no such an element is already +present in the container. Also a logarithmic complexity +requirement should be specified for the operation. +</p> + +<p> +This would allow library implementers to write alternative +implementations not using map::insert and reaching optimal +performance in both cases of the addressed element being +present or absent from the map (no temporaries at all and +just the creation of a new pair inside the container if +the element isn't present). +Some implementer has already taken this option but I think +that the current wording of the standard rules that as +non-conforming. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +Replace 23.6.1.2 [map.access] paragraph 1 with +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +-1- Effects: If there is no key equivalent to x in the map, inserts +value_type(x, T()) into the map. +</p> +<p> +-2- Returns: A reference to the mapped_type corresponding to x in *this. +</p> +<p> +-3- Complexity: logarithmic. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[This is the second option mentioned above. Howard provided +wording. We may also wish to have a blanket statement somewhere in +clause 17 saying that we do not intend the semantics of sample code +fragments to be interpreted as specifing exactly how many copies are +made. See issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#98">98</a> for a similar problem.]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +This is the second solution described above; as noted, it is +consistent with existing practice. +</p> + +<p>Note that we now need to specify the complexity explicitly, because +we are no longer defining <tt>operator[]</tt> in terms of +<tt>insert</tt>.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="335"></a>335. minor issue with char_traits, table 37</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.2.1 [char.traits.require] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Andy Sawyer <b>Opened:</b> 2001-09-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Table 37, in 21.2.1 [char.traits.require], descibes char_traits::assign +as: +</p> +<pre> X::assign(c,d) assigns c = d. +</pre> + +<p>And para 1 says:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + [...] c and d denote values of type CharT [...] +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +Naturally, if c and d are <i>values</i>, then the assignment is +(effectively) meaningless. It's clearly intended that (in the case of +assign, at least), 'c' is intended to be a reference type. +</p> + +<p>I did a quick survey of the four implementations I happened to have +lying around, and sure enough they all have signatures:</p> +<pre> assign( charT&, const charT& ); +</pre> + +<p>(or the equivalent). It's also described this way in Nico's book. +(Not to mention the synopses of char_traits<char> in 21.1.3.1 +and char_traits<wchar_t> in 21.1.3.2...) +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Add the following to 21.1.1 para 1:</p> +<blockquote><p> + r denotes an lvalue of CharT +</p></blockquote> + +<p>and change the description of assign in the table to:</p> +<pre> X::assign(r,d) assigns r = d +</pre> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="336"></a>336. Clause 17 lack of references to deprecated headers</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17 [library] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Detlef Vollmann <b>Opened:</b> 2001-09-05 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index-open.html#library">active issues</a> in [library].</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#library">issues</a> in [library].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>From c++std-edit-873:</p> + +<p>17.6.1.2 [headers], Table 11. In this table, the header +<strstream> is missing.</p> + +<p>This shows a general problem: The whole clause 17 refers quite +often to clauses 18 through 27, but D.7 is also a part of the standard +library (though a deprecated one).</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p>To 17.6.1.2 [headers] Table 11, C++ Library Headers, add +"<strstream>".</p> + +<p>In the following places, change "clauses 17 through 27" to "clauses +17 through 27 and Annex D":</p> + +<ul> +<li>1.2 [intro.refs] Normative references/1/footnote 1</li> +<li>1.3 [intro.defs] Definitions/1</li> +<li>7 [dcl.dcl] Library introduction/9</li> +<li>17.5 [description] Method of description (Informative)/1</li> +<li>17.5.2.1.4 [character.seq] Character sequences/1/bullet 2</li> +<li>17.5.2.2 [functions.within.classes] Functions within classes/1</li> +<li>17.5.2.3 [objects.within.classes] Private members/1/(2 places)</li> +<li>17.6 [requirements] Library-wide requirements/1</li> +<li>17.6.1.2 [headers] Headers/4</li> +<li>17.6.3.6 [replacement.functions] Replacement functions/1</li> +<li>17.6.4.4 [global.functions] Global or non-member functions/2</li> +<li>17.6.4.10 [protection.within.classes] Protection within classes/1</li> +</ul> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="337"></a>337. replace_copy_if's template parameter should be InputIterator</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.3.5 [alg.replace] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Detlef Vollmann <b>Opened:</b> 2001-09-07 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#alg.replace">issues</a> in [alg.replace].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>From c++std-edit-876:</p> + +<p> +In section 25.3.5 [alg.replace] before p4: The name of the first +parameter of template replace_copy_if should be "InputIterator" +instead of "Iterator". According to 17.5.2.1 [type.descriptions] p1 the +parameter name conveys real normative meaning. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change <tt>Iterator</tt> to <tt>InputIterator</tt>.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="338"></a>338. is whitespace allowed between `-' and a digit?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4 [locale.categories] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2001-09-17 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#locale.categories">issues</a> in [locale.categories].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +From Stage 2 processing in 22.4.2.1.2 [facet.num.get.virtuals], p8 and 9 (the +original text or the text corrected by the proposed resolution of +issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#221">221</a>) it seems clear that no whitespace is allowed +within a number, but 22.4.3.1 [locale.numpunct], p2, which gives the +format for integer and floating point values, says that whitespace is +optional between a plusminus and a sign. +</p> + +<p> +The text needs to be clarified to either consistently allow or +disallow whitespace between a plusminus and a sign. It might be +worthwhile to consider the fact that the C library stdio facility does +not permit whitespace embedded in numbers and neither does the C or +C++ core language (the syntax of integer-literals is given in 2.14.2 [lex.icon], that of floating-point-literals in 2.14.4 [lex.fcon] of the C++ standard). +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change the first part of 22.4.3.1 [locale.numpunct] paragraph 2 from:</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +The syntax for number formats is as follows, where <tt>digit</tt> +represents the radix set specified by the <tt>fmtflags</tt> argument +value, <tt>whitespace</tt> is as determined by the facet +<tt>ctype<charT></tt> (22.2.1.1), and <tt>thousands-sep</tt> and +<tt>decimal-point</tt> are the results of corresponding +<tt>numpunct<charT></tt> members. Integer values have the +format: +</p> +<pre> integer ::= [sign] units + sign ::= plusminus [whitespace] + plusminus ::= '+' | '-' + units ::= digits [thousands-sep units] + digits ::= digit [digits] +</pre> +</blockquote> +<p>to:</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +The syntax for number formats is as follows, where <tt>digit</tt> +represents the radix set specified by the <tt>fmtflags</tt> argument +value, and <tt>thousands-sep</tt> and <tt>decimal-point</tt> are the +results of corresponding <tt>numpunct<charT></tt> members. +Integer values have the format: +</p> +<pre> integer ::= [sign] units + sign ::= plusminus + plusminus ::= '+' | '-' + units ::= digits [thousands-sep units] + digits ::= digit [digits] +</pre> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>It's not clear whether the format described in 22.4.3.1 [locale.numpunct] paragraph 2 has any normative weight: nothing in the +standard says how, or whether, it's used. However, there's no reason +for it to differ gratuitously from the very specific description of +numeric processing in 22.4.2.1.2 [facet.num.get.virtuals]. The proposed +resolution removes all mention of "whitespace" from that format.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="339"></a>339. definition of bitmask type restricted to clause 27</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.1 [category.ctype], 17.5.2.1.3 [bitmask.types] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2001-09-17 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#category.ctype">issues</a> in [category.ctype].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The ctype_category::mask type is declared to be an enum in 22.4.1 [category.ctype] with p1 then stating that it is a bitmask type, most +likely referring to the definition of bitmask type in 17.5.2.1.3 [bitmask.types], p1. However, the said definition only applies to +clause 27, making the reference in 22.2.1 somewhat dubious. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Clarify 17.3.2.1.2, p1 by changing the current text from</p> + <blockquote><p> + Several types defined in clause 27 are bitmask types. Each bitmask type + can be implemented as an enumerated type that overloads certain operators, + as an integer type, or as a bitset (20.5 [template.bitset]). + </p></blockquote> +<p>to read</p> + <blockquote><p> + Several types defined in clauses lib.language.support through + lib.input.output and Annex D are bitmask types. Each bitmask type can + be implemented as an enumerated type that overloads certain operators, + as an integer type, or as a bitset (lib.template.bitset). + </p></blockquote> + +<p> +Additionally, change the definition in 22.2.1 to adopt the same +convention as in clause 27 by replacing the existing text with the +following (note, in particluar, the cross-reference to 17.3.2.1.2 in +22.2.1, p1): +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p>22.2.1 The ctype category [lib.category.ctype]</p> +<pre>namespace std { + class ctype_base { + public: + typedef <b><i>T</i></b> mask; + + // numeric values are for exposition only. + static const mask space = 1 << 0; + static const mask print = 1 << 1; + static const mask cntrl = 1 << 2; + static const mask upper = 1 << 3; + static const mask lower = 1 << 4; + static const mask alpha = 1 << 5; + static const mask digit = 1 << 6; + static const mask punct = 1 << 7; + static const mask xdigit = 1 << 8; + static const mask alnum = alpha | digit; + static const mask graph = alnum | punct; + }; +} +</pre> + +<p>The type <tt>mask</tt> is a bitmask type (17.5.2.1.3 [bitmask.types]).</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[Curaçao: The LWG notes that T above should be bold-italics to be +consistent with the rest of the standard.]</i></p> + + + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="340"></a>340. interpretation of <tt>has_facet<Facet>(loc)</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.3.1.1.1 [locale.category] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2001-09-18 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#locale.category">issues</a> in [locale.category].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +It's unclear whether 22.1.1.1.1, p3 says that +<tt>has_facet<Facet>(loc)</tt> returns true for any <tt>Facet</tt> +from Table 51 or whether it includes Table 52 as well: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +For any locale <tt>loc</tt> either constructed, or returned by +locale::classic(), and any facet <tt>Facet</tt> that is a member of a +standard category, <tt>has_facet<Facet>(loc)</tt> is true. Each +locale member function which takes a <tt>locale::category</tt> +argument operates on the corresponding set of facets. +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +It seems that it comes down to which facets are considered to be members of a +standard category. Intuitively, I would classify all the facets in Table 52 as +members of their respective standard categories, but there are an unbounded set +of them... +</p> + +<p> +The paragraph implies that, for instance, <tt>has_facet<num_put<C, +OutputIterator> >(loc)</tt> must always return true. I don't think that's +possible. If it were, then <tt>use_facet<num_put<C, OutputIterator> +>(loc)</tt> would have to return a reference to a distinct object for each +valid specialization of <tt>num_put<C, OutputIteratory></tt>, which is +clearly impossible. +</p> + +<p> +On the other hand, if none of the facets in Table 52 is a member of a standard +category then none of the locale member functions that operate on entire +categories of facets will work properly. +</p> + +<p> +It seems that what p3 should mention that it's required (permitted?) +to hold only for specializations of <tt>Facet</tt> from Table 52 on +<tt>C</tt> from the set { <tt>char</tt>, <tt>wchar_t</tt> }, and +<tt>InputIterator</tt> and <tt>OutputIterator</tt> from the set of +{ +{i,o}<tt>streambuf_iterator</tt><{<tt>char</tt>,<tt>wchar_t</tt>}<tt>></tt> +}. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 22.3.1.1.1 [locale.category], paragraph 3, change +"that is a member of a standard category" to "shown in Table 51".</p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The facets in Table 52 are an unbounded set. Locales should not be +required to contain an infinite number of facets.</p> + +<p>It's not necessary to talk about which values of InputIterator and +OutputIterator must be supported. Table 51 already contains a +complete list of the ones we need.</p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="341"></a>341. Vector reallocation and swap</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.4.1.2 [vector.capacity] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Anthony Williams <b>Opened:</b> 2001-09-27 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#vector.capacity">issues</a> in [vector.capacity].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>It is a common idiom to reduce the capacity of a vector by swapping it with +an empty one:</p> +<pre> std::vector<SomeType> vec; + // fill vec with data + std::vector<SomeType>().swap(vec); + // vec is now empty, with minimal capacity +</pre> + +<p>However, the wording of 23.4.1.2 [vector.capacity]paragraph 5 prevents +the capacity of a vector being reduced, following a call to +reserve(). This invalidates the idiom, as swap() is thus prevented +from reducing the capacity. The proposed wording for issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#329">329</a> does not affect this. Consequently, the example above +requires the temporary to be expanded to cater for the contents of +vec, and the contents be copied across. This is a linear-time +operation.</p> + +<p>However, the container requirements state that swap must have constant +complexity (23.2 [container.requirements] note to table 65).</p> + +<p>This is an important issue, as reallocation affects the validity of +references and iterators.</p> + +<p>If the wording of 23.2.4.2p5 is taken to be the desired intent, then +references and iterators remain valid after a call to swap, if they refer to +an element before the new end() of the vector into which they originally +pointed, in which case they refer to the element at the same index position. +Iterators and references that referred to an element whose index position +was beyond the new end of the vector are invalidated.</p> + +<p>If the note to table 65 is taken as the desired intent, then there are two +possibilities with regard to iterators and references:</p> + +<ol> +<li>All Iterators and references into both vectors are invalidated.</li> +<li>Iterators and references into either vector remain valid, and remain +pointing to the same element. Consequently iterators and references that +referred to one vector now refer to the other, and vice-versa.</li> +</ol> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Add a new paragraph after 23.4.1.2 [vector.capacity] paragraph 5:</p> +<blockquote> +<pre> void swap(vector<T,Allocator>& x); +</pre> +<p><b>Effects:</b> Exchanges the contents and capacity() of <tt>*this</tt> +with that of <tt>x</tt>.</p> +<p><b>Complexity:</b> Constant time.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[This solves the problem reported for this issue. We may also +have a problem with a circular definition of swap() for other +containers.]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +swap should be constant time. The clear intent is that it should just +do pointer twiddling, and that it should exchange all properties of +the two vectors, including their reallocation guarantees. +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="345"></a>345. type tm in <cwchar></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.7 [c.strings] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Clark Nelson <b>Opened:</b> 2001-10-19 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#c.strings">issues</a> in [c.strings].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +C99, and presumably amendment 1 to C90, specify that <wchar.h> +declares struct tm as an incomplete type. However, table 48 in 21.7 [c.strings] does not mention the type tm as being declared in +<cwchar>. Is this omission intentional or accidental? +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In section 21.7 [c.strings], add "tm" to table 48.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="346"></a>346. Some iterator member functions should be const</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> X [iterator.concepts] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Jeremy Siek <b>Opened:</b> 2001-10-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#iterator.concepts">issues</a> in [iterator.concepts].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Iterator member functions and operators that do not change the state +of the iterator should be defined as const member functions or as +functions that take iterators either by const reference or by +value. The standard does not explicitly state which functions should +be const. Since this a fairly common mistake, the following changes +are suggested to make this explicit.</p> + +<p>The tables almost indicate constness properly through naming: r +for non-const and a,b for const iterators. The following changes +make this more explicit and also fix a couple problems.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In X [iterator.concepts] Change the first section of p9 from +"In the following sections, a and b denote values of X..." to +"In the following sections, a and b denote values of type const X...".</p> + +<p>In Table 73, change</p> +<pre> a->m U& ... +</pre> + +<p>to</p> + +<pre> a->m const U& ... + r->m U& ... +</pre> + +<p>In Table 73 expression column, change</p> + +<pre> *a = t +</pre> + +<p>to</p> + +<pre> *r = t +</pre> + +<p><i>[Redmond: The container requirements should be reviewed to see if +the same problem appears there.]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="347"></a>347. locale::category and bitmask requirements</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.3.1.1.1 [locale.category] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> P.J. Plauger, Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 2001-10-23 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#locale.category">issues</a> in [locale.category].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In 22.3.1.1.1 [locale.category] paragraph 1, the category members +are described as bitmask elements. In fact, the bitmask requirements +in 17.5.2.1.3 [bitmask.types] don't seem quite right: <tt>none</tt> +and <tt>all</tt> are bitmask constants, not bitmask elements.</p> + +<p>In particular, the requirements for <tt>none</tt> interact poorly +with the requirement that the LC_* constants from the C library must +be recognizable as C++ locale category constants. LC_* values should +not be mixed with these values to make category values.</p> + +<p>We have two options for the proposed resolution. Informally: +option 1 removes the requirement that LC_* values be recognized as +category arguments. Option 2 changes the category type so that this +requirement is implementable, by allowing <tt>none</tt> to be some +value such as 0x1000 instead of 0.</p> + +<p>Nathan writes: "I believe my proposed resolution [Option 2] merely +re-expresses the status quo more clearly, without introducing any +changes beyond resolving the DR.</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Replace the first two paragraphs of 22.3.1.1 [locale.types] with:</p> +<blockquote> +<pre> typedef int category; +</pre> + +<p>Valid category values include the <tt>locale</tt> member bitmask +elements <tt>collate</tt>, <tt>ctype</tt>, <tt>monetary</tt>, +<tt>numeric</tt>, <tt>time</tt>, and <tt>messages</tt>, each of which +represents a single locale category. In addition, <tt>locale</tt> member +bitmask constant <tt>none</tt> is defined as zero and represents no +category. And locale member bitmask constant <tt>all</tt> is defined such that +the expression</p> +<pre> (collate | ctype | monetary | numeric | time | messages | all) == all +</pre> +<p> +is <tt>true</tt>, and represents the union of all categories. Further +the expression <tt>(X | Y)</tt>, where <tt>X</tt> and <tt>Y</tt> each +represent a single category, represents the union of the two +categories. +</p> + +<p> +<tt>locale</tt> member functions expecting a <tt>category</tt> +argument require one of the <tt>category</tt> values defined above, or +the union of two or more such values. Such a <tt>category</tt> +argument identifies a set of locale categories. Each locale category, +in turn, identifies a set of locale facets, including at least those +shown in Table 51: +</p> +</blockquote> +<p><i>[Curaçao: need input from locale experts.]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> + +<p>The LWG considered, and rejected, an alternate proposal (described + as "Option 2" in the discussion). The main reason for rejecting it + was that library implementors were concerened about implementation + difficult, given that getting a C++ library to work smoothly with a + separately written C library is already a delicate business. Some + library implementers were also concerned about the issue of adding + extra locale categories.</p> + +<blockquote> +<p><b>Option 2:</b> <br> +Replace the first paragraph of 22.3.1.1 [locale.types] with:</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +Valid category values include the enumerated values. In addition, the +result of applying commutative operators | and & to any two valid +values is valid, and results in the setwise union and intersection, +respectively, of the argument categories. The values <tt>all</tt> and +<tt>none</tt> are defined such that for any valid value <tt>cat</tt>, the +expressions <tt>(cat | all == all)</tt>, <tt>(cat & all == cat)</tt>, +<tt>(cat | none == cat)</tt> and <tt>(cat & none == none)</tt> are +true. For non-equal values <tt>cat1</tt> and <tt>cat2</tt> of the +remaining enumerated values, <tt>(cat1 & cat2 == none)</tt> is true. +For any valid categories <tt>cat1</tt> and <tt>cat2</tt>, the result +of <tt>(cat1 & ~cat2)</tt> is valid, and equals the setwise union of +those categories found in <tt>cat1</tt> but not found in <tt>cat2</tt>. +[Footnote: it is not required that <tt>all</tt> equal the setwise union +of the other enumerated values; implementations may add extra categories.] +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="349"></a>349. Minor typographical error in ostream_iterator</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 24.6.2 [ostream.iterator] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Andy Sawyer <b>Opened:</b> 2001-10-24 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>24.5.2 [lib.ostream.iterator] states:</p> +<pre> [...] + + private: + // basic_ostream<charT,traits>* out_stream; exposition only + // const char* delim; exposition only +</pre> + +<p>Whilst it's clearly marked "exposition only", I suspect 'delim' +should be of type 'const charT*'.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 24.6.2 [ostream.iterator], replace <tt>const char* delim</tt> with +<tt>const charT* delim</tt>. +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="352"></a>352. missing fpos requirements</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.2.2 [char.traits.typedefs] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2001-12-02 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#char.traits.typedefs">issues</a> in [char.traits.typedefs].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +<i>(1)</i> +There are no requirements on the <tt>stateT</tt> template parameter of +<tt>fpos</tt> listed in 27.4.3. The interface appears to require that +the type be at least Assignable and CopyConstructible (27.4.3.1, p1), +and I think also DefaultConstructible (to implement the operations in +Table 88). +</p> +<p> +21.1.2, p3, however, only requires that +<tt>char_traits<charT>::state_type</tt> meet the requirements of +CopyConstructible types. +</p> +<p> +<i>(2)</i> +Additionally, the <tt>stateT</tt> template argument has no +corresponding typedef in fpos which might make it difficult to use in +generic code. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Modify 21.1.2, p4 from +</p> +<p> + Requires: <tt>state_type</tt> shall meet the requirements of + CopyConstructible types (20.1.3). +</p> +<p> + Requires: state_type shall meet the requirements of Assignable + (23.1, p4), CopyConstructible (20.1.3), and + DefaultConstructible (20.1.4) types. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The LWG feels this is two issues, as indicated above. The first is +a defect---std::basic_fstream is unimplementable without these +additional requirements---and the proposed resolution fixes it. The +second is questionable; who would use that typedef? The class +template fpos is used only in a very few places, all of which know the +state type already. Unless motivation is provided, the second should +be considered NAD.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="353"></a>353. <tt>std::pair</tt> missing template assignment</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.3.5 [pairs] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2001-12-02 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-19</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#pairs">issues</a> in [pairs].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The class template <tt>std::pair</tt> defines a template ctor (20.2.2, p4) but +no template assignment operator. This may lead to inefficient code since +assigning an object of <tt>pair<C, D></tt> to <tt>pair<A, B></tt> +where the types <tt>C</tt> and <tt>D</tt> are distinct from but convertible to +<tt>A</tt> and <tt>B</tt>, respectively, results in a call to the template copy +ctor to construct an unnamed temporary of type <tt>pair<A, B></tt> +followed by an ordinary (perhaps implicitly defined) assignment operator, +instead of just a straight assignment. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add the following declaration to the definition of <tt>std::pair</tt>: +</p> +<pre> template<class U, class V> + pair& operator=(const pair<U, V> &p); +</pre> +<p> +And also add a paragraph describing the effects of the function template to the +end of 20.2.2: +</p> +<pre> template<class U, class V> + pair& operator=(const pair<U, V> &p); +</pre> +<p> + <b>Effects</b>: <tt>first = p.first;</tt> + <tt>second = p.second;</tt> + <b>Returns</b>: <tt>*this</tt> +</p> + +<p><i>[Curaçao: There is no indication this is was anything other than +a design decision, and thus NAD. May be appropriate for a future +standard.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Pre Bellevue: It was recognized that this was taken care of by +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2005/n1856.html">N1856</a>, +and thus moved from NAD Future to <del>NAD Editorial</del><ins>Resolved</ins>. +]</i></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="354"></a>354. Associative container lower/upper bound requirements</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2.4 [associative.reqmts] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Hans Aberg <b>Opened:</b> 2001-12-17 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index-open.html#associative.reqmts">active issues</a> in [associative.reqmts].</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#associative.reqmts">issues</a> in [associative.reqmts].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Discussions in the thread "Associative container lower/upper bound +requirements" on comp.std.c++ suggests that there is a defect in the +C++ standard, Table 69 of section 23.1.2, "Associative containers", +[lib.associative.reqmts]. It currently says:</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +a.find(k): returns an iterator pointing to an element with the key equivalent to +k, or a.end() if such an element is not found. +</p> + +<p> +a.lower_bound(k): returns an iterator pointing to the first element with +key not less than k. +</p> + +<p> +a.upper_bound(k): returns an iterator pointing to the first element with +key greater than k. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +We have "or a.end() if such an element is not found" for +<tt>find</tt>, but not for <tt>upper_bound</tt> or +<tt>lower_bound</tt>. As the text stands, one would be forced to +insert a new element into the container and return an iterator to that +in case the sought iterator does not exist, which does not seem to be +the intention (and not possible with the "const" versions). +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p>Change Table 69 of section 23.2.4 [associative.reqmts] indicated entries +to:</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +a.lower_bound(k): returns an iterator pointing to the first element with +key not less than k, or a.end() if such an element is not found. +</p> + +<p> +a.upper_bound(k): returns an iterator pointing to the first element with +key greater than k, or a.end() if such an element is not found. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[Curaçao: LWG reviewed PR.]</i></p> + + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="355"></a>355. Operational semantics for a.back()</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2.3 [sequence.reqmts] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Yaroslav Mironov <b>Opened:</b> 2002-01-23 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#sequence.reqmts">issues</a> in [sequence.reqmts].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p>Table 68 "Optional Sequence Operations" in 23.1.1/12 +specifies operational semantics for "a.back()" as +"*--a.end()", which may be ill-formed <i>[because calling +operator-- on a temporary (the return) of a built-in type is +ill-formed]</i>, provided a.end() returns a simple pointer rvalue +(this is almost always the case for std::vector::end(), for +example). Thus, the specification is not only incorrect, it +demonstrates a dangerous construct: "--a.end()" may +successfully compile and run as intended, but after changing the type +of the container or the mode of compilation it may produce +compile-time error. </p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change the specification in table 68 "Optional Sequence +Operations" in 23.1.1/12 for "a.back()" from</p> + + +<blockquote><pre>*--a.end() +</pre></blockquote> + +<p>to</p> + +<blockquote><pre> { iterator tmp = a.end(); --tmp; return *tmp; } +</pre></blockquote> + +<p>and the specification for "a.pop_back()" from</p> + +<blockquote><pre>a.erase(--a.end()) +</pre></blockquote> + +<p>to</p> + +<blockquote><pre> { iterator tmp = a.end(); --tmp; a.erase(tmp); } +</pre></blockquote> + +<p><i>[Curaçao: LWG changed PR from "{ X::iterator tmp = +a.end(); return *--tmp; }" to "*a.rbegin()", and from +"{ X::iterator tmp = a.end(); a.erase(--tmp); }" to +"a.erase(rbegin())".]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[There is a second possible defect; table 68 "Optional +Sequence Operations" in the "Operational Semantics" +column uses operations present only in the "Reversible +Container" requirements, yet there is no stated dependency +between these separate requirements tables. Ask in Santa Cruz if the +LWG would like a new issue opened.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Santa Cruz: the proposed resolution is even worse than what's in + the current standard: erase is undefined for reverse iterator. If + we're going to make the change, we need to define a temporary and + use operator--. Additionally, we don't know how prevalent this is: + do we need to make this change in more than one place? Martin has + volunteered to review the standard and see if this problem occurs + elsewhere.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Oxford: Matt provided new wording to address the concerns raised + in Santa Cruz. It does not appear that this problem appears + anywhere else in clauses 23 or 24.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Kona: In definition of operational semantics of back(), change +"*tmp" to "return *tmp;"]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="358"></a>358. interpreting <tt>thousands_sep</tt> after a <tt>decimal_point</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.2.1.2 [facet.num.get.virtuals] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2002-03-12 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#facet.num.get.virtuals">issues</a> in [facet.num.get.virtuals].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +I don't think <tt>thousands_sep</tt> is being treated correctly after +decimal_point has been seen. Since grouping applies only to the +integral part of the number, the first such occurrence should, IMO, +terminate Stage 2. (If it does not terminate it, then 22.2.2.1.2, p12 +and 22.2.3.1.2, p3 need to explain how <tt>thousands_sep</tt> is to be +interpreted in the fractional part of a number.) +</p> + +<p> +The easiest change I can think of that resolves this issue would be +something like below. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change the first sentence of 22.2.2.1.2, p9 from +</p> + +<blockquote><p> + If discard is true then the position of the character is + remembered, but the character is otherwise ignored. If it is not + discarded, then a check is made to determine if c is allowed as + the next character of an input field of the conversion specifier + returned by stage 1. If so it is accumulated. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>to</p> + +<blockquote><p> + If <tt>discard</tt> is true, then if <tt>'.'</tt> has not yet been + accumulated, then the position of the character is remembered, but + the character is otherwise ignored. Otherwise, if <tt>'.'</tt> has + already been accumulated, the character is discarded and Stage 2 + terminates. ... +</p></blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>We believe this reflects the intent of the Standard. Thousands sep + characters after the decimal point are not useful in any locale. + Some formatting conventions do group digits that follow the decimal + point, but they usually introduce a different grouping character + instead of reusing the thousand sep character. If we want to add + support for such conventions, we need to do so explicitly.</p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="359"></a>359. num_put<>::do_put (..., bool) undocumented</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.2.2.1 [facet.num.put.members] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2002-03-12 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>22.2.2.2.1, p1:</p> + + <pre> iter_type put (iter_type out, ios_base& str, char_type fill, + bool val) const; + ... + + 1 Returns: do_put (out, str, fill, val). + </pre> + +<p>AFAICS, the behavior of do_put (..., bool) is not documented anywhere, +however, 22.2.2.2.2, p23:</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>iter_type put (iter_type out, ios_base& str, char_type fill, + bool val) const; +</pre> + + + <p>Effects: If (str.flags() & ios_base::boolalpha) == 0 then do + out = do_put(out, str, fill, (int)val) + Otherwise do</p> +<pre> string_type s = + val ? use_facet<ctype<charT> >(loc).truename() + : use_facet<ctype<charT> >(loc).falsename(); +</pre> + <p>and then insert the characters of s into out. <i>out</i>.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +This means that the bool overload of <tt>do_put()</tt> will never be called, +which contradicts the first paragraph. Perhaps the declaration +should read <tt>do_put()</tt>, and not <tt>put()</tt>? +</p> + +<p> +Note also that there is no <b>Returns</b> clause for this function, which +should probably be corrected, just as should the second occurrence +of <i>"out."</i> in the text. +</p> + +<p> +I think the least invasive change to fix it would be something like +the following: +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 22.4.2.2.2 [facet.num.put.virtuals], just above paragraph 1, remove + the <tt>bool</tt> overload.</p> + +<p> +In 22.4.2.2.2 [facet.num.put.virtuals], p23, make the following changes +</p> + +<blockquote><p> + Replace <tt>put()</tt> with <tt>do_put()</tt> in the declaration + of the member function. +</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote><p> + Change the <b>Effects</b> clause to a <b>Returns</b> clause (to + avoid the requirement to call <tt>do_put(..., int)</tt> from <tt> + do_put (..., bool))</tt> + like so: +</p></blockquote> + +<blockquote><p> + 23 <b>Returns</b>: If <tt>(str.flags() & + ios_base::boolalpha) == 0</tt> then + <tt>do_put (out, str, fill, (long)val)</tt> + Otherwise the function obtains a string <tt>s</tt> as if by</p> +<pre> string_type s = + val ? use_facet<ctype<charT> >(loc).truename() + : use_facet<ctype<charT> >(loc).falsename(); +</pre> + <p>and then inserts each character <tt>c</tt> of s into out via + <tt>*out++ = c</tt> + and returns <tt>out</tt>.</p> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p><p> +This fixes a couple of obvious typos, and also fixes what appears to +be a requirement of gratuitous inefficiency. +</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="360"></a>360. locale mandates inefficient implementation</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.3.1 [locale] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2002-03-12 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#locale">issues</a> in [locale].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +22.1.1, p7 (copied below) allows iostream formatters and extractors +to make assumptions about the values returned from facet members. +However, such assumptions are apparently not guaranteed to hold +in other cases (e.g., when the facet members are being called directly +rather than as a result of iostream calls, or between successive +calls to the same iostream functions with no interevening calls to +<tt>imbue()</tt>, or even when the facet member functions are called +from other member functions of other facets). This restriction +prevents locale from being implemented efficiently. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change the first sentence in 22.1.1, p7 from</p> +<blockquote><p> + In successive calls to a locale facet member function during + a call to an iostream inserter or extractor or a streambuf member + function, the returned result shall be identical. [Note: This + implies that such results may safely be reused without calling + the locale facet member function again, and that member functions + of iostream classes cannot safely call <tt>imbue()</tt> + themselves, except as specified elsewhere. --end note] +</p></blockquote> + +<p>to</p> + +<blockquote><p> + In successive calls to a locale facet member function on a facet + object installed in the same locale, the returned result shall be + identical. ... +</p></blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>This change is reasonable becuase it clarifies the intent of this + part of the standard.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="362"></a>362. bind1st/bind2nd type safety</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> D.11 [depr.lib.binders] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Andrew Demkin <b>Opened:</b> 2002-04-26 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#depr.lib.binders">issues</a> in [depr.lib.binders].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The definition of bind1st() (D.11 [depr.lib.binders]) can result in +the construction of an unsafe binding between incompatible pointer +types. For example, given a function whose first parameter type is +'pointer to T', it's possible without error to bind an argument of +type 'pointer to U' when U does not derive from T: +</p> +<pre> foo(T*, int); + + struct T {}; + struct U {}; + + U u; + + int* p; + int* q; + + for_each(p, q, bind1st(ptr_fun(foo), &u)); // unsafe binding +</pre> + +<p> +The definition of bind1st() includes a functional-style conversion to +map its argument to the expected argument type of the bound function +(see below): +</p> +<pre> typename Operation::first_argument_type(x) +</pre> + +<p> +A functional-style conversion (D.11 [depr.lib.binders]) is defined to be +semantically equivalent to an explicit cast expression (D.11 [depr.lib.binders]), which may (according to 5.4, paragraph 5) be interpreted +as a reinterpret_cast, thus masking the error. +</p> + +<p>The problem and proposed change also apply to D.11 [depr.lib.binders].</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Add this sentence to the end of D.11 [depr.lib.binders]/1: + "Binders <tt>bind1st</tt> and <tt>bind2nd</tt> are deprecated in + favor of <tt>std::tr1::bind</tt>."</p> + +<p>(Notes to editor: (1) when and if tr1::bind is incorporated into + the standard, "std::tr1::bind" should be changed to "std::bind". (2) + 20.5.6 should probably be moved to Annex D.</p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>There is no point in fixing bind1st and bind2nd. tr1::bind is a + superior solution. It solves this problem and others.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="363"></a>363. Missing exception specification in 27.4.2.1.1</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.5.2.1.1 [ios::failure] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Walter Brown and Marc Paterno <b>Opened:</b> 2002-05-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#ios::failure">issues</a> in [ios::failure].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The destructor of ios_base::failure should have an empty throw +specification, because the destructor of its base class, exception, is +declared in this way. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change the destructor to</p> +<pre> virtual ~failure() throw(); +</pre> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>Fixes an obvious glitch. This is almost editorial.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="364"></a>364. Inconsistent wording in 27.5.2.4.2</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.6.2.4.2 [streambuf.virt.buffer] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Walter Brown, Marc Paterno <b>Opened:</b> 2002-05-10 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#streambuf.virt.buffer">issues</a> in [streambuf.virt.buffer].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +27.6.2.4.2 [streambuf.virt.buffer] paragraph 1 is inconsistent with the Effects +clause for seekoff. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Make this paragraph, the Effects clause for setbuf, consistent in wording +with the Effects clause for seekoff in paragraph 3 by amending paragraph 1 +to indicate the purpose of setbuf: +</p> + +<p>Original text:</p> + +<blockquote><p> +1 Effects: Performs an operation that is defined separately for each +class derived from basic_streambuf in this clause (27.7.1.3, 27.8.1.4). +</p></blockquote> + +<p>Proposed text:</p> + +<blockquote><p> +1 Effects: Influences stream buffering in a way that is defined separately +for each class derived from basic_streambuf in this clause +(27.7.1.3, 27.8.1.4). +</p></blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The LWG doesn't believe there is any normative difference between + the existing wording and what's in the proposed resolution, but the + change may make the intent clearer.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="365"></a>365. Lack of const-qualification in clause 27</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27 [input.output] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Walter Brown, Marc Paterno <b>Opened:</b> 2002-05-10 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#input.output">issues</a> in [input.output].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Some stream and streambuf member functions are declared non-const, +even thought they appear only to report information rather than to +change an object's logical state. They should be declared const. See +document N1360 for details and rationale. +</p> + +<p>The list of member functions under discussion: <tt>in_avail</tt>, +<tt>showmanyc</tt>, <tt>tellg</tt>, <tt>tellp</tt>, <tt>is_open</tt>.</p> + +<p>Related issue: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#73">73</a></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 27.8.1.5, 27.8.1.7, 27.8.1.8, 27.8.1.10, 27.8.1.11, and 27.8.1.13</p> +<p>Replace</p> +<pre> bool is_open(); +</pre> +<p>with</p> +<pre> bool is_open() const; +</pre> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>Of the changes proposed in N1360, the only one that is safe is +changing the filestreams' is_open to const. The LWG believed that +this was NAD the first time it considered this issue (issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#73">73</a>), but now thinks otherwise. The corresponding streambuf +member function, after all,is already const.</p> + +<p>The other proposed changes are less safe, because some streambuf +functions that appear merely to report a value do actually perform +mutating operations. It's not even clear that they should be +considered "logically const", because streambuf has two interfaces, a +public one and a protected one. These functions may, and often do, +change the state as exposed by the protected interface, even if the +state exposed by the public interface is unchanged.</p> + +<p>Note that implementers can make this change in a binary compatible +way by providing both overloads; this would be a conforming extension.</p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="369"></a>369. io stream objects and static ctors</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.4 [iostream.objects] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Ruslan Abdikeev <b>Opened:</b> 2002-07-08 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#iostream.objects">issues</a> in [iostream.objects].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Is it safe to use standard iostream objects from constructors of +static objects? Are standard iostream objects constructed and are +their associations established at that time? +</p> + +<p>Surpisingly enough, Standard does NOT require that.</p> + +<p> +27.3/2 [lib.iostream.objects] guarantees that standard iostream +objects are constructed and their associations are established before +the body of main() begins execution. It also refers to ios_base::Init +class as the panacea for constructors of static objects. +</p> + +<p> +However, there's nothing in 27.3 [lib.iostream.objects], +in 27.4.2 [lib.ios.base], and in 27.4.2.1.6 [lib.ios::Init], +that would require implementations to allow access to standard +iostream objects from constructors of static objects. +</p> + +<p>Details:</p> + +<p>Core text refers to some magic object ios_base::Init, which will +be discussed below:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + "The [standard iostream] objects are constructed, and their + associations are established at some time prior to or during + first time an object of class basic_ios<charT,traits>::Init + is constructed, and in any case before the body of main + begins execution." (27.3/2 [lib.iostream.objects]) +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +The first <i>non-normative</i> footnote encourages implementations +to initialize standard iostream objects earlier than required. +</p> + +<p>However, the second <i>non-normative</i> footnote makes an explicit +and unsupported claim:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + "Constructors and destructors for static objects can access these + [standard iostream] objects to read input from stdin or write output + to stdout or stderr." (27.3/2 footnote 265 [lib.iostream.objects]) +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +The only bit of magic is related to that ios_base::Init class. AFAIK, +the rationale behind ios_base::Init was to bring an instance of this +class to each translation unit which #included <iostream> or +related header. Such an inclusion would support the claim of footnote +quoted above, because in order to use some standard iostream object it +is necessary to #include <iostream>. +</p> + +<p> +However, while Standard explicitly describes ios_base::Init as +an appropriate class for doing the trick, I failed to found a +mention of an _instance_ of ios_base::Init in Standard. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p>Add to 27.4 [iostream.objects], p2, immediately before the last sentence +of the paragraph, the following two sentences:</p> + +<blockquote><p> +If a translation unit includes <iostream>, or explicitly +constructs an ios_base::Init object, these stream objects shall +be constructed before dynamic initialization of non-local +objects defined later in that translation unit, and these stream +objects shall be destroyed after the destruction of dynamically +initialized non-local objects defined later in that translation unit. +</p></blockquote> + +<p><i>[Lillehammer: Matt provided wording.]</i></p> + +<p><i>[Mont Tremblant: Matt provided revised wording.]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +The original proposed resolution unconditionally required +implementations to define an ios_base::Init object of some +implementation-defined name in the header <iostream>. That's an +overspecification. First, defining the object may be unnecessary +and even detrimental to performance if an implementation can +guarantee that the 8 standard iostream objects will be initialized +before any other user-defined object in a program. Second, there +is no need to require implementations to document the name of the +object.</p> + +<p> +The new proposed resolution gives users guidance on what they need to +do to ensure that stream objects are constructed during startup.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="370"></a>370. Minor error in basic_istream::get</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.1.3 [istream.unformatted] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Ray Lischner <b>Opened:</b> 2002-07-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#istream.unformatted">issues</a> in [istream.unformatted].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Defect report for description of basic_istream::get (section 27.7.1.3 [istream.unformatted]), paragraph 15. The description for the get function +with the following signature:</p> + +<pre> basic_istream<charT,traits>& get(basic_streambuf<char_type,traits>& + sb); +</pre> + +<p>is incorrect. It reads</p> + +<blockquote><p> + Effects: Calls get(s,n,widen('\n')) +</p></blockquote> + +<p>which I believe should be:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + Effects: Calls get(sb,widen('\n')) +</p></blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change the <b>Effects</b> paragraph to:</p> +<blockquote><p> + Effects: Calls get(sb,this->widen('\n')) +</p></blockquote> + +<p><i>[Pre-Oxford: Minor correction from Howard: replaced 'widen' + with 'this->widen'.]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p><p>Fixes an obvious typo.</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="371"></a>371. Stability of multiset and multimap member functions</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2 [container.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Frank Compagner <b>Opened:</b> 2002-07-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#container.requirements">issues</a> in [container.requirements].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The requirements for multiset and multimap containers (23.1 +[lib.containers.requirements], 23.1.2 [lib.associative.reqmnts], +23.3.2 [lib.multimap] and 23.3.4 [lib.multiset]) make no mention of +the stability of the required (mutating) member functions. It appears +the standard allows these functions to reorder equivalent elements of +the container at will, yet the pervasive red-black tree implementation +appears to provide stable behaviour. +</p> + +<p>This is of most concern when considering the behaviour of erase(). +A stability requirement would guarantee the correct working of the +following 'idiom' that removes elements based on a certain predicate +function. +</p> + +<pre> multimap<int, int> m; + multimap<int, int>::iterator i = m.begin(); + while (i != m.end()) { + if (pred(i)) + m.erase (i++); + else + ++i; + } +</pre> + +<p> +Although clause 23.1.2/8 guarantees that i remains a valid iterator +througout this loop, absence of the stability requirement could +potentially result in elements being skipped. This would make +this code incorrect, and, furthermore, means that there is no way +of erasing these elements without iterating first over the entire +container, and second over the elements to be erased. This would +be unfortunate, and have a negative impact on both performance and +code simplicity. +</p> + +<p> +If the stability requirement is intended, it should be made explicit +(probably through an extra paragraph in clause 23.1.2). +</p> +<p> +If it turns out stability cannot be guaranteed, i'd argue that a +remark or footnote is called for (also somewhere in clause 23.1.2) to +warn against relying on stable behaviour (as demonstrated by the code +above). If most implementations will display stable behaviour, any +problems emerging on an implementation without stable behaviour will +be hard to track down by users. This would also make the need for an +erase_if() member function that much greater. +</p> + +<p>This issue is somewhat related to LWG issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#130">130</a>.</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p>Add the following to the end of 23.2.4 [associative.reqmts] paragraph 4: +"For <tt>multiset</tt> and <tt>multimap</tt>, <tt>insert</tt>and <tt>erase</tt> + are <i>stable</i>: they preserve the relative ordering of equivalent + elements.</p> + +<p><i>[Lillehammer: Matt provided wording]</i></p> + +<p><i>[Joe Gottman points out that the provided wording does not address +multimap and multiset. N1780 also addresses this issue and suggests +wording.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Mont Tremblant: Changed set and map to multiset and multimap.]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The LWG agrees that this guarantee is necessary for common user + idioms to work, and that all existing implementations provide this + property. Note that this resolution guarantees stability for + multimap and multiset, not for all associative containers in + general.</p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="373"></a>373. Are basic_istream and basic_ostream to use (exceptions()&badbit) != 0 ?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.1.2.1 [istream.formatted.reqmts], 27.7.2.6.1 [ostream.formatted.reqmts] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Keith Baker <b>Opened:</b> 2002-07-23 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#istream.formatted.reqmts">issues</a> in [istream.formatted.reqmts].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p> +In 27.7.1.2.1 [istream.formatted.reqmts] and 27.7.2.6.1 [ostream.formatted.reqmts] +(exception()&badbit) != 0 is used in testing for rethrow, yet +exception() is the constructor to class std::exception in 18.7.1 [type.info] that has no return type. Should member function +exceptions() found in 27.5.4 [ios] be used instead? +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 27.7.1.2.1 [istream.formatted.reqmts] and 27.7.2.6.1 [ostream.formatted.reqmts], change +"(exception()&badbit) != 0" to "(exceptions()&badbit) != 0". +</p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>Fixes an obvious typo.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="375"></a>375. basic_ios should be ios_base in 27.7.1.3</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.8.1.4 [stringbuf.virtuals] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Ray Lischner <b>Opened:</b> 2002-08-14 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#stringbuf.virtuals">issues</a> in [stringbuf.virtuals].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In Section 27.8.1.4 [stringbuf.virtuals]: Table 90, Table 91, and paragraph +14 all contain references to "basic_ios::" which should be +"ios_base::". +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change all references to "basic_ios" in Table 90, Table 91, and +paragraph 14 to "ios_base". +</p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p><p>Fixes an obvious typo.</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="376"></a>376. basic_streambuf semantics</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.8.1.4 [stringbuf.virtuals] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Ray Lischner <b>Opened:</b> 2002-08-14 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#stringbuf.virtuals">issues</a> in [stringbuf.virtuals].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In Section 27.8.1.4 [stringbuf.virtuals], Table 90, the implication is that +the four conditions should be mutually exclusive, but they are not. +The first two cases, as written, are subcases of the third.</p> + +<p> +As written, it is unclear what should be the result if cases 1 and 2 +are both true, but case 3 is false. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p>Rewrite these conditions as:</p> +<blockquote> +<p> + (which & (ios_base::in|ios_base::out)) == ios_base::in +</p> + +<p> + (which & (ios_base::in|ios_base::out)) == ios_base::out +</p> + +<p> + (which & (ios_base::in|ios_base::out)) == +(ios_base::in|ios_base::out) + and way == either ios_base::beg or ios_base::end +</p> + +<p>Otherwise</p> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>It's clear what we wanted to say, we just failed to say it. This + fixes it.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="379"></a>379. nonsensical ctype::do_widen() requirement</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.1.1.2 [locale.ctype.virtuals] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2002-09-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#locale.ctype.virtuals">issues</a> in [locale.ctype.virtuals].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The last sentence in 22.2.1.1.2, p11 below doesn't seem to make sense. +</p> +<pre> charT do_widen (char c) const; + + -11- Effects: Applies the simplest reasonable transformation from + a char value or sequence of char values to the corresponding + charT value or values. The only characters for which unique + transformations are required are those in the basic source + character set (2.2). For any named ctype category with a + ctype<charT> facet ctw and valid ctype_base::mask value + M (is(M, c) || !ctw.is(M, do_widen(c))) is true. +</pre> +<p> +Shouldn't the last sentence instead read +</p> +<pre> For any named ctype category with a ctype<char> facet ctc + and valid ctype_base::mask value M + (ctc.is(M, c) || !is(M, do_widen(c))) is true. +</pre> +<p> +I.e., if the narrow character c is not a member of a class of +characters then neither is the widened form of c. (To paraphrase +footnote 224.) +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Replace the last sentence of 22.4.1.1.2 [locale.ctype.virtuals], p11 with the +following text: +</p> +<pre> For any named ctype category with a ctype<char> facet ctc + and valid ctype_base::mask value M, + (ctc.is(M, c) || !is(M, do_widen(c))) is true. +</pre> + +<p><i>[Kona: Minor edit. Added a comma after the <i>M</i> for clarity.]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The LWG believes this is just a typo, and that this is the correct fix.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="380"></a>380. typos in codecvt tables 53 and 54</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.1.5 [locale.codecvt.byname] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2002-09-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#locale.codecvt.byname">issues</a> in [locale.codecvt.byname].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Tables 53 and 54 in 22.4.1.5 [locale.codecvt.byname] are both titled "convert +result values," when surely "do_in/do_out result values" must have +been intended for Table 53 and "do_unshift result values" for Table +54. +</p> +<p> +Table 54, row 3 says that the meaning of partial is "more characters +needed to be supplied to complete termination." The function is not +supplied any characters, it is given a buffer which it fills with +characters or, more precisely, destination elements (i.e., an escape +sequence). So partial means that space for more than (to_limit - to) +destination elements was needed to terminate a sequence given the +value of state. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change the title of Table 53 to "do_in/do_out result values" and +the title of Table 54 to "do_unshift result values." +</p> +<p> +Change the text in Table 54, row 3 (the <b>partial</b> row), under the +heading Meaning, to "space for more than (to_limit - to) destination +elements was needed to terminate a sequence given the value of state." +</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="381"></a>381. detection of invalid mbstate_t in codecvt</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.1.5 [locale.codecvt.byname] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2002-09-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#locale.codecvt.byname">issues</a> in [locale.codecvt.byname].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +All but one codecvt member functions that take a state_type argument +list as one of their preconditions that the state_type argument have +a valid value. However, according to 22.2.1.5.2, p6, +codecvt::do_unshift() is the only codecvt member that is supposed to +return error if the state_type object is invalid. +</p> + +<p> +It seems to me that the treatment of state_type by all codecvt member +functions should be the same and the current requirements should be +changed. Since the detection of invalid state_type values may be +difficult in general or computationally expensive in some specific +cases, I propose the following: +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add a new paragraph before 22.2.1.5.2, p5, and after the function +declaration below +</p> +<pre> result do_unshift(stateT& state, + externT* to, externT* to_limit, externT*& to_next) const; +</pre> +<p> +as follows: +</p> +<pre> Requires: (to <= to_end) well defined and true; state initialized, + if at the beginning of a sequence, or else equal to the result of + converting the preceding characters in the sequence. +</pre> +<p> +and change the text in Table 54, row 4, the <b>error</b> row, under +the heading Meaning, from +</p> +<pre> state has invalid value +</pre> +<p> +to +</p> +<pre> an unspecified error has occurred +</pre> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The intent is that implementations should not be required to detect +invalid state values; such a requirement appears nowhere else. An +invalid state value is a precondition violation, <i>i.e.</i> undefined +behavior. Implementations that do choose to detect invalid state +values, or that choose to detect any other kind of error, may return +<b>error</b> as an indication.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="383"></a>383. Bidirectional iterator assertion typo</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 24.2.6 [bidirectional.iterators] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> ysapir (submitted via comp.std.c++) <b>Opened:</b> 2002-10-17 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#bidirectional.iterators">issues</a> in [bidirectional.iterators].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Following a discussion on the boost list regarding end iterators and +the possibility of performing operator--() on them, it seems to me +that there is a typo in the standard. This typo has nothing to do +with that discussion. +</p> + +<p> +I have checked this newsgroup, as well as attempted a search of the +Active/Defect/Closed Issues List on the site for the words "s is +derefer" so I believe this has not been proposed before. Furthermore, +the "Lists by Index" mentions only DR <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#299">299</a> on section +24.1.4, and DR <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#299">299</a> is not related to this issue. +</p> + +<p> +The standard makes the following assertion on bidirectional iterators, +in section 24.1.4 [lib.bidirectional.iterators], Table 75: +</p> + +<pre> operational assertion/note +expression return type semantics pre/post-condition + +--r X& pre: there exists s such + that r == ++s. + post: s is dereferenceable. + --(++r) == r. + --r == --s implies r == s. + &r == &--r. +</pre> + +<p> +(See <a href="http://aspn.activestate.com/ASPN/Mail/Message/boost/1395763">http://aspn.activestate.com/ASPN/Mail/Message/boost/1395763</a>.) +</p> + +<p> +In particular, "s is dereferenceable" seems to be in error. It seems +that the intention was to say "r is dereferenceable". +</p> + +<p> +If it were to say "r is dereferenceable" it would +make perfect sense. Since s must be dereferenceable prior to +operator++, then the natural result of operator-- (to undo operator++) +would be to make r dereferenceable. Furthermore, without other +assertions, and basing only on precondition and postconditions, we +could not otherwise know this. So it is also interesting information. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change the guarantee to "postcondition: r is dereferenceable." +</p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p><p>Fixes an obvious typo</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="384"></a>384. equal_range has unimplementable runtime complexity</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.4.3.3 [equal.range] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Hans Bos <b>Opened:</b> 2002-10-18 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#equal.range">issues</a> in [equal.range].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Section 25.4.3.3 [equal.range] +states that at most 2 * log(last - first) + 1 +comparisons are allowed for equal_range. +</p> + +<p>It is not possible to implement equal_range with these constraints.</p> + +<p>In a range of one element as in:</p> +<pre> int x = 1; + equal_range(&x, &x + 1, 1) +</pre> + +<p>it is easy to see that at least 2 comparison operations are needed.</p> + +<p>For this case at most 2 * log(1) + 1 = 1 comparison is allowed.</p> + +<p>I have checked a few libraries and they all use the same (nonconforming) +algorithm for equal_range that has a complexity of</p> +<pre> 2* log(distance(first, last)) + 2. +</pre> +<p>I guess this is the algorithm that the standard assumes for equal_range.</p> + +<p> +It is easy to see that 2 * log(distance) + 2 comparisons are enough +since equal range can be implemented with lower_bound and upper_bound +(both log(distance) + 1). +</p> + +<p> +I think it is better to require something like 2log(distance) + O(1) (or +even logarithmic as multiset::equal_range). +Then an implementation has more room to optimize for certain cases (e.g. +have log(distance) characteristics when at most match is found in the range +but 2log(distance) + 4 for the worst case). +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 25.4.3.1 [lower.bound]/4, change <tt>log(last - first) + 1</tt> +to <tt>log<sub>2</sub>(last - first) + <i>O</i>(1)</tt>.</p> + +<p>In 25.4.3.2 [upper.bound]/4, change <tt>log(last - first) + 1</tt> +to <tt>log<sub>2</sub>(last - first) + <i>O</i>(1)</tt>.</p> + +<p>In 25.4.3.3 [equal.range]/4, change <tt>2*log(last - first) + 1</tt> +to <tt>2*log<sub>2</sub>(last - first) + <i>O</i>(1)</tt>.</p> + +<p><i>[Matt provided wording]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The LWG considered just saying <i>O</i>(log n) for all three, but + decided that threw away too much valuable information. The fact + that lower_bound is twice as fast as equal_range is important. + However, it's better to allow an arbitrary additive constant than to + specify an exact count. An exact count would have to + involve <tt>floor</tt> or <tt>ceil</tt>. It would be too easy to + get this wrong, and don't provide any substantial value for users.</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="386"></a>386. Reverse iterator's operator[] has impossible return type</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 24.5.1.3.11 [reverse.iter.op-=] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 2002-10-23 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>In 24.5.1.3.11 [reverse.iter.op-=], <tt>reverse_iterator<>::operator[]</tt> +is specified as having a return type of <tt>reverse_iterator::reference</tt>, +which is the same as <tt>iterator_traits<Iterator>::reference</tt>. +(Where <tt>Iterator</tt> is the underlying iterator type.)</p> + +<p>The trouble is that <tt>Iterator</tt>'s own operator[] doesn't + necessarily have a return type + of <tt>iterator_traits<Iterator>::reference</tt>. Its + return type is merely required to be convertible + to <tt>Iterator</tt>'s value type. The return type specified for + reverse_iterator's operator[] would thus appear to be impossible.</p> + +<p>With the resolution of issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#299">299</a>, the type of + <tt>a[n]</tt> will continue to be required (for random access + iterators) to be convertible to the value type, and also <tt>a[n] = + t</tt> will be a valid expression. Implementations of + <tt>reverse_iterator</tt> will likely need to return a proxy from + <tt>operator[]</tt> to meet these requirements. As mentioned in the + comment from Dave Abrahams, the simplest way to specify that + <tt>reverse_iterator</tt> meet this requirement to just mandate + it and leave the return type of <tt>operator[]</tt> unspecified.</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p>In 24.5.1.2 [reverse.iter.requirements] change:</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>reference operator[](difference_type n) const; +</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p>to:</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre><b><i>unspecified</i></b> operator[](difference_type n) const; // see 24.2.7 [random.access.iterators] +</pre> +</blockquote> + + + + +<p><i>[ +Comments from Dave Abrahams: IMO we should resolve 386 by just saying + that the return type of reverse_iterator's operator[] is + unspecified, allowing the random access iterator requirements to + impose an appropriate return type. If we accept 299's proposed + resolution (and I think we should), the return type will be + readable and writable, which is about as good as we can do. +]</i></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="387"></a>387. std::complex over-encapsulated</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.4 [complex.numbers] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Gabriel Dos Reis <b>Opened:</b> 2002-11-08 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#complex.numbers">issues</a> in [complex.numbers].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The absence of explicit description of std::complex<T> layout +makes it imposible to reuse existing software developed in traditional +languages like Fortran or C with unambigous and commonly accepted +layout assumptions. There ought to be a way for practitioners to +predict with confidence the layout of std::complex<T> whenever T +is a numerical datatype. The absence of ways to access individual +parts of a std::complex<T> object as lvalues unduly promotes +severe pessimizations. For example, the only way to change, +independently, the real and imaginary parts is to write something like +</p> + +<pre>complex<T> z; +// ... +// set the real part to r +z = complex<T>(r, z.imag()); +// ... +// set the imaginary part to i +z = complex<T>(z.real(), i); +</pre> + +<p> +At this point, it seems appropriate to recall that a complex number +is, in effect, just a pair of numbers with no particular invariant to +maintain. Existing practice in numerical computations has it that a +complex number datatype is usually represented by Cartesian +coordinates. Therefore the over-encapsulation put in the specification +of std::complex<> is not justified. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Add the following requirements to 26.4 [complex.numbers] as 26.3/4:</p> +<blockquote> +<p>If z is an lvalue expression of type cv std::complex<T> then</p> + +<ul> +<li>the expression reinterpret_cast<cv T(&)[2]>(z) +is well-formed; and</li> +<li>reinterpret_cast<cv T(&)[2]>(z)[0]designates the +real part of z; and</li> +<li>reinterpret_cast<cv T(&)[2]>(z)[1]designates the +imaginary part of z.</li> +</ul> + +<p> +Moreover, if a is an expression of pointer type cv complex<T>* +and the expression a[i] is well-defined for an integer expression +i then: +</p> + +<ul> +<li>reinterpret_cast<cv T*>(a)[2*i] designates the real +part of a[i]; and</li> +<li>reinterpret_cast<cv T*>(a)[2*i+1] designates the +imaginary part of a[i].</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + +<p> +In 26.4.2 [complex] and 26.4.3 [complex.special] add the following member functions +(changing <tt>T</tt> to concrete types as appropriate for the specializations). +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void real(T); +void imag(T); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Add to 26.4.4 [complex.members] +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>T real() const; +</pre> +<blockquote> +<i>Returns:</i> the value of the real component +</blockquote> +<pre>void real(T val); +</pre> +<blockquote> +Assigns val to the real component. +</blockquote> +<pre>T imag() const; +</pre> +<blockquote> +<i>Returns:</i> the value of the imaginary component +</blockquote> +<pre>void imag(T val); +</pre> +<blockquote> +Assigns val to the imaginary component. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[Kona: The layout guarantee is absolutely necessary for C + compatibility. However, there was disagreement about the other part + of this proposal: retrieving elements of the complex number as + lvalues. An alternative: continue to have real() and imag() return + rvalues, but add set_real() and set_imag(). Straw poll: return + lvalues - 2, add setter functions - 5. Related issue: do we want + reinterpret_cast as the interface for converting a complex to an + array of two reals, or do we want to provide a more explicit way of + doing it? Howard will try to resolve this issue for the next + meeting.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[pre-Sydney: Howard summarized the options in n1589.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Bellevue: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Second half of proposed wording replaced and moved to Ready. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Pre-Sophia Antipolis, Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Added the members to 26.4.3 [complex.special] and changed from Ready to Review. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Post-Sophia Antipolis: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved from WP back to Ready so that the "and 26.4.3 [complex.special]" in the proposed +resolution can be officially applied. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The LWG believes that C99 compatibility would be enough +justification for this change even without other considerations. All +existing implementations already have the layout proposed here.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="389"></a>389. Const overload of valarray::operator[] returns by value</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.6.2.3 [valarray.access] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Gabriel Dos Reis <b>Opened:</b> 2002-11-08 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#valarray.access">issues</a> in [valarray.access].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#77">77</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Consider the following program:</p> +<pre> #include <iostream> + #include <ostream> + #include <vector> + #include <valarray> + #include <algorithm> + #include <iterator> + template<typename Array> + void print(const Array& a) + { + using namespace std; + typedef typename Array::value_type T; + copy(&a[0], &a[0] + a.size(), + ostream_iterator<T>(std::cout, " ")); + } + template<typename T, unsigned N> + unsigned size(T(&)[N]) { return N; } + int main() + { + double array[] = { 0.89, 9.3, 7, 6.23 }; + std::vector<double> v(array, array + size(array)); + std::valarray<double> w(array, size(array)); + print(v); // #1 + std::cout << std::endl; + print(w); // #2 + std::cout << std::endl; + } +</pre> + +<p>While the call numbered #1 succeeds, the call numbered #2 fails +because the const version of the member function +valarray<T>::operator[](size_t) returns a value instead of a +const-reference. That seems to be so for no apparent reason, no +benefit. Not only does that defeats users' expectation but it also +does hinder existing software (written either in C or Fortran) +integration within programs written in C++. There is no reason why +subscripting an expression of type valarray<T> that is const-qualified +should not return a const T&.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In the class synopsis in 26.6.2 [template.valarray], and in +26.6.2.3 [valarray.access] just above paragraph 1, change</p> +<pre> T operator[](size_t const); +</pre> +<p>to</p> +<pre> const T& operator[](size_t const); +</pre> + +<p><i>[Kona: fixed a minor typo: put semicolon at the end of the line + wehre it belongs.]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>Return by value seems to serve no purpose. Valaray was explicitly +designed to have a specified layout so that it could easily be +integrated with libraries in other languages, and return by value +defeats that purpose. It is believed that this change will have no +impact on allowable optimizations.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="391"></a>391. non-member functions specified as const</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.3.3.2 [conversions] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> James Kanze <b>Opened:</b> 2002-12-10 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The specifications of toupper and tolower both specify the functions as +const, althought they are not member functions, and are not specified as +const in the header file synopsis in section 22.3 [locales]. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 22.3.3.2 [conversions], remove <tt>const</tt> from the function + declarations of std::toupper and std::tolower</p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p><p>Fixes an obvious typo</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="395"></a>395. inconsistencies in the definitions of rand() and random_shuffle()</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.8 [c.math] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> James Kanze <b>Opened:</b> 2003-01-03 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#c.math">issues</a> in [c.math].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In 26.8 [c.math], the C++ standard refers to the C standard for the +definition of rand(); in the C standard, it is written that "The +implementation shall behave as if no library function calls the rand +function." +</p> + +<p> +In 25.3.12 [alg.random.shuffle], there is no specification as to +how the two parameter version of the function generates its random +value. I believe that all current implementations in fact call rand() +(in contradiction with the requirement avove); if an implementation does +not call rand(), there is the question of how whatever random generator +it does use is seeded. Something is missing. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In [lib.c.math], add a paragraph specifying that the C definition of +rand shal be modified to say that "Unless otherwise specified, the +implementation shall behave as if no library function calls the rand +function." +</p> + +<p> +In [lib.alg.random.shuffle], add a sentence to the effect that "In +the two argument form of the function, the underlying source of +random numbers is implementation defined. [Note: in particular, an +implementation is permitted to use <tt>rand</tt>.] +</p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The original proposed resolution proposed requiring the + two-argument from of <tt>random_shuffle</tt> to + use <tt>rand</tt>. We don't want to do that, because some existing + implementations already use something else: gcc + uses <tt>lrand48</tt>, for example. Using <tt>rand</tt> presents a + problem if the number of elements in the sequence is greater than + RAND_MAX.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="396"></a>396. what are characters zero and one</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.5.1 [bitset.cons] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2003-01-05 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#bitset.cons">issues</a> in [bitset.cons].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + <p> +23.3.5.1, p6 [lib.bitset.cons] talks about a generic character +having the value of 0 or 1 but there is no definition of what +that means for charT other than char and wchar_t. And even for +those two types, the values 0 and 1 are not actually what is +intended -- the values '0' and '1' are. This, along with the +converse problem in the description of to_string() in 23.3.5.2, +p33, looks like a defect remotely related to DR 303. + </p> + <p> +http://anubis.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#303 + </p> + <pre>23.3.5.1: + -6- An element of the constructed string has value zero if the + corresponding character in str, beginning at position pos, + is 0. Otherwise, the element has the value one. + </pre> + <pre>23.3.5.2: + -33- Effects: Constructs a string object of the appropriate + type and initializes it to a string of length N characters. + Each character is determined by the value of its + corresponding bit position in *this. Character position N + ?- 1 corresponds to bit position zero. Subsequent decreasing + character positions correspond to increasing bit positions. + Bit value zero becomes the character 0, bit value one becomes + the character 1. + </pre> + <p> +Also note the typo in 23.3.5.1, p6: the object under construction +is a bitset, not a string. + </p> + +<p><i>[ +Sophia Antipolis: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +We note that <tt>bitset</tt> has been moved from section 23 to section 20, by +another issue (<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#842">842</a>) previously resolved at this meeting. +</p> +<p> +Disposition: move to ready. +</p> +<p> +We request that Howard submit a separate issue regarding the three to_string overloads. +</p> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change the constructor's function declaration immediately before +20.5.1 [bitset.cons] p3 to:</p> +<pre> template <class charT, class traits, class Allocator> + explicit + bitset(const basic_string<charT, traits, Allocator>& str, + typename basic_string<charT, traits, Allocator>::size_type pos = 0, + typename basic_string<charT, traits, Allocator>::size_type n = + basic_string<charT, traits, Allocator>::npos, + charT zero = charT('0'), charT one = charT('1')) +</pre> +<p>Change the first two sentences of 20.5.1 [bitset.cons] p6 to: "An +element of the constructed string has value 0 if the corresponding +character in <i>str</i>, beginning at position <i>pos</i>, +is <i>zero</i>. Otherwise, the element has the value 1.</p> + +<p>Change the text of the second sentence in 23.3.5.1, p5 to read: + "The function then throws invalid_argument if any of the rlen + characters in str beginning at position pos is other than <i>zero</i> + or <i>one</i>. The function uses traits::eq() to compare the character + values." +</p> + +<p>Change the declaration of the <tt>to_string</tt> member function + immediately before 20.5.2 [bitset.members] p33 to:</p> +<pre> template <class charT, class traits, class Allocator> + basic_string<charT, traits, Allocator> + to_string(charT zero = charT('0'), charT one = charT('1')) const; +</pre> +<p>Change the last sentence of 20.5.2 [bitset.members] p33 to: "Bit + value 0 becomes the character <tt><i>zero</i></tt>, bit value 1 becomes the + character <tt><i>one</i></tt>.</p> +<p>Change 20.5.4 [bitset.operators] p8 to:</p> +<p><b>Returns</b>:</p> +<pre> os << x.template to_string<charT,traits,allocator<charT> >( + use_facet<ctype<charT> >(<i>os</i>.getloc()).widen('0'), + use_facet<ctype<charT> >(<i>os</i>.getloc()).widen('1')); +</pre> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>There is a real problem here: we need the character values of '0' + and '1', and we have no way to get them since strings don't have + imbued locales. In principle the "right" solution would be to + provide an extra object, either a ctype facet or a full locale, + which would be used to widen '0' and '1'. However, there was some + discomfort about using such a heavyweight mechanism. The proposed + resolution allows those users who care about this issue to get it + right.</p> +<p>We fix the inserter to use the new arguments. Note that we already + fixed the analogous problem with the extractor in issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#303">303</a>.</p> + + + +<p><i>[ +post Bellevue: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +We are happy with the resolution as proposed, and we move this to Ready. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +The proposed wording neglects the 3 newer to_string overloads. +</blockquote> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="400"></a>400. redundant type cast in lib.allocator.members</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.5.1 [allocator.members] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Markus Mauhart <b>Opened:</b> 2003-02-27 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#allocator.members">issues</a> in [allocator.members].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +20.9.5.1 [allocator.members] allocator members, contains +the following 3 lines: +</p> + +<pre> 12 Returns: new((void *) p) T( val) + void destroy(pointer p); + 13 Returns: ((T*) p)->~T() +</pre> + +<p> +The type cast "(T*) p" in the last line is redundant cause +we know that std::allocator<T>::pointer is a typedef for T*. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Replace "((T*) p)" with "p". +</p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p><p>Just a typo, this is really editorial.</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="401"></a>401. incorrect type casts in table 32 in lib.allocator.requirements</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.2.5 [allocator.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Markus Mauhart <b>Opened:</b> 2003-02-27 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#allocator.requirements">issues</a> in [allocator.requirements].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +I think that in par2 of [default.con.req] the last two +lines of table 32 contain two incorrect type casts. The lines are ... +</p> + +<pre> a.construct(p,t) Effect: new((void*)p) T(t) + a.destroy(p) Effect: ((T*)p)?->~T() +</pre> + +<p> +.... with the prerequisits coming from the preceding two paragraphs, especially +from table 31: +</p> + +<pre> alloc<T> a ;// an allocator for T + alloc<T>::pointer p ;// random access iterator + // (may be different from T*) + alloc<T>::reference r = *p;// T& + T const& t ; +</pre> + +<p> +For that two type casts ("(void*)p" and "(T*)p") to be well-formed +this would require then conversions to T* and void* for all +alloc<T>::pointer, so it would implicitely introduce extra +requirements for alloc<T>::pointer, additionally to the only +current requirement (being a random access iterator). +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +Accept proposed wording from +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2436.pdf">N2436</a> part 1. +</p> + +<p> +Note: Actually I would prefer to replace "((T*)p)?->dtor_name" with +"p?->dtor_name", but AFAICS this is not possible cause of an omission +in 13.5.6 [over.ref] (for which I have filed another DR on 29.11.2002). +</p> + +<p><i>[Kona: The LWG thinks this is somewhere on the border between + Open and NAD. The intend is clear: <tt>construct</tt> constructs an + object at the location <i>p</i>. It's reading too much into the + description to think that literally calling <tt>new</tt> is + required. Tweaking this description is low priority until we can do + a thorough review of allocators, and, in particular, allocators with + non-default pointer types.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Batavia: Proposed resolution changed to less code and more description. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +post Oxford: This would be rendered NAD Editorial by acceptance of +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2257.html">N2257</a>. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007): The LWG adopted the proposed resolution of N2387 for this issue which +was subsequently split out into a separate paper N2436 for the purposes of voting. +The resolution in N2436 addresses this issue. The LWG voted to accelerate this +issue to Ready status to be voted into the WP at Kona. +]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="402"></a>402. wrong new expression in [some_]allocator::construct</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.2.5 [allocator.requirements], 20.9.5.1 [allocator.members] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Markus Mauhart <b>Opened:</b> 2003-02-27 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#allocator.requirements">issues</a> in [allocator.requirements].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +This applies to the new expression that is contained in both par12 of +20.9.5.1 [allocator.members] and in par2 (table 32) of [default.con.req]. +I think this new expression is wrong, involving unintended side +effects. +</p> + + +<p>20.9.5.1 [allocator.members] contains the following 3 lines:</p> + +<pre> 11 Returns: the largest value N for which the call allocate(N,0) might succeed. + void construct(pointer p, const_reference val); + 12 Returns: new((void *) p) T( val) +</pre> + + +<p> [default.con.req] in table 32 has the following line:</p> +<pre> a.construct(p,t) Effect: new((void*)p) T(t) +</pre> + +<p> +.... with the prerequisits coming from the preceding two paragraphs, +especially from table 31: +</p> + +<pre> alloc<T> a ;// an allocator for T + alloc<T>::pointer p ;// random access iterator + // (may be different from T*) + alloc<T>::reference r = *p;// T& + T const& t ; +</pre> + +<p> +Cause of using "new" but not "::new", any existing "T::operator new" +function will hide the global placement new function. When there is no +"T::operator new" with adequate signature, +every_alloc<T>::construct(..) is ill-formed, and most +std::container<T,every_alloc<T>> use it; a workaround +would be adding placement new and delete functions with adequate +signature and semantic to class T, but class T might come from another +party. Maybe even worse is the case when T has placement new and +delete functions with adequate signature but with "unknown" semantic: +I dont like to speculate about it, but whoever implements +any_container<T,any_alloc> and wants to use construct(..) +probably must think about it. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Replace "new" with "::new" in both cases. +</p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="403"></a>403. basic_string::swap should not throw exceptions</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.4.6.8 [string::swap] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Beman Dawes <b>Opened:</b> 2003-03-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#string::swap">issues</a> in [string::swap].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p> +std::basic_string, 21.4 [basic.string] paragraph 2 says that +basic_string "conforms to the requirements of a Sequence, as specified +in (23.1.1)." The sequence requirements specified in (23.1.1) to not +include any prohibition on swap members throwing exceptions. +</p> + +<p> +Section 23.2 [container.requirements] paragraph 10 does limit conditions under +which exceptions may be thrown, but applies only to "all container +types defined in this clause" and so excludes basic_string::swap +because it is defined elsewhere. +</p> + +<p> +Eric Niebler points out that 21.4 [basic.string] paragraph 5 explicitly +permits basic_string::swap to invalidates iterators, which is +disallowed by 23.2 [container.requirements] paragraph 10. Thus the standard would +be contradictory if it were read or extended to read as having +basic_string meet 23.2 [container.requirements] paragraph 10 requirements. +</p> + +<p> +Yet several LWG members have expressed the belief that the original +intent was that basic_string::swap should not throw exceptions as +specified by 23.2 [container.requirements] paragraph 10, and that the standard is +unclear on this issue. The complexity of basic_string::swap is +specified as "constant time", indicating the intent was to avoid +copying (which could cause a bad_alloc or other exception). An +important use of swap is to ensure that exceptions are not thrown in +exception-safe code. +</p> + +<p> +Note: There remains long standing concern over whether or not it is +possible to reasonably meet the 23.2 [container.requirements] paragraph 10 swap +requirements when allocators are unequal. The specification of +basic_string::swap exception requirements is in no way intended to +address, prejudice, or otherwise impact that concern. +</p> + + + + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 21.4.6.8 [string::swap], add a throws clause: +</p> + +<p> +Throws: Shall not throw exceptions. +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="404"></a>404. May a replacement allocation function be declared inline?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17.6.3.6 [replacement.functions], 18.6.1 [new.delete] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 2003-04-24 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The eight basic dynamic memory allocation functions (single-object +and array versions of ::operator new and ::operator delete, in the +ordinary and nothrow forms) are replaceable. A C++ program may +provide an alternative definition for any of them, which will be used +in preference to the implementation's definition. +</p> + +<p> +Three different parts of the standard mention requirements on +replacement functions: 17.6.3.6 [replacement.functions], 18.6.1.1 [new.delete.single] +and 18.6.1.2 [new.delete.array], and 3.7.3 [basic.stc.auto]. +</p> + +<p>None of these three places say whether a replacement function may + be declared inline. 18.6.1.1 [new.delete.single] paragraph 2 specifies a + signature for the replacement function, but that's not enough: + the <tt>inline</tt> specifier is not part of a function's signature. + One might also reason from 7.1.2 [dcl.fct.spec] paragraph 2, which + requires that "an inline function shall be defined in every + translation unit in which it is used," but this may not be quite + specific enough either. We should either explicitly allow or + explicitly forbid inline replacement memory allocation + functions.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add a new sentence to the end of 17.6.3.6 [replacement.functions] paragraph 3: +"The program's definitions shall not be specified as <tt>inline</tt>. +No diagnostic is required." +</p> + +<p><i>[Kona: added "no diagnostic is required"]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +The fact that <tt>inline</tt> isn't mentioned appears to have been +nothing more than an oversight. Existing implementations do not +permit inline functions as replacement memory allocation functions. +Providing this functionality would be difficult in some cases, and is +believed to be of limited value. +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="405"></a>405. qsort and POD</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.5 [alg.c.library] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Ray Lischner <b>Opened:</b> 2003-04-08 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#alg.c.library">issues</a> in [alg.c.library].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Section 25.5 [alg.c.library] describes bsearch and qsort, from the C +standard library. Paragraph 4 does not list any restrictions on qsort, +but it should limit the base parameter to point to POD. Presumably, +qsort sorts the array by copying bytes, which requires POD. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 25.5 [alg.c.library] paragraph 4, just after the declarations and +before the nonnormative note, add these words: "both of which have the +same behavior as the original declaration. The behavior is undefined +unless the objects in the array pointed to by <i>base</i> are of POD +type." +</p> + +<p><i>[Something along these lines is clearly necessary. Matt + provided wording.]</i></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="406"></a>406. vector::insert(s) exception safety</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.4.1.4 [vector.modifiers] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Dave Abrahams <b>Opened:</b> 2003-04-27 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#vector.modifiers">issues</a> in [vector.modifiers].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +There is a possible defect in the standard: the standard text was +never intended to prevent arbitrary ForwardIterators, whose operations +may throw exceptions, from being passed, and it also wasn't intended +to require a temporary buffer in the case where ForwardIterators were +passed (and I think most implementations don't use one). As is, the +standard appears to impose requirements that aren't met by any +existing implementation. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Replace 23.4.1.4 [vector.modifiers] paragraph 1 with:</p> +<blockquote><p> + 1- Notes: Causes reallocation if the new size is greater than the + old capacity. If no reallocation happens, all the iterators and + references before the insertion point remain valid. If an exception + is thrown other than by the copy constructor or assignment operator + of T or by any InputIterator operation there are no effects. +</p></blockquote> + +<p><i>[We probably need to say something similar for deque.]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="407"></a>407. Can singular iterators be destroyed?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> X [iterator.concepts] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 2003-06-03 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#iterator.concepts">issues</a> in [iterator.concepts].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Clause X [iterator.concepts], paragraph 5, says that the only expression +that is defined for a singular iterator is "an assignment of a +non-singular value to an iterator that holds a singular value". This +means that destroying a singular iterator (e.g. letting an automatic +variable go out of scope) is technically undefined behavior. This +seems overly strict, and probably unintentional. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change the sentence in question to "... the only exceptions are +destroying an iterator that holds a singular value, or the assignment +of a non-singular value to an iterator that holds a singular value." +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="409"></a>409. Closing an fstream should clear error state</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.9.1.9 [ifstream.members], 27.9.1.13 [ofstream.members] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 2003-06-03 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#ifstream.members">issues</a> in [ifstream.members].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +A strict reading of 27.9.1 [fstreams] shows that opening or +closing a basic_[io]fstream does not affect the error bits. This +means, for example, that if you read through a file up to EOF, and +then close the stream and reopen it at the beginning of the file, +the EOF bit in the stream's error state is still set. This is +counterintuitive. +</p> +<p> +The LWG considered this issue once before, as issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#22">22</a>, +and put in a footnote to clarify that the strict reading was indeed +correct. We did that because we believed the standard was +unambiguous and consistent, and that we should not make architectural +changes in a TC. Now that we're working on a new revision of the +language, those considerations no longer apply. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p>Change 27.9.1.9 [ifstream.members], para. 3 from:</p> + +<blockquote><p> +Calls rdbuf()->open(s,mode|in). If that function returns a null pointer, calls setstate(failbit) (which may throw ios_base::failure [Footnote: (lib.iostate.flags)]. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>to:</p> + +<blockquote><p> +Calls rdbuf()->open(s,mode|in). If that function returns a null pointer, calls setstate(failbit) (which may throw ios_base::failure [Footnote: (lib.iostate.flags)), else calls clear(). +</p></blockquote> + +<p>Change 27.9.1.13 [ofstream.members], para. 3 from:</p> + +<blockquote><p> +Calls rdbuf()->open(s,mode|out). If that function returns a null pointer, calls setstate(failbit) (which may throw ios_base::failure [Footnote: (lib.iostate.flags)). +</p></blockquote> + +<p>to:</p> + +<blockquote><p> +Calls rdbuf()->open(s,mode|out). If that function returns a null pointer, calls setstate(failbit) (which may throw ios_base::failure [Footnote: (lib.iostate.flags)), else calls clear(). +</p></blockquote> + +<p>Change 27.9.1.17 [fstream.members], para. 3 from:</p> + +<blockquote><p> +Calls rdbuf()->open(s,mode), If that function returns a null pointer, calls setstate(failbit), (which may throw ios_base::failure). (lib.iostate.flags) ) +</p></blockquote> + +<p>to:</p> + +<blockquote><p> +Calls rdbuf()->open(s,mode), If that function returns a null pointer, calls setstate(failbit), (which may throw ios_base::failure). (lib.iostate.flags) ), else calls clear(). +</p></blockquote> + + + +<p><i>[Kona: the LWG agrees this is a good idea. Post-Kona: Bill +provided wording. He suggests having open, not close, clear the error +flags.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Post-Sydney: Howard provided a new proposed resolution. The + old one didn't make sense because it proposed to fix this at the + level of basic_filebuf, which doesn't have access to the stream's + error state. Howard's proposed resolution fixes this at the level + of the three fstream class template instead.]</i></p> + + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="410"></a>410. Missing semantics for stack and queue comparison operators</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.3.4.1 [list.cons], 23.3.4.3 [list.modifiers] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Hans Bos <b>Opened:</b> 2003-06-07 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#list.cons">issues</a> in [list.cons].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Sections 23.3.4.1 [list.cons] and 23.3.4.3 [list.modifiers] list +comparison operators (==, !=, <, <=, >, =>) for queue and +stack. Only the semantics for queue::operator== (23.3.4.1 [list.cons] par2) and queue::operator< (23.3.4.1 [list.cons] +par3) are defined. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p>Add the following new paragraphs after 23.3.4.1 [list.cons] + paragraph 3:</p> + +<blockquote> + +<pre> operator!= +</pre> +<p>Returns: <tt>x.c != y.c</tt></p> + +<pre> operator> +</pre> +<p>Returns: <tt>x.c > y.c</tt></p> + +<pre> operator<= +</pre> +<p>Returns: <tt>x.c <= y.c</tt></p> + +<pre> operator>= +</pre> +<p>Returns: <tt>x.c >= y.c</tt></p> + +</blockquote> + +<p>Add the following paragraphs at the end of 23.3.4.3 [list.modifiers]:</p> + +<blockquote> + +<pre> operator== +</pre> +<p>Returns: <tt>x.c == y.c</tt></p> + +<pre> operator< +</pre> +<p>Returns: <tt>x.c < y.c</tt></p> + +<pre> operator!= +</pre> +<p>Returns: <tt>x.c != y.c</tt></p> + +<pre> operator> +</pre> +<p>Returns: <tt>x.c > y.c</tt></p> + +<pre> operator<= +</pre> +<p>Returns: <tt>x.c <= y.c</tt></p> + +<pre> operator>= +</pre> +<p>Returns: <tt>x.c >= y.c</tt></p> + +</blockquote> + + +<p><i>[Kona: Matt provided wording.]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>There isn't any real doubt about what these operators are +supposed to do, but we ought to spell it out.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="411"></a>411. Wrong names of set member functions</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.4.5 [alg.set.operations] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Frey <b>Opened:</b> 2003-07-09 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#alg.set.operations">issues</a> in [alg.set.operations].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +25.4.5 [alg.set.operations] paragraph 1 reads: +"The semantics of the set operations are generalized to multisets in a +standard way by defining union() to contain the maximum number of +occurrences of every element, intersection() to contain the minimum, and +so on." +</p> + +<p> +This is wrong. The name of the functions are set_union() and +set_intersection(), not union() and intersection(). +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change that sentence to use the correct names.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="412"></a>412. Typo in 27.4.4.3</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.5.4.3 [iostate.flags] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2003-07-10 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#iostate.flags">issues</a> in [iostate.flags].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#429">429</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The Effects clause in 27.5.4.3 [iostate.flags] paragraph 5 says that the +function only throws if the respective bits are already set prior to +the function call. That's obviously not the intent. The typo ought to +be corrected and the text reworded as: "If (<i>state</i> & +exceptions()) == 0, returns. ..." +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 27.5.4.3 [iostate.flags] paragraph 5, replace "If (rdstate() & +exceptions()) == 0" with "If ((state | (rdbuf() ? goodbit : badbit)) +& exceptions()) == 0". +</p> + +<p><i>[Kona: the original proposed resolution wasn't quite right. We + really do mean rdstate(); the ambiguity is that the wording in the + standard doesn't make it clear whether we mean rdstate() before + setting the new state, or rdsate() after setting it. We intend the + latter, of course. Post-Kona: Martin provided wording.]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="413"></a>413. Proposed resolution to LDR#64 still wrong</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.1.2.3 [istream::extractors] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Bo Persson <b>Opened:</b> 2003-07-13 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#istream::extractors">issues</a> in [istream::extractors].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The second sentence of the proposed resolution says: +</p> + +<p> +"If it inserted no characters because it caught an exception thrown +while extracting characters from sb and ..." +</p> + +<p> +However, we are not extracting from sb, but extracting from the +basic_istream (*this) and inserting into sb. I can't really tell if +"extracting" or "sb" is a typo. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Sydney: Definitely a real issue. We are, indeed, extracting characters +from an istream and not from sb. The problem was there in the FDIS and +wasn't fixed by issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#64">64</a>. Probably what was intended was +to have *this instead of sb. We're talking about the exception flag +state of a basic_istream object, and there's only one basic_istream +object in this discussion, so that would be a consistent +interpretation. (But we need to be careful: the exception policy of +this member function must be consistent with that of other +extractors.) PJP will provide wording. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change the sentence from:</p> + +<blockquote><p> +If it inserted no characters because it caught an exception thrown +while extracting characters from sb and failbit is on in exceptions(), +then the caught exception is rethrown. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>to:</p> + +<blockquote><p> +If it inserted no characters because it caught an exception thrown +while extracting characters from *this and failbit is on in exceptions(), +then the caught exception is rethrown. +</p></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="414"></a>414. Which iterators are invalidated by v.erase()?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.4.1.4 [vector.modifiers] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 2003-08-19 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#vector.modifiers">issues</a> in [vector.modifiers].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Consider the following code fragment: +</p> +<blockquote> +<pre>int A[8] = { 1,3,5,7,9,8,4,2 }; +std::vector<int> v(A, A+8); + +std::vector<int>::iterator i1 = v.begin() + 3; +std::vector<int>::iterator i2 = v.begin() + 4; +v.erase(i1); +</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Which iterators are invalidated by <tt>v.erase(i1)</tt>: i1, i2, +both, or neither? +</p> + +<p> +On all existing implementations that I know of, the status of i1 and +i2 is the same: both of them will be iterators that point to some +elements of the vector (albeit not the same elements they did +before). You won't get a crash if you use them. Depending on +exactly what you mean by "invalidate", you might say that neither one +has been invalidated because they still point to <i>something</i>, +or you might say that both have been invalidated because in both +cases the elements they point to have been changed out from under the +iterator. +</p> + +<p> +The standard doesn't say either of those things. It says that erase +invalidates all iterators and references "after the point of the +erase". This doesn't include i1, since it's at the point of the +erase instead of after it. I can't think of any sensible definition +of invalidation by which one can say that i2 is invalidated but i1 +isn't. +</p> + +<p> +(This issue is important if you try to reason about iterator validity +based only on the guarantees in the standard, rather than reasoning +from typical implementation techniques. Strict debugging modes, +which some programmers find useful, do not use typical implementation +techniques.) +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 23.4.1.4 [vector.modifiers] paragraph 3, change "Invalidates all the +iterators and references after the point of the erase" to +"Invalidates iterators and references at or after the point of the +erase". +</p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>I believe this was essentially a typographical error, and that it + was taken for granted that erasing an element invalidates iterators + that point to it. The effects clause in question treats iterators + and references in parallel, and it would seem counterintuitive to + say that a reference to an erased value remains valid.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="415"></a>415. behavior of std::ws</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.1.4 [istream.manip] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2003-09-18 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +According to 27.6.1.4, the ws() manipulator is not required to construct +the sentry object. The manipulator is also not a member function so the +text in 27.6.1, p1 through 4 that describes the exception policy for +istream member functions does not apply. That seems inconsistent with +the rest of extractors and all the other input functions (i.e., ws will +not cause a tied stream to be flushed before extraction, it doesn't check +the stream's exceptions or catch exceptions thrown during input, and it +doesn't affect the stream's gcount). +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add to 27.7.1.4 [istream.manip], immediately before the first sentence +of paragraph 1, the following text: +</p> + + <blockquote><p> + Behaves as an unformatted input function (as described in + 27.6.1.3, paragraph 1), except that it does not count the number + of characters extracted and does not affect the value returned by + subsequent calls to is.gcount(). After constructing a sentry + object... + </p></blockquote> + +<p><i>[Post-Kona: Martin provided wording]</i></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="416"></a>416. definitions of XXX_MIN and XXX_MAX macros in climits</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.3.2 [c.limits] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2003-09-18 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + <p> + +Given two overloads of the function foo(), one taking an argument of type +int and the other taking a long, which one will the call foo(LONG_MAX) +resolve to? The expected answer should be foo(long), but whether that +is true depends on the #defintion of the LONG_MAX macro, specifically +its type. This issue is about the fact that the type of these macros +is not actually required to be the same as the the type each respective +limit. +<br> + +Section 18.2.2 of the C++ Standard does not specify the exact types of +the XXX_MIN and XXX_MAX macros #defined in the <climits> and <limits.h> +headers such as INT_MAX and LONG_MAX and instead defers to the C standard. +<br> + +Section 5.2.4.2.1, p1 of the C standard specifies that "The values [of +these constants] shall be replaced by constant expressions suitable for use +in #if preprocessing directives. Moreover, except for CHAR_BIT and MB_LEN_MAX, +the following shall be replaced by expressions that have the same type as +would an expression that is an object of the corresponding type converted +according to the integer promotions." +<br> + +The "corresponding type converted according to the integer promotions" for +LONG_MAX is, according to 6.4.4.1, p5 of the C standard, the type of long +converted to the first of the following set of types that can represent it: +int, long int, long long int. So on an implementation where (sizeof(long) +== sizeof(int)) this type is actually int, while on an implementation where +(sizeof(long) > sizeof(int)) holds this type will be long. +<br> + +This is not an issue in C since the type of the macro cannot be detected +by any conforming C program, but it presents a portability problem in C++ +where the actual type is easily detectable by overload resolution. + + </p> +<p><i>[Kona: the LWG does not believe this is a defect. The C macro + definitions are what they are; we've got a better + mechanism, <tt>std::numeric_limits</tt>, that is specified more + precisely than the C limit macros. At most we should add a + nonnormative note recommending that users who care about the exact + types of limit quantities should use <limits> instead of + <climits>.]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +Change 18.3.2 [c.limits], paragraph 2: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +-2- The contents are the same as the Standard C library header <tt><limits.h></tt>. +<ins>[<i>Note:</i> The types of the macros in <tt><climits></tt> are not guaranteed +to match the type to which they refer.<i>--end note</i>]</ins> +</p></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="419"></a>419. istream extractors not setting failbit if eofbit is already set</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.1.1.3 [istream::sentry] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2003-09-18 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#istream::sentry">issues</a> in [istream::sentry].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + <p> + +27.7.1.1.3 [istream::sentry], p2 says that istream::sentry ctor prepares for input if is.good() +is true. p4 then goes on to say that the ctor sets the sentry::ok_ member to +true if the stream state is good after any preparation. 27.7.1.2.1 [istream.formatted.reqmts], p1 then +says that a formatted input function endeavors to obtain the requested input +if the sentry's operator bool() returns true. + +Given these requirements, no formatted extractor should ever set failbit if +the initial stream rdstate() == eofbit. That is contrary to the behavior of +all implementations I tested. The program below prints out + +eof = 1, fail = 0 +eof = 1, fail = 1 + +on all of them. + </p> +<pre> +#include <sstream> +#include <cstdio> + +int main() +{ + std::istringstream strm ("1"); + + int i = 0; + + strm >> i; + + std::printf ("eof = %d, fail = %d\n", + !!strm.eof (), !!strm.fail ()); + + strm >> i; + + std::printf ("eof = %d, fail = %d\n", + !!strm.eof (), !!strm.fail ()); +} + +</pre> + <p> +<br> + +Comments from Jerry Schwarz (c++std-lib-11373): +<br> + +Jerry Schwarz wrote: +<br> + +I don't know where (if anywhere) it says it in the standard, but the +formatted extractors are supposed to set failbit if they don't extract +any characters. If they didn't then simple loops like +<br> + +while (cin >> x); +<br> + +would loop forever. +<br> + +Further comments from Martin Sebor: +<br> + +The question is which part of the extraction should prevent this from happening +by setting failbit when eofbit is already set. It could either be the sentry +object or the extractor. It seems that most implementations have chosen to +set failbit in the sentry [...] so that's the text that will need to be +corrected. + + </p> +<p> +Pre Berlin: This issue is related to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#342">342</a>. If the sentry +sets <tt>failbit</tt> when it finds <tt>eofbit</tt> already set, then +you can never seek away from the end of stream. +</p> +<p>Kona: Possibly NAD. If eofbit is set then good() will return false. We + then set <i>ok</i> to false. We believe that the sentry's + constructor should always set failbit when <i>ok</i> is false, and + we also think the standard already says that. Possibly it could be + clearer.</p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 27.7.1.1.3 [istream::sentry], p2 to: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>explicit sentry(basic_istream<charT,traits>& <i>is</i> , bool <i>noskipws</i> = false);</pre> +<p> +-2- <i>Effects:</i> If <tt>is.good()</tt> is <del><tt>true</tt></del> +<ins><tt>false</tt></ins>, <ins>calls <tt>is.setstate(failbit)</tt>. +Otherwise</ins> prepares for formatted or unformatted input. ... +</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="420"></a>420. is std::FILE a complete type?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.9.1 [fstreams] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2003-09-18 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#fstreams">issues</a> in [fstreams].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +7.19.1, p2, of C99 requires that the FILE type only be declared in +<stdio.h>. None of the (implementation-defined) members of the +struct is mentioned anywhere for obvious reasons. +</p> + +<p> +C++ says in 27.8.1, p2 that FILE is a type that's defined in <cstdio>. Is +it really the intent that FILE be a complete type or is an implementation +allowed to just declare it without providing a full definition? +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In the first sentence of 27.9.1 [fstreams] paragraph 2, change + "defined" to "declared".</p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>We don't want to impose any restrictions beyond what the C standard + already says. We don't want to make anything implementation defined, + because that imposes new requirements in implementations.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="422"></a>422. explicit specializations of member functions of class templates</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17.6.3.3 [reserved.names] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2003-09-18 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#reserved.names">issues</a> in [reserved.names].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +It has been suggested that 17.4.3.1, p1 may or may not allow programs to +explicitly specialize members of standard templates on user-defined types. +The answer to the question might have an impact where library requirements +are given using the "as if" rule. I.e., if programs are allowed to specialize +member functions they will be able to detect an implementation's strict +conformance to Effects clauses that describe the behavior of the function +in terms of the other member function (the one explicitly specialized by +the program) by relying on the "as if" rule. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> + Add the following sentence to 17.6.3.3 [reserved.names], p1: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +It is undefined for a C++ program to add declarations or definitions to +namespace std or namespaces within namespace <tt>std</tt> unless otherwise specified. A +program may add template specializations for any standard library template to +namespace <tt>std</tt>. Such a specialization (complete or partial) of a standard library +template results in undefined behavior unless the declaration depends on a +user-defined type of external linkage and unless the specialization meets the +standard library requirements for the original template.<sup>168)</sup> +<ins>A program has undefined behavior if it declares</ins> +</p> +<ul> +<li><ins>an explicit specialization of any member function of a standard + library class template, or</ins></li> +<li><ins>an explicit specialization of any member function template of a + standard library class or class template, or</ins></li> +<li><ins>an explicit or partial specialization of any member class + template of a standard library class or class template.</ins></li> +</ul> +<p> +A program may explicitly instantiate any templates in the standard library only +if the declaration depends on the name of a user-defined type of external +linkage and the instantiation meets the standard library requirements for the +original template. +</p></blockquote> + +<p><i>[Kona: straw poll was 6-1 that user programs should not be + allowed to specialize individual member functions of standard + library class templates, and that doing so invokes undefined + behavior. Post-Kona: Martin provided wording.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Sydney: The LWG agrees that the standard shouldn't permit users +to specialize individual member functions unless they specialize the +whole class, but we're not sure these words say what we want them to; +they could be read as prohibiting the specialization of any standard +library class templates. We need to consult with CWG to make sure we +use the right wording.]</i></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="425"></a>425. return value of std::get_temporary_buffer</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.7 [temporary.buffer] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2003-09-18 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The standard is not clear about the requirements on the value returned from +a call to get_temporary_buffer(0). In particular, it fails to specify whether +the call should return a distinct pointer each time it is called (like +operator new), or whether the value is unspecified (as if returned by +malloc). The standard also fails to mention what the required behavior +is when the argument is less than 0. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change 20.7.3 [meta.help] paragraph 2 from "...or a pair of 0 +values if no storage can be obtained" to "...or a pair of 0 values if +no storage can be obtained or if <i>n</i> <= 0."</p> +<p><i>[Kona: Matt provided wording]</i></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="426"></a>426. search_n(), fill_n(), and generate_n() with negative n</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.2.13 [alg.search], 25.3.6 [alg.fill], 25.3.7 [alg.generate] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2003-09-18 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#alg.search">issues</a> in [alg.search].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The complexity requirements for these function templates are incorrect +(or don't even make sense) for negative n:</p> + +<p>25.1.9, p7 (search_n): +<br> +Complexity: At most (last1 - first1) * count applications +of the corresponding predicate.</p> + +<p>25.2.5, p3 (fill_n): +<br> +Complexity: Exactly last - first (or n) assignments.</p> + +<p>25.2.6, p3 (generate_n): +<br> +Complexity: Exactly last - first (or n) assignments.</p> + +<p> +In addition, the Requirements or the Effects clauses for the latter two +templates don't say anything about the behavior when n is negative. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change 25.1.9, p7 to</p> + +<blockquote><p> +Complexity: At most (last1 - first1) * count applications +of the corresponding predicate if count is positive, +or 0 otherwise. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>Change 25.2.5, p2 to</p> +<blockquote><p> +Effects: Assigns value through all the iterators in the range [first, +last), or [first, first + n) if n is positive, none otherwise. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>Change 25.2.5, p3 to:</p> +<blockquote><p> +Complexity: Exactly last - first (or n if n is positive, +or 0 otherwise) assignments. +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +Change 25.2.6, p1 +to (notice the correction for the misspelled "through"): +</p> +<blockquote><p> +Effects: Invokes the function object genand assigns the return +value of gen through all the iterators in the range [first, last), +or [first, first + n) if n is positive, or [first, first) +otherwise. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>Change 25.2.6, p3 to:</p> +<blockquote><p> +Complexity: Exactly last - first (or n if n is positive, +or 0 otherwise) assignments. +</p></blockquote> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>Informally, we want to say that whenever we see a negative number + we treat it the same as if it were zero. We believe the above + changes do that (although they may not be the minimal way of saying + so). The LWG considered and rejected the alternative of saying that + negative numbers are undefined behavior.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="427"></a>427. stage 2 and rationale of DR 221</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.2.1.2 [facet.num.get.virtuals] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2003-09-18 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#facet.num.get.virtuals">issues</a> in [facet.num.get.virtuals].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The requirements specified in Stage 2 and reiterated in the rationale +of DR 221 (and echoed again in DR 303) specify that num_get<charT>:: +do_get() compares characters on the stream against the widened elements +of "012...abc...ABCX+-" +</p> + +<p> +An implementation is required to allow programs to instantiate the num_get +template on any charT that satisfies the requirements on a user-defined +character type. These requirements do not include the ability of the +character type to be equality comparable (the char_traits template must +be used to perform tests for equality). Hence, the num_get template cannot +be implemented to support any arbitrary character type. The num_get template +must either make the assumption that the character type is equality-comparable +(as some popular implementations do), or it may use char_traits<charT> to do +the comparisons (some other popular implementations do that). This diversity +of approaches makes it difficult to write portable programs that attempt to +instantiate the num_get template on user-defined types. +</p> + +<p><i>[Kona: the heart of the problem is that we're theoretically + supposed to use traits classes for all fundamental character + operations like assignment and comparison, but facets don't have + traits parameters. This is a fundamental design flaw and it + appears all over the place, not just in this one place. It's not + clear what the correct solution is, but a thorough review of facets + and traits is in order. The LWG considered and rejected the + possibility of changing numeric facets to use narrowing instead of + widening. This may be a good idea for other reasons (see issue + <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#459">459</a>), but it doesn't solve the problem raised by this + issue. Whether we use widen or narrow the <tt>num_get</tt> facet + still has no idea which traits class the user wants to use for + the comparison, because only streams, not facets, are passed traits + classes. The standard does not require that two different + traits classes with the same <tt>char_type</tt> must necessarily + have the same behavior.]</i></p> + + +<p>Informally, one possibility: require that some of the basic +character operations, such as <tt>eq</tt>, <tt>lt</tt>, +and <tt>assign</tt>, must behave the same way for all traits classes +with the same <tt>char_type</tt>. If we accept that limitation on +traits classes, then the facet could reasonably be required to +use <tt>char_traits<charT></tt>.</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +There was general agreement that the standard only needs to specify the +behavior when the character type is char or wchar_t. +</p> +<p> +Beman: we don't need to worry about C++1x because there is a non-zero +possibility that we would have a replacement facility for iostreams that +would solve these problems. +</p> +<p> +We need to change the following sentence in [locale.category], paragraph +6 to specify that C is char and wchar_t: +</p> +<p> +"A template formal parameter with name C represents the set of all +possible specializations on a parameter that satisfies the requirements +for a character on which any member of the iostream components can be +instantiated." +</p> +<p> +We also need to specify in 27 that the basic character operations, such +as eq, lt, and assign use std::char_traits. +</p> +<p> +Daniel volunteered to provide wording. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-09-19 Daniel provided wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Leave as Open. Alisdair and/or Tom will provide wording based on discussions. +We want to clearly state that streams and locales work just on <tt>char</tt> +and <tt>wchar_t</tt> (except where otherwise specified). +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-06 Tom updated the proposed wording. +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p><i>[ +The original proposed wording is preserved here: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote class="note"> +<ol> +<li> +<p> +Change 22.3.1.1.1 [locale.category]/6: +</p> + +<blockquote> +[..] A template formal parameter with name <tt>C</tt> represents the set of all possible +specializations on a <ins><tt>char</tt> or <tt>wchar_t</tt></ins> parameter<del> that satisfies +the requirements for a character on which any of the iostream components +can be instantiated</del>. [..] +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Add the following sentence to the end of 22.4.2 [category.numeric]/2: +</p> + +<blockquote> +[..] These specializations refer to [..], and also for the <tt>ctype<></tt> facet to +perform character classification. <ins>Implementations are encouraged +but not required to use the <tt>char_traits<charT></tt> functions for all +comparisons and assignments of characters of type <tt>charT</tt> that do +not belong to the set of required specializations.</ins> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 22.4.2.1.2 [facet.num.get.virtuals]/3: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Stage 2: If <tt>in==end</tt> then stage 2 terminates. Otherwise a <tt>charT</tt> is taken +from <tt>in</tt> and local variables are initialized as if by +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>char_type ct = *in; +<ins>using tr = char_traits<char_type>; +const char_type* pos = tr::find(atoms, sizeof(src) - 1, ct);</ins> +char c = src[<del>find(atoms, atoms + sizeof(src) - 1, ct) - atoms</del> + <ins>pos ? pos - atoms : sizeof(src) - 1</ins>]; +if (<ins>tr::eq(ct, </ins><del>ct == </del>use_facet<numpunct<charT>(loc).decimal_point()<ins>)</ins>) + c = '.'; +bool discard = + <ins>tr::eq(ct, </ins><del>ct == </del>use_facet<numpunct<charT>(loc).thousands_sep()<ins>)</ins> + && use_facet<numpunct<charT> >(loc).grouping().length() != 0; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +where the values <tt>src</tt> and <tt>atoms</tt> are defined as if by: [..] +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +[Remark of the author: I considered to replace the initialization +"<tt>char_type ct = *in;</tt>" +by the sequence "<tt>char_type ct; tr::assign(ct, *in);</tt>", but decided +against it, because +it is a copy-initialization context, not an assignment] +</p> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Add the following sentence to the end of 22.4.5 [category.time]/1: +</p> + +<blockquote> +[..] Their members use [..] , to determine formatting details. +<ins>Implementations are encouraged but not required to use the +<tt>char_traits<charT></tt> functions for all comparisons and assignments +of characters of type <tt>charT</tt> that do +not belong to the set of required specializations.</ins> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 22.4.5.1.1 [locale.time.get.members]/8 bullet 4: +</p> + +<ul> +<li> +<del>The next element of <tt>fmt</tt> is equal to <tt>'%'</tt></del> <ins>For the next element <tt>c</tt> +of <tt>fmt char_traits<char_type>::eq(c, use_facet<ctype<char_type>>(f.getloc()).widen('%')) == true</tt></ins>, +[..] +</li> +</ul> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Add the following sentence to the end of 22.4.6 [category.monetary]/2: +</p> + +<blockquote> +Their members use [..] to determine formatting details. +<ins>Implementations are encouraged but not required to use the +<tt>char_traits<charT></tt> functions for all comparisons and assignments +of characters of type <tt>charT</tt> that do +not belong to the set of required specializations.</ins> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 22.4.6.1.2 [locale.money.get.virtuals]/4: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +[..] The value <tt>units</tt> is produced as if by: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>for (int i = 0; i < n; ++i) + buf2[i] = src[<ins>char_traits<charT>::</ins>find(atoms, <del>atoms+</del>sizeof(src), buf1[i]) - atoms]; +buf2[n] = 0; +sscanf(buf2, "%Lf", &units); +</pre></blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 22.4.6.2.2 [locale.money.put.virtuals]/1: +</p> + +<blockquote> +[..] for character buffers <tt>buf1</tt> and <tt>buf2</tt>. If <ins>for</ins> the first +character <ins><tt>c</tt></ins> +in <tt>digits</tt> or <tt>buf2</tt> <del>is equal to +<tt>ct.widen('-')</tt></del><ins><tt>char_traits<charT>::eq(c, +ct.widen('-')) == true</tt></ins>, [..] +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Add a footnote to the first sentence of 27.7.1.2.2 [istream.formatted.arithmetic]/1: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +As in the case of the inserters, these extractors depend on the locale's +<tt>num_get<></tt> (22.4.2.1) object to perform parsing the input stream +data.<ins><sup>(footnote)</sup></ins> [..] +</p> + +<p> +<ins> +<sup>footnote)</sup> If the traits of the input stream has different semantics for <tt>lt()</tt>, +<tt>eq()</tt>, and <tt>assign()</tt> than <tt>char_traits<char_type></tt>, this may give surprising +results. +</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Add a footnote to the second sentence of 27.7.2.6.2 [ostream.inserters.arithmetic]/1: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> The classes <tt>num_get<></tt> and +<tt>num_put<></tt> handle locale-dependent numeric formatting and +parsing. These inserter functions use the imbued locale value to perform +numeric formatting.<ins><sup>(footnote)</sup></ins> [..] +</p> + +<p> +<ins> +<sup>footnote)</sup> If the traits of the output stream has different semantics for <tt>lt()</tt>, +<tt>eq()</tt>, and <tt>assign()</tt> than <tt>char_traits<char_type></tt>, this may give surprising +results. +</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Add a footnote after the first sentence of 27.7.4 [ext.manip]/4: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Returns:</i> An object of unspecified type such that if in is an object of type +<tt>basic_istream<charT, traits></tt> then the expression <tt>in >> get_money(mon, intl)</tt> +behaves as if it called <tt>f(in, mon, intl)</tt>, where the function <tt>f</tt> is defined +as:<ins><sup>(footnote)</sup></ins> [..] +</p> + +<p> +<ins> +<sup>footnote)</sup> If the traits of the input stream has different semantics for <tt>lt()</tt>, +<tt>eq()</tt>, and <tt>assign()</tt> than <tt>char_traits<char_type></tt>, this may give surprising +results. +</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Add a footnote after the first sentence of 27.7.4 [ext.manip]/5: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Returns:</i> An object of unspecified type such that if <tt>out</tt> is an object of type +<tt>basic_ostream<charT, traits></tt> then the expression <tt>out << put_money(mon, intl)</tt> +behaves as a formatted input function that calls <tt>f(out, mon, intl)</tt>, where the +function <tt>f</tt> is defined as:<ins><sup>(footnote)</sup></ins> [..] +</p> + +<p> +<ins> +<sup>footnote)</sup> If the traits of the output stream has different semantics for <tt>lt()</tt>, +<tt>eq()</tt>, and <tt>assign()</tt> than <tt>char_traits<char_type></tt>, this may give surprising +results. +</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +13) Add a footnote after the first sentence of 27.7.4 [ext.manip]/8: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Returns:</i> An object of unspecified type such that if <tt>in</tt> is an +object of type b<tt>asic_istream<charT, traits></tt> then the expression +<tt>in >>get_time(tmb, fmt)</tt> behaves as if it called <tt>f(in, tmb, fmt)</tt>, +where the function <tt>f</tt> is defined as:<ins><sup>(footnote)</sup></ins> [..] +</p> + +<p> +<ins> +<sup>footnote)</sup> If the traits of the input stream has different semantics for <tt>lt()</tt>, +<tt>eq()</tt>, and <tt>assign()</tt> than <tt>char_traits<char_type></tt>, this may give surprising +results. +</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Add a footnote after the first sentence of 27.7.4 [ext.manip]/10: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Returns: An object of unspecified type such that if <tt>out</tt> is an object of type +<tt>basic_ostream<charT, traits></tt> then the expression <tt>out <<put_time(tmb, fmt)</tt> +behaves as if it called <tt>f(out, tmb, fmt)</tt>, where the function <tt>f</tt> is defined +as:<ins><sup>(footnote)</sup></ins> [..] +</p> + +<p> +<ins> +<sup>footnote)</sup> If the traits of the output stream has different semantics for <tt>lt()</tt>, +<tt>eq()</tt>, and <tt>assign()</tt> than <tt>char_traits<char_type></tt>, this may give surprising +results. +</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010 Pittsburgh: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Moved to Ready with only two of the bullets. The original wording is preserved +here: +</p> + +<blockquote class="note"> +<ol> +<li> +<p> +Change 22.3.1.1.1 [locale.category]/6: +</p> + +<blockquote> +[..] A template formal parameter with name <tt>C</tt> represents +the set +<del>of all possible specializations on a</del> +<ins>of types containing <tt>char</tt>, <tt>wchar_t</tt>, +and any other implementation-defined character type +</ins> +<del> parameter</del> +that satisfies +the requirements for a character on which any of the iostream components +can be instantiated. [..] +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Add the following sentence to the end of 22.4.2 [category.numeric]/2: +</p> + +<blockquote> +[..] These specializations refer to [..], and also for the <tt>ctype<></tt> facet to +perform character classification. <ins>[<i>Note:</i> Implementations are encouraged +but not required to use the <tt>char_traits<charT></tt> functions for all +comparisons and assignments of characters of type <tt>charT</tt> that do +not belong to the set of required specializations - <i>end note</i>].</ins> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 22.4.2.1.2 [facet.num.get.virtuals]/3: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Stage 2: If <tt>in==end</tt> then stage 2 terminates. Otherwise a <tt>charT</tt> is taken +from <tt>in</tt> and local variables are initialized as if by +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>char_type ct = *in; +<ins>using tr = char_traits<char_type>; +const char_type* pos = tr::find(atoms, sizeof(src) - 1, ct);</ins> +char c = src[<del>find(atoms, atoms + sizeof(src) - 1, ct) - atoms</del> + <ins>pos ? pos - atoms : sizeof(src) - 1</ins>]; +if (<ins>tr::eq(ct, </ins><del>ct == </del>use_facet<numpunct<charT>(loc).decimal_point()<ins>)</ins>) + c = '.'; +bool discard = + <ins>tr::eq(ct, </ins><del>ct == </del>use_facet<numpunct<charT>(loc).thousands_sep()<ins>)</ins> + && use_facet<numpunct<charT> >(loc).grouping().length() != 0; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +where the values <tt>src</tt> and <tt>atoms</tt> are defined as if by: [..] +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +[Remark of the author: I considered to replace the initialization +"<tt>char_type ct = *in;</tt>" +by the sequence "<tt>char_type ct; tr::assign(ct, *in);</tt>", but decided +against it, because +it is a copy-initialization context, not an assignment] +</p> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Add the following sentence to the end of 22.4.5 [category.time]/1: +</p> + +<blockquote> +[..] Their members use [..] , to determine formatting details. +<ins>[<i>Note:</i> Implementations are encouraged but not required to use the +<tt>char_traits<charT></tt> functions for all comparisons and assignments +of characters of type <tt>charT</tt> that do +not belong to the set of required specializations - <i>end note</i>].</ins> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 22.4.5.1.1 [locale.time.get.members]/8 bullet 4: +</p> + +<ul> +<li> +<del>The next element of <tt>fmt</tt> is equal to <tt>'%'</tt></del> <ins>For the next element <tt>c</tt> +of <tt>fmt char_traits<char_type>::eq(c, use_facet<ctype<char_type>>(f.getloc()).widen('%')) == true</tt></ins>, +[..] +</li> +</ul> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Add the following sentence to the end of 22.4.6 [category.monetary]/2: +</p> + +<blockquote> +Their members use [..] to determine formatting details. +<ins>[<i>Note:</i> Implementations are encouraged but not required to use the +<tt>char_traits<charT></tt> functions for all comparisons and assignments +of characters of type <tt>charT</tt> that do +not belong to the set of required specializations - <i>end note</i>].</ins> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 22.4.6.1.2 [locale.money.get.virtuals]/4: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +[..] The value <tt>units</tt> is produced as if by: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>for (int i = 0; i < n; ++i) + buf2[i] = src[<ins>char_traits<charT>::</ins>find(atoms, <del>atoms+</del>sizeof(src), buf1[i]) - atoms]; +buf2[n] = 0; +sscanf(buf2, "%Lf", &units); +</pre></blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 22.4.6.2.2 [locale.money.put.virtuals]/1: +</p> + +<blockquote> +[..] for character buffers <tt>buf1</tt> and <tt>buf2</tt>. If <ins>for</ins> the first +character <ins><tt>c</tt></ins> +in <tt>digits</tt> or <tt>buf2</tt> <del>is equal to +<tt>ct.widen('-')</tt></del><ins><tt>char_traits<charT>::eq(c, +ct.widen('-')) == true</tt></ins>, [..] +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Add a new paragraph after the +first paragraph of 27.2.2 [iostreams.limits.pos]/1: +</p> +<blockquote> +In the classes of clause 27, +a template formal parameter with name <tt>charT</tt> represents +one of +the set of types +containing <tt>char</tt>, <tt>wchar_t</tt>, +and any other implementation-defined character type +that satisfies +the requirements for a character on which any of the iostream components +can be instantiated. +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Add a footnote to the first sentence of 27.7.1.2.2 [istream.formatted.arithmetic]/1: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +As in the case of the inserters, these extractors depend on the locale's +<tt>num_get<></tt> (22.4.2.1) object to perform parsing the input stream +data.<ins><sup>(footnote)</sup></ins> [..] +</p> + +<p> +<ins> +<sup>footnote)</sup> If the traits of the input stream has different semantics for <tt>lt()</tt>, +<tt>eq()</tt>, and <tt>assign()</tt> than <tt>char_traits<char_type></tt>, this may give surprising +results. +</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Add a footnote to the second sentence of 27.7.2.6.2 [ostream.inserters.arithmetic]/1: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> The classes <tt>num_get<></tt> and +<tt>num_put<></tt> handle locale-dependent numeric formatting and +parsing. These inserter functions use the imbued locale value to perform +numeric formatting.<ins><sup>(footnote)</sup></ins> [..] +</p> + +<p> +<ins> +<sup>footnote)</sup> If the traits of the output stream has different semantics for <tt>lt()</tt>, +<tt>eq()</tt>, and <tt>assign()</tt> than <tt>char_traits<char_type></tt>, this may give surprising +results. +</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</li> + + +<li> +<p> +Add a footnote after the first sentence of 27.7.4 [ext.manip]/4: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Returns:</i> An object of unspecified type such that if in is an object of type +<tt>basic_istream<charT, traits></tt> then the expression <tt>in >> get_money(mon, intl)</tt> +behaves as if it called <tt>f(in, mon, intl)</tt>, where the function <tt>f</tt> is defined +as:<ins><sup>(footnote)</sup></ins> [..] +</p> + +<p> +<ins> +<sup>footnote)</sup> If the traits of the input stream has different semantics for <tt>lt()</tt>, +<tt>eq()</tt>, and <tt>assign()</tt> than <tt>char_traits<char_type></tt>, this may give surprising +results. +</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Add a footnote after the first sentence of 27.7.4 [ext.manip]/5: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Returns:</i> An object of unspecified type such that if <tt>out</tt> is an object of type +<tt>basic_ostream<charT, traits></tt> then the expression <tt>out << put_money(mon, intl)</tt> +behaves as a formatted input function that calls <tt>f(out, mon, intl)</tt>, where the +function <tt>f</tt> is defined as:<ins><sup>(footnote)</sup></ins> [..] +</p> + +<p> +<ins> +<sup>footnote)</sup> If the traits of the output stream has different semantics for <tt>lt()</tt>, +<tt>eq()</tt>, and <tt>assign()</tt> than <tt>char_traits<char_type></tt>, this may give surprising +results. +</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Add a footnote after the first sentence of 27.7.4 [ext.manip]/8: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Returns:</i> An object of unspecified type such that if <tt>in</tt> is an +object of type b<tt>asic_istream<charT, traits></tt> then the expression +<tt>in >>get_time(tmb, fmt)</tt> behaves as if it called <tt>f(in, tmb, fmt)</tt>, +where the function <tt>f</tt> is defined as:<ins><sup>(footnote)</sup></ins> [..] +</p> + +<p> +<ins> +<sup>footnote)</sup> If the traits of the input stream has different semantics for <tt>lt()</tt>, +<tt>eq()</tt>, and <tt>assign()</tt> than <tt>char_traits<char_type></tt>, this may give surprising +results. +</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Add a footnote after the first sentence of 27.7.4 [ext.manip]/10: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Returns: An object of unspecified type such that if <tt>out</tt> is an object of type +<tt>basic_ostream<charT, traits></tt> then the expression <tt>out <<put_time(tmb, fmt)</tt> +behaves as if it called <tt>f(out, tmb, fmt)</tt>, where the function <tt>f</tt> is defined +as:<ins><sup>(footnote)</sup></ins> [..] +</p> + +<p> +<ins> +<sup>footnote)</sup> If the traits of the output stream has different semantics for <tt>lt()</tt>, +<tt>eq()</tt>, and <tt>assign()</tt> than <tt>char_traits<char_type></tt>, this may give surprising +results. +</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<ol> +<li> +<p> +Change 22.3.1.1.1 [locale.category]/6: +</p> + +<blockquote> +[..] A template formal parameter with name <tt>C</tt> represents +the set +<del>of all possible specializations on a</del> +<ins>of types containing <tt>char</tt>, <tt>wchar_t</tt>, +and any other implementation-defined character type +</ins> +<del> parameter</del> +that satisfies +the requirements for a character on which any of the iostream components +can be instantiated. [..] +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Add a new paragraph after the +first paragraph of 27.2.2 [iostreams.limits.pos]/1: +</p> +<blockquote> +In the classes of clause 27, +a template formal parameter with name <tt>charT</tt> represents +one of +the set of types +containing <tt>char</tt>, <tt>wchar_t</tt>, +and any other implementation-defined character type +that satisfies +the requirements for a character on which any of the iostream components +can be instantiated. +</blockquote> +</li> + +</ol> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="428"></a>428. string::erase(iterator) validity</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.4.6.5 [string::erase] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2003-09-18 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#string::erase">issues</a> in [string::erase].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +23.1.1, p3 along with Table 67 specify as a prerequisite for a.erase(q) +that q must be a valid dereferenceable iterator into the sequence a. +</p> + +<p> +However, 21.3.5.5, p5 describing string::erase(p) only requires that +p be a valid iterator. +</p> + +<p> +This may be interepreted as a relaxation of the general requirement, +which is most likely not the intent. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Remove 21.4.6.5 [string::erase] paragraph 5.</p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The LWG considered two options: changing the string requirements to + match the general container requirements, or just removing the + erroneous string requirements altogether. The LWG chose the latter + option, on the grounds that duplicating text always risks the + possibility that it might be duplicated incorrectly.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="430"></a>430. valarray subset operations</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.6.2.4 [valarray.sub] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2003-09-18 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The standard fails to specify the behavior of valarray::operator[](slice) +and other valarray subset operations when they are passed an "invalid" +slice object, i.e., either a slice that doesn't make sense at all (e.g., +slice (0, 1, 0) or one that doesn't specify a valid subset of the valarray +object (e.g., slice (2, 1, 1) for a valarray of size 1). +</p> +<p><i>[Kona: the LWG believes that invalid slices should invoke + undefined behavior. Valarrays are supposed to be designed for high + performance, so we don't want to require specific checking. We + need wording to express this decision.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Bellevue: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Please note that the standard also fails to specify the behavior of +slice_array and gslice_array in the valid case. Bill Plauger will +endeavor to provide revised wording for slice_array and gslice_array. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +post-Bellevue: Bill provided wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Move to Ready. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-04 Pete opens: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +The resolution to LWG issue 430 has not been applied --- there have been +changes to the underlying text, and the resolution needs to be reworked. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-03-09 Matt updated wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010 Pittsburgh: Moved to Ready for Pittsburgh. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Replace 26.6.2.4 [valarray.sub], with the following: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +The member operator is overloaded to provide several ways to select +sequences of elements from among those controlled by <tt>*this</tt>. +Each of these operations returns a subset of the array. The +const-qualified versions return this subset as a new <tt>valarray</tt>. The +non-const versions return a class template object which has reference +semantics to the original array, working in conjunction with various +overloads of <tt>operator=</tt> (and other assigning operators) to allow +selective replacement (slicing) of the controlled sequence. In each case +the selected element(s) must exist. +</p> + +<pre>valarray<T> operator[](slice slicearr) const; +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +This function returns an object of class <tt>valarray<T></tt> +containing those elements of the controlled sequence designated by +<tt>slicearr</tt>. [<i>Example:</i> +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>valarray<char> v0("abcdefghijklmnop", 16); +valarray<char> v1("ABCDE", 5); +v0[slice(2, 5, 3)] = v1; +// v0 == valarray<char>("abAdeBghCjkDmnEp", 16) +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +<i>end example</i>] +</p> +</blockquote> + +<pre>valarray<T> operator[](slice slicearr); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +This function selects those elements of the controlled sequence +designated by <tt>slicearr</tt>. [<i>Example</i>: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>valarray<char> v0("abcdefghijklmnop", 16); +valarray<char> v1("ABCDE", 5); +v0[slice(2, 5, 3)] = v1; +// v0 == valarray<char>("abAdeBghCjkDmnEp", 16) +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +<i>end example</i>] +</p> +</blockquote> + +<pre>valarray<T> operator[](const gslice& gslicearr) const; +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +This function returns an object of class <tt>valarray<T></tt> +containing those elements of the controlled sequence designated by +<tt>gslicearr</tt>. [<i>Example:</i> +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>valarray<char> v0("abcdefghijklmnop", 16); +const size_t lv[] = {2, 3}; +const size_t dv[] = {7, 2}; +const valarray<size_t> len(lv, 2), str(dv, 2); +// v0[gslice(3, len, str)] returns +// valarray<char>("dfhkmo", 6) +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +<i>end example</i>] +</p> +</blockquote> + +<pre>gslice_array<T> operator[](const gslice& gslicearr); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +This function selects those elements of the controlled sequence +designated by <tt>gslicearr</tt>. [<i>Example:</i> +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>valarray<char> v0("abcdefghijklmnop", 16); +valarray<char> v1("ABCDEF", 6); +const size_t lv[] = {2, 3}; +const size_t dv[] = {7, 2}; +const valarray<size_t> len(lv, 2), str(dv, 2); +v0[gslice(3, len, str)] = v1; +// v0 == valarray<char>("abcAeBgCijDlEnFp", 16) +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +<i>end example</i>] +</p> +</blockquote> + +<pre>valarray<T> operator[](const valarray<bool>& boolarr) const; +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +This function returns an object of class <tt>valarray<T></tt> +containing those elements of the controlled sequence designated by +<tt>boolarr</tt>. [<i>Example:</i> +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>valarray<char> v0("abcdefghijklmnop", 16); +const bool vb[] = {false, false, true, true, false, true}; +// v0[valarray<bool>(vb, 6)] returns +// valarray<char>("cdf", 3) +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +<i>end example</i>] +</p> +</blockquote> + +<pre>mask_array<T> operator[](const valarray<bool>& boolarr); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +This function selects those elements of the controlled sequence +designated by <tt>boolarr</tt>. [<i>Example:</i> +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>valarray<char> v0("abcdefghijklmnop", 16); +valarray<char> v1("ABC", 3); +const bool vb[] = {false, false, true, true, false, true}; +v0[valarray<bool>(vb, 6)] = v1; +// v0 == valarray<char>("abABeCghijklmnop", 16) +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +<i>end example</i>] +</p> +</blockquote> + +<pre>valarray<T> operator[](const valarray<size_t>& indarr) const; +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +This function returns an object of class <tt>valarray<T></tt> +containing those elements of the controlled sequence designated by +<tt>indarr</tt>. [<i>Example:</i> +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>valarray<char> v0("abcdefghijklmnop", 16); +const size_t vi[] = {7, 5, 2, 3, 8}; +// v0[valarray<size_t>(vi, 5)] returns +// valarray<char>("hfcdi", 5) +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +<i>end example</i>] +</p> +</blockquote> + +<pre>indirect_array<T> operator[](const valarray<size_t>& indarr); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +This function selects those elements of the controlled sequence +designated by <tt>indarr</tt>. [<i>Example:</i> +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>valarray<char> v0("abcdefghijklmnop", 16); +valarray<char> v1("ABCDE", 5); +const size_t vi[] = {7, 5, 2, 3, 8}; +v0[valarray<size_t>(vi, 5)] = v1; +// v0 == valarray<char>("abCDeBgAEjklmnop", 16) +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +<i>end example</i>] +</p> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="431"></a>431. Swapping containers with unequal allocators</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.2.5 [allocator.requirements], 25 [algorithms] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 2003-09-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-20</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#allocator.requirements">issues</a> in [allocator.requirements].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Clause 20.2.5 [allocator.requirements] paragraph 4 says that implementations + are permitted to supply containers that are unable to cope with + allocator instances and that container implementations may assume + that all instances of an allocator type compare equal. We gave + implementers this latitude as a temporary hack, and eventually we + want to get rid of it. What happens when we're dealing with + allocators that <i>don't</i> compare equal? +</p> + +<p>In particular: suppose that <tt>v1</tt> and <tt>v2</tt> are both + objects of type <tt>vector<int, my_alloc></tt> and that + <tt>v1.get_allocator() != v2.get_allocator()</tt>. What happens if + we write <tt>v1.swap(v2)</tt>? Informally, three possibilities:</p> + +<p>1. This operation is illegal. Perhaps we could say that an + implementation is required to check and to throw an exception, or + perhaps we could say it's undefined behavior.</p> +<p>2. The operation performs a slow swap (i.e. using three + invocations of <tt>operator=</tt>, leaving each allocator with its + original container. This would be an O(N) operation.</p> +<p>3. The operation swaps both the vectors' contents and their + allocators. This would be an O(1) operation. That is:</p> + <blockquote> + <pre> my_alloc a1(...); + my_alloc a2(...); + assert(a1 != a2); + + vector<int, my_alloc> v1(a1); + vector<int, my_alloc> v2(a2); + assert(a1 == v1.get_allocator()); + assert(a2 == v2.get_allocator()); + + v1.swap(v2); + assert(a1 == v2.get_allocator()); + assert(a2 == v1.get_allocator()); + </pre> + </blockquote> + +<p><i>[Kona: This is part of a general problem. We need a paper + saying how to deal with unequal allocators in general.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[pre-Sydney: Howard argues for option 3 in +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2004/n1599.html">N1599</a>. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2007-01-12, Howard: This issue will now tend to come up more often with move constructors +and move assignment operators. For containers, these members transfer resources (i.e. +the allocated memory) just like swap. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Batavia: There is agreement to overload the container <tt>swap</tt> on the allocator's Swappable +requirement using concepts. If the allocator supports Swappable, then container's swap will +swap allocators, else it will perform a "slow swap" using copy construction and copy assignment. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-04-28 Pablo adds: +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +Fixed in +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2525.pdf">N2525</a>. +I argued for marking this Tentatively-Ready right after Bellevue, +but there was a concern that +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2525.pdf">N2525</a> +would break in the presence of the RVO. (That breakage had nothing to do with +swap, but never-the-less). I addressed that breakage in in +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2840.pdf">N2840</a> +(Summit) by means of a non-normative reference: + +<blockquote> +[<i>Note:</i> in situations where the copy constructor for a container is elided, +this function is not called. The behavior in these cases is as if +<tt>select_on_container_copy_construction</tt> returned <tt>x</tt> — <i>end note</i>] +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<del>NAD Editorial</del><ins>Resolved</ins>. Addressed by +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2982.pdf">N2982</a>. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="432"></a>432. stringbuf::overflow() makes only one write position available</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.8.1.4 [stringbuf.virtuals] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Christian W Brock <b>Opened:</b> 2003-09-24 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#stringbuf.virtuals">issues</a> in [stringbuf.virtuals].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>27.7.1.3 par 8 says:</p> +<blockquote><p> +Notes: The function can make a write position available only if + ( mode & ios_base::out) != 0. To make a write position + available, the function reallocates (or initially allocates) an + array object with a sufficient number of elements to hold the + current array object (if any), plus one additional write position. + If ( mode & ios_base::in) != 0, the function alters the read end + pointer egptr() to point just past the new write position (as + does the write end pointer epptr()). +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +The sentences "plus one additional write position." and especially + "(as does the write end pointer epptr())" COULD by interpreted + (and is interpreted by at least my library vendor) as: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> + post-condition: epptr() == pptr()+1 +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +This WOULD force sputc() to call the virtual overflow() each time. +</p> + +<p>The proposed change also affects Defect Report 169.</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>27.7.1.1/2 Change:</p> + +<blockquote><p> +2- Notes: The function allocates no array object. +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +to: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +2- Postcondition: str() == "". +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +27.7.1.1/3 Change: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-3- Effects: Constructs an object of class basic_stringbuf, +initializing the base class with basic_streambuf() +(lib.streambuf.cons), and initializing mode with which . Then copies +the content of str into the basic_stringbuf underlying character +sequence and initializes the input and output sequences according to +which. If which & ios_base::out is true, initializes the output +sequence with the underlying sequence. If which & ios_base::in is +true, initializes the input sequence with the underlying sequence. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>to:</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-3- Effects: Constructs an object of class basic_stringbuf, +initializing the base class with basic_streambuf() +(lib.streambuf.cons), and initializing mode with which. Then copies +the content of str into the basic_stringbuf underlying character +sequence. If which & ios_base::out is true, initializes the output +sequence such that pbase() points to the first underlying character, +epptr() points one past the last underlying character, and if (which & +ios_base::ate) is true, pptr() is set equal to +epptr() else pptr() is set equal to pbase(). If which & ios_base::in +is true, initializes the input sequence such that eback() and gptr() +point to the first underlying character and egptr() points one past +the last underlying character. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>27.7.1.2/1 Change:</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-1- Returns: A basic_string object whose content is equal to the +basic_stringbuf underlying character sequence. If the buffer is only +created in input mode, the underlying character sequence is equal to +the input sequence; otherwise, it is equal to the output sequence. In +case of an empty underlying character sequence, the function returns +basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>(). +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>to:</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-1- Returns: A basic_string object whose content is equal to the +basic_stringbuf underlying character sequence. If the basic_stringbuf +was created only in input mode, the resultant basic_string contains +the character sequence in the range [eback(), egptr()). If the +basic_stringbuf was created with (which & ios_base::out) being true +then the resultant basic_string contains the character sequence in the +range [pbase(), high_mark) where high_mark represents the position one +past the highest initialized character in the buffer. Characters can +be initialized either through writing to the stream, or by +constructing the basic_stringbuf with a basic_string, or by calling +the str(basic_string) member function. In the case of calling the +str(basic_string) member function, all characters initialized prior to +the call are now considered uninitialized (except for those +characters re-initialized by the new basic_string). Otherwise the +basic_stringbuf has been created in neither input nor output mode and +a zero length basic_string is returned. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +27.7.1.2/2 Change: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-2- Effects: If the basic_stringbuf's underlying character sequence is +not empty, deallocates it. Then copies the content of s into the +basic_stringbuf underlying character sequence and initializes the +input and output sequences according to the mode stored when creating +the basic_stringbuf object. If (mode&ios_base::out) is true, then +initializes the output sequence with the underlying sequence. If +(mode&ios_base::in) is true, then initializes the input sequence with +the underlying sequence. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>to:</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-2- Effects: Copies the content of s into the basic_stringbuf +underlying character sequence. If mode & ios_base::out is true, +initializes the output sequence such that pbase() points to the first +underlying character, epptr() points one past the last underlying +character, and if (mode & ios_base::ate) is true, +pptr() is set equal to epptr() else pptr() is set equal to pbase(). If +mode & ios_base::in is true, initializes the input sequence such that +eback() and gptr() point to the first underlying character and egptr() +points one past the last underlying character. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>Remove 27.2.1.2/3. (Same rationale as issue 238: incorrect and unnecessary.)</p> + +<p>27.7.1.3/1 Change:</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +1- Returns: If the input sequence has a read position available, +returns traits::to_int_type(*gptr()). Otherwise, returns +traits::eof(). +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>to:</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +1- Returns: If the input sequence has a read position available, +returns traits::to_int_type(*gptr()). Otherwise, returns +traits::eof(). Any character in the underlying buffer which has been +initialized is considered to be part of the input sequence. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>27.7.1.3/9 Change:</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-9- Notes: The function can make a write position available only if ( +mode & ios_base::out) != 0. To make a write position available, the +function reallocates (or initially allocates) an array object with a +sufficient number of elements to hold the current array object (if +any), plus one additional write position. If ( mode & ios_base::in) != +0, the function alters the read end pointer egptr() to point just past +the new write position (as does the write end pointer epptr()). +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>to:</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-9- The function can make a write position available only if ( mode & +ios_base::out) != 0. To make a write position available, the function +reallocates (or initially allocates) an array object with a sufficient +number of elements to hold the current array object (if any), plus one +additional write position. If ( mode & ios_base::in) != 0, the +function alters the read end pointer egptr() to point just past the +new write position. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>27.7.1.3/12 Change:</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-12- _ If (newoff + off) < 0, or (xend - xbeg) < (newoff + off), the +positioning operation fails. Otherwise, the function assigns xbeg + +newoff + off to the next pointer xnext . +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>to:</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-12- _ If (newoff + off) < 0, or if (newoff + off) refers to an +uninitialized character (as defined in 27.8.1.3 [stringbuf.members] +paragraph 1), the positioning operation fails. Otherwise, the function +assigns xbeg + newoff + off to the next pointer xnext . +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[post-Kona: Howard provided wording. At Kona the LWG agreed that + something along these lines was a good idea, but the original + proposed resolution didn't say enough about the effect of various + member functions on the underlying character sequences.]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The current basic_stringbuf description is over-constrained in such +a way as to prohibit vendors from making this the high-performance +in-memory stream it was meant to be. The fundamental problem is that +the pointers: eback(), gptr(), egptr(), pbase(), pptr(), epptr() are +observable from a derived client, and the current description +restricts the range [pbase(), epptr()) from being grown geometrically. +This change allows, but does not require, geometric growth of this +range.</p> + +<p>Backwards compatibility issues: These changes will break code that +derives from basic_stringbuf, observes epptr(), and depends upon +[pbase(), epptr()) growing by one character on each call to overflow() +(i.e. test suites). Otherwise there are no backwards compatibility +issues.</p> + +<p>27.7.1.1/2: The non-normative note is non-binding, and if it were +binding, would be over specification. The recommended change focuses +on the important observable fact.</p> + +<p>27.7.1.1/3: This change does two things: 1. It describes exactly +what must happen in terms of the sequences. The terms "input +sequence" and "output sequence" are not well defined. 2. It +introduces a common extension: open with app or ate mode. I concur +with issue 238 that paragraph 4 is both wrong and unnecessary.</p> + +<p>27.7.1.2/1: This change is the crux of the efficiency issue. The +resultant basic_string is not dependent upon epptr(), and thus +implementors are free to grow the underlying buffer geometrically +during overflow() *and* place epptr() at the end of that buffer.</p> + +<p>27.7.1.2/2: Made consistent with the proposed 27.7.1.1/3.</p> + +<p>27.7.1.3/1: Clarifies that characters written to the stream beyond +the initially specified string are available for reading in an i/o +basic_streambuf.</p> + +<p>27.7.1.3/9: Made normative by removing "Notes:", and removed the +trailing parenthetical comment concerning epptr().</p> + +<p>27.7.1.3/12: Restricting the positioning to [xbeg, xend) is no +longer allowable since [pbase(), epptr()) may now contain +uninitialized characters. Positioning is only allowable over the +initialized range.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="434"></a>434. bitset::to_string() hard to use</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.5.2 [bitset.members] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2003-10-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#bitset.members">issues</a> in [bitset.members].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +It has been pointed out a number of times that the bitset to_string() member +function template is tedious to use since callers must explicitly specify the +entire template argument list (3 arguments). At least two implementations +provide a number of overloads of this template to make it easier to use. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In order to allow callers to specify no template arguments at all, just the +first one (charT), or the first 2 (charT and traits), in addition to all +three template arguments, add the following three overloads to both the +interface (declarations only) of the class template bitset as well as to +section 23.3.5.2, immediately after p34, the Returns clause of the existing +to_string() member function template:</p> + +<pre> template <class charT, class traits> + basic_string<charT, traits, allocator<charT> > + to_string () const; + + -34.1- Returns: to_string<charT, traits, allocator<charT> >(). + + template <class charT> + basic_string<charT, char_traits<charT>, allocator<charT> > + to_string () const; + + -34.2- Returns: to_string<charT, char_traits<charT>, allocator<charT> >(). + + basic_string<char, char_traits<char>, allocator<char> > + to_string () const; + + -34.3- Returns: to_string<char, char_traits<char>, allocator<char> >(). +</pre> + +<p><i>[Kona: the LWG agrees that this is an improvement over the + status quo. Dietmar thought about an alternative using a proxy + object but now believes that the proposed resolution above is the + right choice. +]</i></p> + + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="435"></a>435. bug in DR 25</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.4.8.9 [string.io] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2003-10-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#string.io">issues</a> in [string.io].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p> +It has been pointed out that the proposed resolution in DR 25 may not be +quite up to snuff: <br> +http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2003-09/msg00147.html +http://anubis.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#25<br> +</p> + +<p> +It looks like Petur is right. The complete corrected text is copied below. +I think we may have have been confused by the reference to 22.2.2.2.2 and +the subsequent description of `n' which actually talks about the second +argument to sputn(), not about the number of fill characters to pad with. +</p> + +<p> +So the question is: was the original text correct? If the intent was to +follow classic iostreams then it most likely wasn't, since setting width() +to less than the length of the string doesn't truncate it on output. This +is also the behavior of most implementations (except for SGI's standard +iostreams where the operator does truncate). +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change the text in 21.3.7.9, p4 from</p> + <blockquote><p> + If bool(k) is true, inserts characters as if by calling + os.rdbuf()->sputn(str.data(), n), padding as described in stage 3 + of lib.facet.num.put.virtuals, where n is the larger of os.width() + and str.size(); + </p></blockquote> +<p>to</p> + <blockquote><p> + If bool(k) is true, determines padding as described in + lib.facet.num.put.virtuals, and then inserts the resulting + sequence of characters <tt>seq</tt> as if by calling + <tt>os.rdbuf()->sputn(seq, n)</tt>, where <tt>n</tt> is the larger of + <tt>os.width()</tt> and <tt>str.size()</tt>; + </p></blockquote> + +<p><i>[Kona: it appears that neither the original wording, DR25, nor the + proposed resolution, is quite what we want. We want to say that + the string will be output, padded to os.width() if necessary. We + don't want to duplicate the padding rules in clause 22, because + they're complicated, but we need to be careful because they weren't + quite written with quite this case in mind. We need to say what + the character sequence is, and then defer to clause 22. Post-Kona: + Benjamin provided wording.]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="436"></a>436. are cv-qualified facet types valid facets?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.3.1.1.2 [locale.facet] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2003-10-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Is "const std::ctype<char>" a valid template argument to has_facet, use_facet, +and the locale template ctor? And if so, does it designate the same Facet as +the non-const "std::ctype<char>?" What about "volatile std::ctype<char>?" +Different implementations behave differently: some fail to compile, others +accept such types but behave inconsistently. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change 22.1.1.1.2, p1 to read:</p> + +<p>Template parameters in this clause which are required to be facets +are those named Facet in declarations. A program that passes a type +that is not a facet, or a type that refers to volatile-qualified +facet, as an (explicit or deduced) template parameter to a locale +function expecting a facet, is ill-formed. A const-qualified facet is +a valid template argument to any locale function that expects a Facet +template parameter.</p> + +<p><i>[Kona: changed the last sentence from a footnote to normative +text.]</i></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="438"></a>438. Ambiguity in the "do the right thing" clause</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2.3 [sequence.reqmts] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2003-10-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#sequence.reqmts">issues</a> in [sequence.reqmts].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p>Section 23.2.3 [sequence.reqmts], paragraphs 9-11, fixed up the problem +noticed with statements like:</p> +<pre>vector<int> v(10, 1); +</pre> + +<p>The intent of the above statement was to construct with:</p> +<pre>vector(size_type, const value_type&); +</pre> + +<p>but early implementations failed to compile as they bound to:</p> +<pre>template <class InputIterator> +vector(InputIterator f, InputIterator l); +</pre> +<p>instead.</p> + +<p>Paragraphs 9-11 say that if InputIterator is an integral type, then the +member template constructor will have the same effect as:</p> +<pre>vector<static_cast<size_type>(f), static_cast<value_type>(l)); +</pre> +<p>(and similarly for the other member template functions of sequences).</p> + +<p>There is also a note that describes one implementation technique:</p> +<blockquote><p> + One way that sequence implementors can satisfy this requirement is to + specialize the member template for every integral type. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>This might look something like:</p> +<blockquote> +<pre>template <class T> +struct vector +{ + typedef unsigned size_type; + + explicit vector(size_type) {} + vector(size_type, const T&) {} + + template <class I> + vector(I, I); + + // ... +}; + +template <class T> +template <class I> +vector<T>::vector(I, I) { ... } + +template <> +template <> +vector<int>::vector(int, int) { ... } + +template <> +template <> +vector<int>::vector(unsigned, unsigned) { ... } + +// ... +</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p>Label this solution 'A'.</p> + +<p>The standard also says:</p> +<blockquote><p> + Less cumbersome implementation techniques also exist. +</p></blockquote> +<p> +A popular technique is to not specialize as above, but instead catch +every call with the member template, detect the type of InputIterator, +and then redirect to the correct logic. Something like: +</p> +<blockquote> +<pre>template <class T> +template <class I> +vector<T>::vector(I f, I l) +{ + choose_init(f, l, int2type<is_integral<I>::value>()); +} + +template <class T> +template <class I> +vector<T>::choose_init(I f, I l, int2type<false>) +{ + // construct with iterators +} + +template <class T> +template <class I> +vector<T>::choose_init(I f, I l, int2type<true>) +{ + size_type sz = static_cast<size_type>(f); + value_type v = static_cast<value_type>(l); + // construct with sz,v +} +</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p>Label this solution 'B'.</p> + +<p>Both of these solutions solve the case the standard specifically +mentions:</p> +<pre>vector<int> v(10, 1); // ok, vector size 10, initialized to 1 +</pre> + +<p> +However, (and here is the problem), the two solutions have different +behavior in some cases where the value_type of the sequence is not an +integral type. For example consider: +</p> +<blockquote><pre> pair<char, char> p('a', 'b'); + vector<vector<pair<char, char> > > d('a', 'b'); +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +The second line of this snippet is likely an error. Solution A catches +the error and refuses to compile. The reason is that there is no +specialization of the member template constructor that looks like: +</p> +<pre>template <> +template <> +vector<vector<pair<char, char> > >::vector(char, char) { ... } +</pre> + +<p> +So the expression binds to the unspecialized member template +constructor, and then fails (compile time) because char is not an +InputIterator. +</p> + +<p> +Solution B compiles the above example though. 'a' is casted to an +unsigned integral type and used to size the outer vector. 'b' is +static casted to the inner vector using it's explicit constructor: +</p> + +<pre>explicit vector(size_type n); +</pre> + +<p> +and so you end up with a static_cast<size_type>('a') by +static_cast<size_type>('b') matrix. +</p> + +<p> +It is certainly possible that this is what the coder intended. But the +explicit qualifier on the inner vector has been thwarted at any rate. +</p> + +<p> +The standard is not clear whether the expression: +</p> + +<pre> vector<vector<pair<char, char> > > d('a', 'b'); +</pre> + +<p> +(and similar expressions) are: +</p> + +<ol> +<li> undefined behavior.</li> +<li> illegal and must be rejected.</li> +<li> legal and must be accepted.</li> +</ol> + +<p>My preference is listed in the order presented.</p> + +<p>There are still other techniques for implementing the requirements of +paragraphs 9-11, namely the "restricted template technique" (e.g. +enable_if). This technique is the most compact and easy way of coding +the requirements, and has the behavior of #2 (rejects the above +expression). +</p> + +<p> +Choosing 1 would allow all implementation techniques I'm aware of. +Choosing 2 would allow only solution 'A' and the enable_if technique. +Choosing 3 would allow only solution 'B'. +</p> + +<p> +Possible wording for a future standard if we wanted to actively reject +the expression above would be to change "static_cast" in paragraphs +9-11 to "implicit_cast" where that is defined by: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template <class T, class U> +inline +T implicit_cast(const U& u) +{ + return u; +} +</pre> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p>Replace 23.2.3 [sequence.reqmts] paragraphs 9 - 11 with:</p> + +<p>For every sequence defined in this clause and in clause lib.strings:</p> + +<ul> + <li> + <p>If the constructor</p> + <pre> template <class InputIterator> + X(InputIterator f, InputIterator l, + const allocator_type& a = allocator_type()) + </pre> + <p>is called with a type InputIterator that does not qualify as + an input iterator, then the constructor will behave as if the + overloaded constructor:</p> + <pre> X(size_type, const value_type& = value_type(), + const allocator_type& = allocator_type()) + </pre> + <p>were called instead, with the arguments static_cast<size_type>(f), l and a, respectively.</p> + </li> + + <li> + <p>If the member functions of the forms:</p> + <pre> template <class InputIterator> // such as insert() + rt fx1(iterator p, InputIterator f, InputIterator l); + + template <class InputIterator> // such as append(), assign() + rt fx2(InputIterator f, InputIterator l); + + template <class InputIterator> // such as replace() + rt fx3(iterator i1, iterator i2, InputIterator f, InputIterator l); + </pre> + <p>are called with a type InputIterator that does not qualify as + an input iterator, then these functions will behave as if the + overloaded member functions:</p> + <pre> rt fx1(iterator, size_type, const value_type&); + + rt fx2(size_type, const value_type&); + + rt fx3(iterator, iterator, size_type, const value_type&); + </pre> + <p>were called instead, with the same arguments.</p> + </li> +</ul> + +<p>In the previous paragraph the alternative binding will fail if f +is not implicitly convertible to X::size_type or if l is not implicitly +convertible to X::value_type.</p> + +<p> +The extent to which an implementation determines that a type cannot be +an input iterator is unspecified, except that as a minimum integral +types shall not qualify as input iterators. +</p> + + + +<p><i>[ +Kona: agreed that the current standard requires <tt>v('a', 'b')</tt> +to be accepted, and also agreed that this is surprising behavior. The +LWG considered several options, including something like +implicit_cast, which doesn't appear to be quite what we want. We +considered Howards three options: allow acceptance or rejection, +require rejection as a compile time error, and require acceptance. By +straw poll (1-6-1), we chose to require a compile time error. +Post-Kona: Howard provided wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Sydney: The LWG agreed with this general direction, but there was some +discomfort with the wording in the original proposed resolution. +Howard submitted new wording, and we will review this again in +Redmond. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Redmond: one very small change in wording: the first argument + is cast to size_t. This fixes the problem of something like + <tt>vector<vector<int> >(5, 5)</tt>, where int is not + implicitly convertible to the value type.]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The proposed resolution fixes:</p> + +<pre> vector<int> v(10, 1); +</pre> + +<p> +since as integral types 10 and 1 must be disqualified as input +iterators and therefore the (size,value) constructor is called (as +if).</p> + +<p>The proposed resolution breaks:</p> + +<pre> vector<vector<T> > v(10, 1); +</pre> + +<p> +because the integral type 1 is not *implicitly* convertible to +vector<T>. The wording above requires a diagnostic.</p> + +<p> +The proposed resolution leaves the behavior of the following code +unspecified. +</p> + +<pre> struct A + { + operator int () const {return 10;} + }; + + struct B + { + B(A) {} + }; + + vector<B> v(A(), A()); +</pre> + +<p> +The implementation may or may not detect that A is not an input +iterator and employee the (size,value) constructor. Note though that +in the above example if the B(A) constructor is qualified explicit, +then the implementation must reject the constructor as A is no longer +implicitly convertible to B. +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="441"></a>441. Is fpos::state const?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.5.3 [fpos] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Vincent Leloup <b>Opened:</b> 2003-11-17 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#fpos">issues</a> in [fpos].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In section 27.5.3.1 [fpos.members] fpos<stateT>::state() is declared +non const, but in section 27.5.3 [fpos] it is declared const. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In section 27.5.3.1 [fpos.members], change the declaration of +<tt>fpos<stateT>::state()</tt> to const. +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="442"></a>442. sentry::operator bool() inconsistent signature</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.2.4 [ostream::sentry] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Vincent Leloup <b>Opened:</b> 2003-11-18 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#ostream::sentry">issues</a> in [ostream::sentry].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In section 27.7.2.4 [ostream::sentry] paragraph 4, in description part +basic_ostream<charT, traits>::sentry::operator bool() is declared +as non const, but in section 27.6.2.3, in synopsis it is declared +const. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In section 27.7.2.4 [ostream::sentry] paragraph 4, change the declaration +of <tt>sentry::operator bool()</tt> to const. +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="443"></a>443. filebuf::close() inconsistent use of EOF</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.9.1.4 [filebuf.members] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Vincent Leloup <b>Opened:</b> 2003-11-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#filebuf.members">issues</a> in [filebuf.members].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In section 27.9.1.4 [filebuf.members] par6, in effects description of +basic_filebuf<charT, traits>::close(), overflow(EOF) is used twice; +should be overflow(traits::eof()). +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change overflow(EOF) to overflow(traits::eof()). +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="444"></a>444. Bad use of casts in fstream</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.9.1 [fstreams] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Vincent Leloup <b>Opened:</b> 2003-11-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#fstreams">issues</a> in [fstreams].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +27.9.1.9 [ifstream.members] p1, 27.9.1.13 [ofstream.members] p1, 27.9.1.17 [fstream.members] p1 seems have same problem as exposed in LWG issue +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#252">252</a>. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p><i>[Sydney: Genuine defect. 27.8.1.13 needs a cast to cast away + constness. The other two places are stylistic: we could change the + C-style casts to const_cast. Post-Sydney: Howard provided wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p>Change 27.8.1.7/1 from:</p> +<blockquote><p> + Returns: (basic_filebuf<charT,traits>*)&sb. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>to:</p> +<blockquote><p> + Returns: const_cast<basic_filebuf<charT,traits>*>(&sb). +</p></blockquote> + +<p>Change 27.8.1.10/1 from:</p> +<blockquote><p> + Returns: (basic_filebuf<charT,traits>*)&sb. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>to:</p> +<blockquote><p> + Returns: const_cast<basic_filebuf<charT,traits>*>(&sb). +</p></blockquote> + +<p>Change 27.8.1.13/1 from:</p> +<blockquote><p> + Returns: &sb. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>to:</p> +<blockquote><p> + Returns: const_cast<basic_filebuf<charT,traits>*>(&sb). +</p></blockquote> + + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="445"></a>445. iterator_traits::reference unspecified for some iterator categories</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 24.4.1 [iterator.traits] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Dave Abrahams <b>Opened:</b> 2003-12-09 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#iterator.traits">issues</a> in [iterator.traits].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The standard places no restrictions at all on the reference type +of input, output, or forward iterators (for forward iterators it +only specifies that *x must be value_type& and doesn't mention +the reference type). Bidirectional iterators' reference type is +restricted only by implication, since the base iterator's +reference type is used as the return type of reverse_iterator's +operator*, which must be T& in order to be a conforming forward +iterator. +</p> + +<p> +Here's what I think we ought to be able to expect from an input +or forward iterator's reference type R, where a is an iterator +and V is its value_type +</p> + +<ul> + <li> + *a is convertible to R + </li> + + <li> + R is convertible to V + </li> + + <li> + static_cast<V>(static_cast<R>(*a)) is equivalent to + static_cast<V>(*a) + </li> +</ul> + +<p>A mutable forward iterator ought to satisfy, for x of type V:</p> + <pre> { R r = *a; r = x; } is equivalent to *a = x; + </pre> + +<p> +I think these requirements capture existing container iterators +(including vector<bool>'s), but render istream_iterator invalid; +its reference type would have to be changed to a constant +reference. +</p> + + +<p> +(Jeremy Siek) During the discussion in Sydney, it was felt that a +simpler long term solution for this was needed. The solution proposed +was to require <tt>reference</tt> to be the same type as <tt>*a</tt> +and <tt>pointer</tt> to be the same type as <tt>a-></tt>. Most +iterators in the Standard Library already meet this requirement. Some +iterators are output iterators, and do not need to meet the +requirement, and others are only specified through the general +iterator requirements (which will change with this resolution). The +sole case where there is an explicit definition of the reference type +that will need to change is <tt>istreambuf_iterator</tt> which returns +<tt>charT</tt> from <tt>operator*</tt> but has a reference type of +<tt>charT&</tt>. We propose changing the reference type of +<tt>istreambuf_iterator</tt> to <tt>charT</tt>. +</p> + +<p>The other option for resolving the issue with <tt>pointer</tt>, + mentioned in the note below, is to remove <tt>pointer</tt> + altogether. I prefer placing requirements on <tt>pointer</tt> to + removing it for two reasons. First, <tt>pointer</tt> will become + useful for implementing iterator adaptors and in particular, + <tt>reverse_iterator</tt> will become more well defined. Second, + removing <tt>pointer</tt> is a rather drastic and publicly-visible + action to take.</p> + +<p>The proposed resolution technically enlarges the requirements for +iterators, which means there are existing iterators (such as +<tt>istreambuf_iterator</tt>, and potentially some programmer-defined +iterators) that will no longer meet the requirements. Will this break +existing code? The scenario in which it would is if an algorithm +implementation (say in the Standard Library) is changed to rely on +<tt>iterator_traits::reference</tt>, and then is used with one of the +iterators that do not have an appropriately defined +<tt>iterator_traits::reference</tt>. +</p> + + +<p>The proposed resolution makes one other subtle change. Previously, +it was required that output iterators have a <tt>difference_type</tt> +and <tt>value_type</tt> of <tt>void</tt>, which means that a forward +iterator could not be an output iterator. This is clearly a mistake, +so I've changed the wording to say that those types may be +<tt>void</tt>. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p>In 24.4.1 [iterator.traits], after:</p> + +<blockquote><p> +be defined as the iterator's difference type, value type and iterator +category, respectively. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>add</p> + +<blockquote><p> +In addition, the types</p> +<pre>iterator_traits<Iterator>::reference +iterator_traits<Iterator>::pointer +</pre> +<p>must be defined as the iterator's reference and pointer types, that +is, the same type as the type of <tt>*a</tt> and <tt>a-></tt>, +respectively.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>In 24.4.1 [iterator.traits], change:</p> + +<blockquote><p> +In the case of an output iterator, the types</p> +<pre>iterator_traits<Iterator>::difference_type +iterator_traits<Iterator>::value_type +</pre> +<p>are both defined as <tt>void</tt>.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>to:</p> +<blockquote><p> +In the case of an output iterator, the types</p> +<pre>iterator_traits<Iterator>::difference_type +iterator_traits<Iterator>::value_type +iterator_traits<Iterator>::reference +iterator_traits<Iterator>::pointer +</pre> +<p>may be defined as <tt>void</tt>.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>In 24.6.3 [istreambuf.iterator], change:</p> +<blockquote> +<pre>typename traits::off_type, charT*, charT&> +</pre> +</blockquote> +<p>to:</p> +<blockquote> +<pre>typename traits::off_type, charT*, charT> +</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Redmond: there was concern in Sydney that this might not be the only place +where things were underspecified and needed to be changed. Jeremy +reviewed iterators in the standard and confirmed that nothing else +needed to be changed. +]</i></p> + + + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="448"></a>448. Random Access Iterators over abstract classes</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 24.2.7 [random.access.iterators] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Dave Abrahams <b>Opened:</b> 2004-01-07 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#random.access.iterators">issues</a> in [random.access.iterators].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Table 76, the random access iterator requirement table, says that the +return type of a[n] must be "convertible to T". When an iterator's +value_type T is an abstract class, nothing is convertible to T. +Surely this isn't an intended restriction? +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change the return type to "convertible to T const&". +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="449"></a>449. Library Issue 306 Goes Too Far</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.2 [support.types] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Pete Becker <b>Opened:</b> 2004-01-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#support.types">issues</a> in [support.types].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Original text:</p> +<blockquote><p> +The macro offsetof accepts a restricted set of type arguments in this +International Standard. type shall be a POD structure or a POD union +(clause 9). The result of applying the offsetof macro to a field that +is a static data member or a function member is undefined." +</p></blockquote> + +<p>Revised text:</p> +<blockquote><p> +"If type is not a POD structure or a POD union the results are undefined." +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +Looks to me like the revised text should have replaced only the second +sentence. It doesn't make sense standing alone. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change 18.1, paragraph 5, to:</p> + +<blockquote><p> +The macro offsetof accepts a restricted set of type arguments in this +International Standard. If type is not a POD structure or a POD union +the results are undefined. The result of applying the offsetof macro +to a field that is a static data member or a function member is +undefined." +</p></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="453"></a>453. basic_stringbuf::seekoff need not always fail for an empty stream</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.8.1.4 [stringbuf.virtuals] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Bill Plauger <b>Opened:</b> 2004-01-30 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#stringbuf.virtuals">issues</a> in [stringbuf.virtuals].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<pre> pos_type basic_stringbuf::seekoff(off_type, ios_base::seekdir, + ios_base::openmode); +</pre> +<p> +is obliged to fail if nothing has been inserted into the stream. This +is unnecessary and undesirable. It should be permissible to seek to +an effective offset of zero.</p> + +<p><i>[ + Sydney: Agreed that this is an annoying problem: seeking to zero should be + legal. Bill will provide wording. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change the sentence from:</p> +<blockquote><p> +For a sequence to be positioned, if its next pointer (either +gptr() or pptr()) is a null pointer, the positioning operation +fails. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>to:</p> + +<blockquote><p> +For a sequence to be positioned, if its next pointer (either +gptr() or pptr()) is a null pointer and the new offset newoff +is nonzero, the positioning operation fails. +</p></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="455"></a>455. cerr::tie() and wcerr::tie() are overspecified</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.4 [iostream.objects] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Bill Plauger <b>Opened:</b> 2004-01-30 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#iostream.objects">issues</a> in [iostream.objects].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Both cerr::tie() and wcerr::tie() are obliged to be null at program +startup. This is overspecification and overkill. It is both traditional +and useful to tie cerr to cout, to ensure that standard output is drained +whenever an error message is written. This behavior should at least be +permitted if not required. Same for wcerr::tie(). +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p>Add to the description of cerr:</p> +<blockquote><p> +After the object cerr is initialized, cerr.tie() returns &cout. +Its state is otherwise the same as required for basic_ios<char>::init +(lib.basic.ios.cons). +</p></blockquote> + +<p>Add to the description of wcerr:</p> + +<blockquote><p> +After the object wcerr is initialized, wcerr.tie() returns &wcout. +Its state is otherwise the same as required for basic_ios<wchar_t>::init +(lib.basic.ios.cons). +</p></blockquote> + +<p><i>[Sydney: straw poll (3-1): we should <i>require</i>, not just + permit, cout and cerr to be tied on startup. Pre-Redmond: Bill will + provide wording.]</i></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="456"></a>456. Traditional C header files are overspecified</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17.6.1.2 [headers] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Bill Plauger <b>Opened:</b> 2004-01-30 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#headers">issues</a> in [headers].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p>The C++ Standard effectively requires that the traditional C headers +(of the form <xxx.h>) be defined in terms of the newer C++ +headers (of the form <cxxx>). Clauses 17.4.1.2/4 and D.5 combine +to require that:</p> + +<ul> + <li>Including the header <cxxx> declares a C name in namespace std.</li> + + <li> Including the header <xxx.h> declares a C name in namespace std + (effectively by including <cxxx>), then imports it into the global + namespace with an individual using declaration.</li> +</ul> + +<p> +The rules were left in this form despited repeated and heated objections +from several compiler vendors. The C headers are often beyond the direct +control of C++ implementors. In some organizations, it's all they can do +to get a few #ifdef __cplusplus tests added. Third-party library vendors +can perhaps wrap the C headers. But neither of these approaches supports +the drastic restructuring required by the C++ Standard. As a result, it is +still widespread practice to ignore this conformance requirement, nearly +seven years after the committee last debated this topic. Instead, what is +often implemented is: +</p> + +<ul> + <li> Including the header <xxx.h> declares a C name in the + global namespace.</li> + + <li> Including the header <cxxx> declares a C name in the + global namespace (effectively by including <xxx.h>), then + imports it into namespace std with an individual using declaration.</li> +</ul> + +<p> +The practical benefit for implementors with the second approach is that +they can use existing C library headers, as they are pretty much obliged +to do. The practical cost for programmers facing a mix of implementations +is that they have to assume weaker rules:</p> + +<ul> + <li> If you want to assuredly declare a C name in the global + namespace, include <xxx.h>. You may or may not also get the + declaration in namespace std.</li> + + <li> If you want to assuredly declare a C name in namespace std, + include <cxxx>. You may or may not also get the declaration in + the global namespace.</li> +</ul> + +<p> +There also exists the <i>possibility</i> of subtle differences due to +Koenig lookup, but there are so few non-builtin types defined in the C +headers that I've yet to see an example of any real problems in this +area. +</p> + +<p> +It is worth observing that the rate at which programmers fall afoul of +these differences has remained small, at least as measured by newsgroup +postings and our own bug reports. (By an overwhelming margin, the +commonest problem is still that programmers include <string> and can't +understand why the typename string isn't defined -- this a decade after +the committee invented namespace std, nominally for the benefit of all +programmers.) +</p> + +<p> +We should accept the fact that we made a serious mistake and rectify it, +however belatedly, by explicitly allowing either of the two schemes for +declaring C names in headers. +</p> + +<p><i>[Sydney: This issue has been debated many times, and will + certainly have to be discussed in full committee before any action + can be taken. However, the preliminary sentiment of the LWG was in + favor of the change. (6 yes, 0 no, 2 abstain) Robert Klarer + suggests that we might also want to undeprecate the + C-style <tt>.h</tt> headers.]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add to 17.6.1.2 [headers], para. 4: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +Except as noted in clauses 18 through 27 and Annex D, the contents of each +header <i>cname</i> shall be the same as that of the corresponding header +<i>name.h</i>, as specified in ISO/IEC 9899:1990 Programming Languages C (Clause +7), or ISO/IEC:1990 Programming Languages-C AMENDMENT 1: C Integrity, (Clause +7), as appropriate, as if by inclusion. In the C++ Standard Library, however, +the declarations <del>and definitions</del> (except for names which are defined +as macros in C) are within namespace scope (3.3.5) of the namespace std. +<ins>It is unspecified whether these names are first declared within the global +namespace scope and are then injected into namespace std by explicit +using-declarations (7.3.3 [namespace.udecl]).</ins> +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +Change D.7 [depr.c.headers], para. 2-3: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-2- Every C header, each of which has a name of the form <i>name.h</i>, behaves +as if each name placed in the Standard library namespace by the corresponding +<i>cname</i> header is <del>also</del> placed within the <ins>global</ins> +namespace scope<ins>.</ins> <del>of the namespace <tt>std</tt> and is followed +by an explicit <i>using-declaration</i> (7.3.3 [namespace.udecl]).</del> +<ins>It is unspecified whether these names are first declared or defined within +namespace scope (3.3.6 [basic.scope.namespace]) of the namespace +<tt>std</tt> and are then injected into the global namespace scope by explicit +using-declarations (7.3.3 [namespace.udecl]).</ins> +</p> +<p> +-3- [<i>Example:</i> The header <tt><cstdlib></tt> <ins>assuredly</ins> +provides its declarations and definitions within the namespace <tt>std</tt>. +<ins>It may also provide these names within the global namespace.</ins> The +header <tt><stdlib.h></tt> <del>makes these available also in</del> +<ins>assuredly provides the same declarations and definitions within</ins> the +global namespace, much as in the C Standard. <ins>It may also provide these +names within the namespace <tt>std</tt>.</ins> <i>-- end example</i>] +</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="457"></a>457. bitset constructor: incorrect number of initialized bits</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.5.1 [bitset.cons] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Dag Henriksson <b>Opened:</b> 2004-01-30 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#bitset.cons">issues</a> in [bitset.cons].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The constructor from unsigned long says it initializes "the first M +bit positions to the corresponding bit values in val. M is the smaller +of N and the value CHAR_BIT * sizeof(unsigned long)." +</p> + +<p> +Object-representation vs. value-representation strikes again. CHAR_BIT * +sizeof (unsigned long) does not give us the number of bits an unsigned long +uses to hold the value. Thus, the first M bit position above is not +guaranteed to have any corresponding bit values in val. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 20.5.1 [bitset.cons] paragraph 2, change "M is the smaller of + N and the value CHAR_BIT * sizeof (unsigned long). (249)" to + "<tt>M</tt> is the smaller of <tt>N</tt> and the number of bits in + the value representation (section 3.9 [basic.types]) of <tt>unsigned + long</tt>." +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="460"></a>460. Default modes missing from basic_fstream member specifications</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.9.1 [fstreams] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Ben Hutchings <b>Opened:</b> 2004-04-01 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#fstreams">issues</a> in [fstreams].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The second parameters of the non-default constructor and of the open +member function for basic_fstream, named "mode", are optional +according to the class declaration in 27.8.1.11 [lib.fstream]. The +specifications of these members in 27.8.1.12 [lib.fstream.cons] and +27.8.1.13 lib.fstream.members] disagree with this, though the +constructor declaration has the "explicit" function-specifier implying +that it is intended to be callable with one argument. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 27.9.1.15 [fstream.cons], change</p> +<pre> explicit basic_fstream(const char* s, ios_base::openmode mode); +</pre> +<p>to</p> +<pre> explicit basic_fstream(const char* s, + ios_base::openmode mode = ios_base::in|ios_base::out); +</pre> +<p>In 27.9.1.17 [fstream.members], change</p> +<pre> void open(const char*s, ios_base::openmode mode); +</pre> +<p>to</p> +<pre> void open(const char*s, + ios_base::openmode mode = ios_base::in|ios_base::out); +</pre> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="461"></a>461. time_get hard or impossible to implement</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.5.1.2 [locale.time.get.virtuals] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Bill Plauger <b>Opened:</b> 2004-03-23 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Template time_get currently contains difficult, if not impossible, +requirements for do_date_order, do_get_time, and do_get_date. All require +the implementation to scan a field generated by the %x or %X conversion +specifier in strftime. Yes, do_date_order can always return no_order, but +that doesn't help the other functions. The problem is that %x can be +nearly anything, and it can vary widely with locales. It's horribly +onerous to have to parse "third sunday after Michaelmas in the year of +our Lord two thousand and three," but that's what we currently ask of +do_get_date. More practically, it leads some people to think that if +%x produces 10.2.04, we should know to look for dots as separators. Still +not easy. +</p> + +<p> +Note that this is the <i>opposite</i> effect from the intent stated in the +footnote earlier in this subclause: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +"In other words, user confirmation is required for reliable parsing of +user-entered dates and times, but machine-generated formats can be +parsed reliably. This allows parsers to be aggressive about interpreting +user variations on standard formats." +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +We should give both implementers and users an easier and more reliable +alternative: provide a (short) list of alternative delimiters and say +what the default date order is for no_order. For backward compatibility, +and maximum latitude, we can permit an implementation to parse whatever +%x or %X generates, but we shouldn't require it. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p><b>In the description:</b></p> +<pre>iter_type do_get_time(iter_type s, iter_type end, ios_base& str, + ios_base::iostate& err, tm* t) const; +</pre> + +<p> +2 Effects: Reads characters starting at suntil it has extracted those +struct tm members, and remaining format characters, used by +time_put<>::put to produce the format specified by 'X', or until it +encounters an error or end of sequence. +</p> + +<p><b>change:</b> 'X'</p> + +<p><b>to:</b> "%H:%M:%S"</p> + + +<p>Change</p> +<pre>iter_type do_get_date(iter_type s, iter_type end, ios_base& str, + ios_base::iostate& err, tm* t) const; + +4 Effects: Reads characters starting at s until it has extracted those +struct tm members, and remaining format characters, used by +time_put<>::put to produce the format specified by 'x', or until it +encounters an error. +</pre> + +<p>to</p> +<pre>iter_type do_get_date(iter_type s, iter_type end, ios_base& str, + ios_base::iostate& err, tm* t) const; +</pre> + +<p> +4 Effects: Reads characters starting at s until it has extracted those +struct tm members, and remaining format characters, used by +time_put<>::put to produce one of the following formats, or until it +encounters an error. The format depends on the value returned by +date_order() as follows: +</p> + +<pre> date_order() format + + no_order "%m/%d/%y" + dmy "%d/%m/%y" + mdy "%m/%d/%y" + ymd "%y/%m/%d" + ydm "%y/%d/%m" +</pre> +<p> +An implementation may also accept additional implementation-defined formats. +</p> + +<p><i>[Redmond: agreed that this is a real problem. The solution is + probably to match C99's parsing rules. Bill provided wording. +]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="464"></a>464. Suggestion for new member functions in standard containers</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.4.1 [vector], 23.6.1 [map] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Thorsten Ottosen <b>Opened:</b> 2004-05-12 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#vector">issues</a> in [vector].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p>To add slightly more convenience to vector<T> and map<Key,T> we should consider to add</p> +<ol> +<li> add vector<T>::data() member (const and non-const version) +semantics: if( empty() ) return 0; else return buffer_;</li> +<li> add map<Key,T>::at( const Key& k ) member (const and non-const version) +<i>semantics</i>: iterator i = find( k ); if( i != end() ) return *i; else throw range_error();</li> +</ol> + +<p>Rationale:</p> + +<ul> +<li>To obtain a pointer to the vector's buffer, one must use either operator[]() (which can give undefined behavior for empty vectors) or at() (which will then throw if the vector is empty). </li> +<li>tr1::array<T,sz> already has a data() member</li> +<li>e cannot use operator[]() when T is not DefaultDonstructible</li> +<li>Neither when the map is const.</li> +<li>when we want to make sure we don't add an element accidently</li> +<li>when it should be considered an error if a key is not in the map</li> +</ul> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 23.4.1 [vector], add the following to the <tt>vector</tt> + synopsis after "element access" and before "modifiers":</p> +<pre> // <i>[lib.vector.data] data access</i> + pointer data(); + const_pointer data() const; +</pre> + +<p>Add a new subsection of 23.4.1 [vector]:</p> +<blockquote> +<p>23.2.4.x <tt>vector</tt> data access</p> +<pre> pointer data(); + const_pointer data() const; +</pre> +<p><b>Returns:</b> A pointer such that [data(), data() + size()) is a valid + range. For a non-empty vector, data() == &front().</p> +<p><b>Complexity:</b> Constant time.</p> +<p><b>Throws:</b> Nothing.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>In 23.6.1 [map], add the following to the <tt>map</tt> +synopsis immediately after the line for operator[]:</p> +<pre> T& at(const key_type& x); + const T& at(const key_type& x) const; +</pre> + +<p>Add the following to 23.6.1.2 [map.access]:</p> +<blockquote> +<pre> T& at(const key_type& x); + const T& at(const key_type& x) const; +</pre> + +<p><b>Returns:</b> A reference to the element whose key is equivalent + to x, if such an element is present in the map.</p> +<p><b>Throws:</b> <tt>out_of_range</tt> if no such element is present.</p> + +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>Neither of these additions provides any new functionality but the + LWG agreed that they are convenient, especially for novices. The + exception type chosen for <tt>at</tt>, <tt>std::out_of_range</tt>, + was chosen to match <tt>vector::at</tt>.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="465"></a>465. Contents of <ciso646></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17.6.1.2 [headers] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Steve Clamage <b>Opened:</b> 2004-06-03 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#headers">issues</a> in [headers].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>C header <iso646.h> defines macros for some operators, such as +not_eq for !=.</p> + +<p>Section 17.6.1.2 [headers] "Headers" says that except as noted in +clauses 18 through 27, the <cname> C++ header contents are the same +as the C header <name.h>. In particular, table 12 lists +<ciso646> as a C++ header.</p> + +<p>I don't find any other mention of <ciso646>, or any mention of +<iso646.h>, in clauses 17 thorough 27. That implies that the +contents of <ciso646> are the same as C header <iso646.h>.</p> + +<p>Annex C (informative, not normative) in [diff.header.iso646.h] C.2.2.2 +"Header <iso646.h>" says that the alternative tokens are not +defined as macros in <ciso646>, but does not mention the contents +of <iso646.h>.</p> + +<p>I don't find any normative text to support C.2.2.2.</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Add to section 17.4.1.2 Headers [lib.headers] a new paragraph after + paragraph 6 (the one about functions must be functions):</p> + +<blockquote> +<p>Identifiers that are keywords or operators in C++ shall not be defined +as macros in C++ standard library headers. +[Footnote:In particular, including the standard header <iso646.h> +or <ciso646> has no effect. </p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[post-Redmond: Steve provided wording.]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="467"></a>467. char_traits::lt(), compare(), and memcmp()</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.2.3.1 [char.traits.specializations.char] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2004-06-28 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p> +Table 37 describes the requirements on Traits::compare() in terms of +those on Traits::lt(). 21.1.3.1, p6 requires char_traits<char>::lt() +to yield the same result as operator<(char, char). +</p> + +<p> +Most, if not all, implementations of char_traits<char>::compare() +call memcmp() for efficiency. However, the C standard requires both +memcmp() and strcmp() to interpret characters under comparison as +unsigned, regardless of the signedness of char. As a result, all +these char_traits implementations fail to meet the requirement +imposed by Table 37 on compare() when char is signed. +</p> + + +<p>Read email thread starting with c++std-lib-13499 for more. </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + + +<p>Change 21.1.3.1, p6 from</p> +<blockquote><p> + The two-argument members assign, eq, and lt are defined identically + to the built-in operators =, ==, and < respectively. +</p></blockquote> +<p>to</p> +<blockquote><p> + The two-argument member assign is defined identically to + the built-in operator =. The two + argument members eq and lt are defined identically to + the built-in operators == and < for type unsigned char. +</p></blockquote> + +<p><i>[Redmond: The LWG agreed with this general direction, but we + also need to change <tt>eq</tt> to be consistent with this change. + Post-Redmond: Martin provided wording.]</i></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="468"></a>468. unexpected consequences of ios_base::operator void*()</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.5.4.3 [iostate.flags] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2004-06-28 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#iostate.flags">issues</a> in [iostate.flags].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p>The program below is required to compile but when run it typically +produces unexpected results due to the user-defined conversion from +std::cout or any object derived from basic_ios to void*. +</p> + +<pre> #include <cassert> + #include <iostream> + + int main () + { + assert (std::cin.tie () == std::cout); + // calls std::cout.ios::operator void*() + } +</pre> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +Replace std::basic_ios<charT, traits>::operator void*() with another +conversion operator to some unspecified type that is guaranteed not +to be convertible to any other type except for bool (a pointer-to-member +might be one such suitable type). In addition, make it clear that the +pointer type need not be a pointer to a complete type and when non-null, +the value need not be valid. +</p> + +<p>Specifically, change in [lib.ios] the signature of</p> +<pre> operator void*() const; +</pre> +<p>to</p> +<pre> operator unspecified-bool-type() const; +</pre> +<p>and change [lib.iostate.flags], p1 from</p> +<pre> operator void*() const; +</pre> +<p>to</p> +<pre>operator unspecified-bool-type() const; + + -1- Returns: if fail() then a value that will evaluate false in a + boolean context; otherwise a value that will evaluate true in a + boolean context. The value type returned shall not be + convertible to int. + + -2- [Note: This conversion can be used in contexts where a bool + is expected (e.g., an if condition); however, implicit + conversions (e.g., to int) that can occur with bool are not + allowed, eliminating some sources of user error. One possible + implementation choice for this type is pointer-to-member. - end + note] +</pre> + +<p><i>[Redmond: 5-4 straw poll in favor of doing this.]</i></p> + +<p><i>[Lillehammer: Doug provided revised wording for + "unspecified-bool-type".]</i></p> + + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="469"></a>469. vector<bool> ill-formed relational operators</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.4.1 [vector] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2004-06-28 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#vector">issues</a> in [vector].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p> +The overloads of relational operators for vector<bool> specified +in [lib.vector.bool] are redundant (they are semantically identical +to those provided for the vector primary template) and may even be +diagnosed as ill-formed (refer to Daveed Vandevoorde's explanation +in c++std-lib-13647). +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Remove all overloads of overloads of relational operators for +vector<bool> from [lib.vector.bool]. +</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="471"></a>471. result of what() implementation-defined</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.8.1 [exception] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2004-06-28 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p>[lib.exception] specifies the following:</p> +<pre> exception (const exception&) throw(); + exception& operator= (const exception&) throw(); + + -4- Effects: Copies an exception object. + -5- Notes: The effects of calling what() after assignment + are implementation-defined. +</pre> + +<p> +First, does the Note only apply to the assignment operator? If so, +what are the effects of calling what() on a copy of an object? Is +the returned pointer supposed to point to an identical copy of +the NTBS returned by what() called on the original object or not? +</p> + +<p> +Second, is this Note intended to extend to all the derived classes +in section 19? I.e., does the standard provide any guarantee for +the effects of what() called on a copy of any of the derived class +described in section 19? +</p> + +<p> +Finally, if the answer to the first question is no, I believe it +constitutes a defect since throwing an exception object typically +implies invoking the copy ctor on the object. If the answer is yes, +then I believe the standard ought to be clarified to spell out +exactly what the effects are on the copy (i.e., after the copy +ctor was called). +</p> + +<p><i>[Redmond: Yes, this is fuzzy. The issue of derived classes is + fuzzy too.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Batavia: Howard provided wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Bellevue: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Eric concerned this is unimplementable, due to nothrow guarantees. +Suggested implementation would involve reference counting. +</p> +<p> +Is the implied reference counting subtle enough to call out a note on +implementation? Probably not. +</p> +<p> +If reference counting required, could we tighten specification further +to require same pointer value? Probably an overspecification, especially +if exception classes defer evalutation of final string to calls to +what(). +</p> +<p> +Remember issue moved open and not resolved at Batavia, but cannot +remember who objected to canvas a disenting opinion - please speak up if +you disagree while reading these minutes! +</p> +<p> +Move to Ready as we are accepting words unmodified. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Sophia Antipolis: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +The issue was pulled from Ready. It needs to make clear that only homogenous copying +is intended to be supported, not coping from a derived to a base. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Howard supplied the following replacement wording +for paragraph 7 of the proposed resolution: +</p> +<blockquote> +<ins>-7- <i>Postcondition:</i> <tt>what()</tt> shall return the same NTBS + as would be obtained by using <tt>static_cast</tt> + to cast the rhs to the same types as the lhs + and then calling <tt>what()</tt> on that possibly sliced object.</ins> +</blockquote> +<p> +Pete asks what "the same NTBS" means. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-30 Niels adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Further discussion in the thread starting with c++std-lib-24512. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-09-24 Niels provided updated wording: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I think the resolution should at least guarantee +that the result of <tt>what()</tt> is independent of whether the compiler does +copy-elision. And for any class derived from <tt>std::excepion</tt> that has a +constructor that allows specifying a <tt>what_arg</tt>, it should make sure that +the text of a user-provided <tt>what_arg</tt> is preserved, when the object is +copied. Note that all the implementations I've tested already appear to +satisfy the proposed resolution, including MSVC 2008 SP1, Apache +stdcxx-4.2.1, GCC 4.1.2, GCC 4.3.2, and CodeGear C++ 6.13. +</p> +<p> +The proposed resolution was updated with help from Daniel Krügler; +the update aims to clarify that the proposed postcondition only +applies to homogeneous copying. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Ready after inserting "publicly accessible" in two places. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +Change 18.8.1 [exception] to: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-1- The class <tt>exception</tt> defines the base class for the types of +objects thrown as exceptions by C++ standard library components, and +certain expressions, to report errors detected during program execution. +</p> +<p><ins> +Each standard library class <tt>T</tt> that derives from class +<tt>exception</tt> shall have a publicly accessible copy constructor and a publicly accessible copy assignment +operator that do not exit with an exception. These member functions +shall preserve the following postcondition: If two objects <i>lhs</i> +and <i>rhs</i> both have dynamic type <tt>T</tt>, and <i>lhs</i> is a +copy of <i>rhs</i>, then <tt>strcmp(<i>lhs</i>.what(), +<i>rhs</i>.what()) == 0</tt>. +</ins></p> +<p> + ... +</p> + +<pre>exception(const exception& <ins>rhs</ins>) throw(); +exception& operator=(const exception& <ins>rhs</ins>) throw();</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-4- <i>Effects:</i> Copies an exception object. +</p> +<p> +<del> -5- <i>Remarks:</i> The effects of calling <tt>what()</tt> after assignment +are implementation-defined.</del> +</p> +<p> +<ins>-5- <i>Postcondition:</i> + If <tt>*this</tt> + and <i>rhs</i> both have dynamic type <tt>exception</tt> + then <tt>strcmp(what(), <i>rhs</i>.what()) == 0</tt>.</ins> +</p> + +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="473"></a>473. underspecified ctype calls</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.1.1 [locale.ctype] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2004-07-01 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Most ctype member functions come in two forms: one that operates +on a single character at a time and another form that operates +on a range of characters. Both forms are typically described by +a single Effects and/or Returns clause. +</p> +<p> +The Returns clause of each of the single-character non-virtual forms +suggests that the function calls the corresponding single character +virtual function, and that the array form calls the corresponding +virtual array form. Neither of the two forms of each virtual member +function is required to be implemented in terms of the other. +</p> +<p> +There are three problems: +</p> +<p> +1. One is that while the standard does suggest that each non-virtual +member function calls the corresponding form of the virtual function, +it doesn't actually explicitly require it. +</p> +<p> +Implementations that cache results from some of the virtual member +functions for some or all values of their arguments might want to +call the array form from the non-array form the first time to fill +the cache and avoid any or most subsequent virtual calls. Programs +that rely on each form of the virtual function being called from +the corresponding non-virtual function will see unexpected behavior +when using such implementations. +</p> +<p> +2. The second problem is that either form of each of the virtual +functions can be overridden by a user-defined function in a derived +class to return a value that is different from the one produced by +the virtual function of the alternate form that has not been +overriden. +</p> +<p> +Thus, it might be possible for, say, ctype::widen(c) to return one +value, while for ctype::widen(&c, &c + 1, &wc) to set +wc to another value. This is almost certainly not intended. Both +forms of every function should be required to return the same result +for the same character, otherwise the same program using an +implementation that calls one form of the functions will behave +differently than when using another implementation that calls the +other form of the function "under the hood." +</p> +<p> +3. The last problem is that the standard text fails to specify whether +one form of any of the virtual functions is permitted to be implemented +in terms of the other form or not, and if so, whether it is required +or permitted to call the overridden virtual function or not. +</p> +<p> +Thus, a program that overrides one of the virtual functions so that +it calls the other form which then calls the base member might end +up in an infinite loop if the called form of the base implementation +of the function in turn calls the other form. +</p> +<p> +Lillehammer: Part of this isn't a real problem. We already talk about +caching. 22.1.1/6 But part is a real problem. ctype virtuals may call +each other, so users don't know which ones to override to avoid avoid +infinite loops.</p> + +<p>This is a problem for all facet virtuals, not just ctype virtuals, +so we probably want a blanket statement in clause 22 for all +facets. The LWG is leaning toward a blanket prohibition, that a +facet's virtuals may never call each other. We might want to do that +in clause 27 too, for that matter. A review is necessary. Bill will +provide wording.</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt, Howard provided wording directed by consensus. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add paragraph 3 to 22.4 [locale.categories]: +</p> + +<blockquote><ins> +-3- Within this clause it is unspecified if one virtual function calls another +virtual function. +</ins></blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +We are explicitly not addressing bullet +item #2, thus giving implementors more latitude. Users will have to +override both virtual functions, not just one. +</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="474"></a>474. confusing Footnote 297</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.2.6.4 [ostream.inserters.character] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2004-07-01 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#ostream.inserters.character">issues</a> in [ostream.inserters.character].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p> +I think Footnote 297 is confused. The paragraph it applies to seems +quite clear in that widen() is only called if the object is not a char +stream (i.e., not basic_ostream<char>), so it's irrelevant what the +value of widen(c) is otherwise. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +I propose to strike the Footnote. +</p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="475"></a>475. May the function object passed to for_each modify the elements of the iterated sequence?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.2.4 [alg.foreach] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Stephan T. Lavavej, Jaakko Jarvi <b>Opened:</b> 2004-07-09 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#alg.foreach">issues</a> in [alg.foreach].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +It is not clear whether the function object passed to for_each is allowed to +modify the elements of the sequence being iterated over. +</p> + +<p> +for_each is classified without explanation in [lib.alg.nonmodifying], "25.1 +Non-modifying sequence operations". 'Non-modifying sequence operation' is +never defined. +</p> + +<p> +25(5) says: "If an algorithm's Effects section says that a value pointed to +by any iterator passed as an argument is modified, then that algorithm has +an additional type requirement: The type of that argument shall satisfy the +requirements of a mutable iterator (24.1)." +</p> + +<p>for_each's Effects section does not mention whether arguments can be +modified:</p> + +<blockquote><p> + "Effects: Applies f to the result of dereferencing every iterator in the + range [first, last), starting from first and proceeding to last - 1." +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +Every other algorithm in [lib.alg.nonmodifying] is "really" non-modifying in +the sense that neither the algorithms themselves nor the function objects +passed to the algorithms may modify the sequences or elements in any way. +This DR affects only for_each. +</p> + +<p> +We suspect that for_each's classification in "non-modifying sequence +operations" means that the algorithm itself does not inherently modify the +sequence or the elements in the sequence, but that the function object +passed to it may modify the elements it operates on. +</p> + +<p> +The original STL document by Stepanov and Lee explicitly prohibited the +function object from modifying its argument. +The "obvious" implementation of for_each found in several standard library +implementations, however, does not impose this restriction. +As a result, we suspect that the use of for_each with function objects that modify +their arguments is wide-spread. +If the restriction was reinstated, all such code would become non-conforming. +Further, none of the other algorithms in the Standard +could serve the purpose of for_each (transform does not guarantee the order in +which its function object is called). +</p> + +<p> +We suggest that the standard be clarified to explicitly allow the function object +passed to for_each modify its argument.</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Add a nonnormative note to the Effects in 25.2.4 [alg.foreach]: If +the type of 'first' satisfies the requirements of a mutable iterator, +'f' may apply nonconstant functions through the dereferenced iterators +passed to it. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p>The LWG believes that nothing in the standard prohibits function + objects that modify the sequence elements. The problem is that + for_each is in a secion entitled "nonmutating algorithms", and the + title may be confusing. A nonnormative note should clarify that.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="478"></a>478. Should forward iterator requirements table have a line for r->m?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 24.2.5 [forward.iterators] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Dave Abrahams <b>Opened:</b> 2004-07-11 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#forward.iterators">issues</a> in [forward.iterators].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#477">477</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The Forward Iterator requirements table contains the following: +</p> +<pre> expression return type operational precondition + semantics + ========== ================== =========== ========================== + a->m U& if X is mutable, (*a).m pre: (*a).m is well-defined. + otherwise const U& + + r->m U& (*r).m pre: (*r).m is well-defined. +</pre> + +<p>The second line may be unnecessary. Paragraph 11 of + [lib.iterator.requirements] says: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> + In the following sections, a and b denote values of type const X, n + denotes a value of the difference type Distance, u, tmp, and m + denote identifiers, r denotes a value of X&, t denotes a value of + value type T, o denotes a value of some type that is writable to + the output iterator. +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +Because operators can be overloaded on an iterator's const-ness, the +current requirements allow iterators to make many of the operations +specified using the identifiers a and b invalid for non-const +iterators.</p> + +<p>Related issue: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#477">477</a></p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p>Remove the "r->m" line from the Forward Iterator requirements +table. Change</p> +<blockquote><p> + "const X" +</p></blockquote> + +<p> to </p> + +<blockquote><p> + "X or const X" +</p></blockquote> + +<p>in paragraph 11 of [lib.iterator.requirements].</p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +This is a defect because it constrains an lvalue to returning a modifiable lvalue. +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="482"></a>482. Swapping pairs</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.3.5 [pairs], 20.4 [tuple] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Andrew Koenig <b>Opened:</b> 2004-09-14 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-20</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#pairs">issues</a> in [pairs].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>(Based on recent comp.std.c++ discussion)</p> + +<p>Pair (and tuple) should specialize std::swap to work in terms of +std::swap on their components. For example, there's no obvious reason +why swapping two objects of type pair<vector<int>, +list<double> > should not take O(1).</p> + +<p><i>[Lillehammer: We agree it should be swappable. Howard will + provide wording.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Post Oxford: We got <tt>swap</tt> for <tt>pair</tt> but accidently +missed <tt>tuple</tt>. <tt>tuple::swap</tt> is being tracked by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#522">522</a>. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Wording provided in +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2005/n1856.html#20.2.3%20-%20Pairs">N1856</a>. +</p> + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +Recommend <del>NAD</del><ins>Resolved</ins>, fixed by +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2005/n1856.html#20.2.3%20-%20Pairs">N1856</a>. +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="488"></a>488. rotate throws away useful information</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.3.11 [alg.rotate] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2004-11-22 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +rotate takes 3 iterators: first, middle and last which point into a +sequence, and rearranges the sequence such that the subrange [middle, +last) is now at the beginning of the sequence and the subrange [first, +middle) follows. The return type is void. +</p> + +<p> +In many use cases of rotate, the client needs to know where the +subrange [first, middle) starts after the rotate is performed. This +might look like: +</p> +<pre> rotate(first, middle, last); + Iterator i = advance(first, distance(middle, last)); +</pre> + +<p> +Unless the iterators are random access, the computation to find the +start of the subrange [first, middle) has linear complexity. However, +it is not difficult for rotate to return this information with +negligible additional computation expense. So the client could code: +</p> +<pre> Iterator i = rotate(first, middle, last); +</pre> + +<p> +and the resulting program becomes significantly more efficient. +</p> + +<p> +While the backwards compatibility hit with this change is not zero, it +is very small (similar to that of lwg <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#130">130</a>), and there is +a significant benefit to the change. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>In 25 [algorithms] p2, change:</p> + +<blockquote><pre> template<class ForwardIterator> + <del>void</del> <ins>ForwardIterator</ins> rotate(ForwardIterator first, ForwardIterator middle, + ForwardIterator last); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p>In 25.3.11 [alg.rotate], change:</p> + +<blockquote><pre> template<class ForwardIterator> + <del>void</del> <ins>ForwardIterator</ins> rotate(ForwardIterator first, ForwardIterator middle, + ForwardIterator last); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p>In 25.3.11 [alg.rotate] insert a new paragraph after p1:</p> + +<blockquote> +<p><b>Returns</b>: <tt>first + (last - middle)</tt>.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +The LWG agrees with this idea, but has one quibble: we want to make +sure not to give the impression that the function "advance" is +actually called, just that the nth iterator is returned. (Calling +advance is observable behavior, since users can specialize it for +their own iterators.) Howard will provide wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Howard provided wording for mid-meeting-mailing Jun. 2005.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Toronto: moved to Ready. +]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="495"></a>495. Clause 22 template parameter requirements</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22 [localization] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Beman Dawes <b>Opened:</b> 2005-01-10 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#localization">issues</a> in [localization].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>It appears that there are no requirements specified for many of the +template parameters in clause 22. It looks like this issue has never +come up, except perhaps for Facet.</p> + +<p>Clause 22 isn't even listed in 17.3.2.1 [lib.type.descriptions], +either, which is the wording that allows requirements on template +parameters to be identified by name.</p> + +<p>So one issue is that 17.3.2.1 [lib.type.descriptions] Should be +changed to cover clause 22. A better change, which will cover us in +the future, would be to say that it applies to all the library +clauses. Then if a template gets added to any library clause we are +covered.</p> + +<p>charT, InputIterator, and other names with requirements defined +elsewhere are fine, assuming the 17.3.2.1 [lib.type.descriptions] fix. +But there are a few template arguments names which I don't think have +requirements given elsewhere:</p> + +<ul> +<li>internT and externT. The fix is to add wording saying that internT +and externT must meet the same requirements as template arguments +named charT.</li> + +<li>stateT. I'm not sure about this one. There already is some wording, +but it seems a bit vague.</li> + +<li>Intl. [lib.locale.moneypunct.byname] The fix for this one is to +rename "Intl" to "International". The name is important because other +text identifies the requirements for the name International but not +for Intl.</li> +</ul> + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change 17.5.2.1 [type.descriptions], paragraph 1, from:</p> +<blockquote><p> +The Requirements subclauses may describe names that are used to +specify constraints on template arguments.153) These names are used in +clauses 20, 23, 25, and 26 to describe the types that may be supplied +as arguments by a C++ program when instantiating template components +from the library. +</p></blockquote> +<p>to:</p> +<blockquote><p> +The Requirements subclauses may describe names that are used to +specify constraints on template arguments.153) These names are used in +library clauses to describe the types that may be supplied as +arguments by a C++ program when instantiating template components from +the library. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>In the front matter of class 22, locales, add:</p> +<blockquote><p> +Template parameter types internT and externT shall meet the +requirements of charT (described in 21 [strings]). +</p></blockquote> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> + Again, a blanket clause isn't blanket enough. Also, we've got a + couple of names that we don't have blanket requirement statements + for. The only issue is what to do about stateT. This wording is + thin, but probably adequate.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="496"></a>496. Illegal use of "T" in vector<bool></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.4.1 [vector] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> richard@ex-parrot.com <b>Opened:</b> 2005-02-10 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#vector">issues</a> in [vector].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In the synopsis of the std::vector<bool> specialisation in 23.4.1 [vector], +the non-template assign() function has the signature</p> + +<pre> void assign( size_type n, const T& t ); +</pre> + +<p>The type, T, is not defined in this context.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Replace "T" with "value_type".</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="497"></a>497. meaning of numeric_limits::traps for floating point types</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.3.1.2 [numeric.limits.members] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2005-03-02 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#numeric.limits.members">issues</a> in [numeric.limits.members].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p>18.2.1.2, p59 says this much about the traps member of numeric_limits:</p> + +<blockquote> +<p>static const bool traps;<br> +-59- true if trapping is implemented for the type.204) +<br> +Footnote 204: Required by LIA-1. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>It's not clear what is meant by "is implemented" here.</p> + +<p> +In the context of floating point numbers it seems reasonable to expect +to be able to use traps to determine whether a program can "safely" use +infinity(), quiet_NaN(), etc., in arithmetic expressions, that is +without causing a trap (i.e., on UNIX without having to worry about +getting a signal). When traps is true, I would expect any of the +operations in section 7 of IEEE 754 to cause a trap (and my program +to get a SIGFPE). So, for example, on Alpha, I would expect traps +to be true by default (unless I compiled my program with the -ieee +option), false by default on most other popular architectures, +including IA64, MIPS, PA-RISC, PPC, SPARC, and x86 which require +traps to be explicitly enabled by the program. +</p> + +<p> +Another possible interpretation of p59 is that traps should be true +on any implementation that supports traps regardless of whether they +are enabled by default or not. I don't think such an interpretation +makes the traps member very useful, even though that is how traps is +implemented on several platforms. It is also the only way to implement +traps on platforms that allow programs to enable and disable trapping +at runtime. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change p59 to read:</p> +<blockquote><p>True if, at program startup, there exists a value of the type that + would cause an arithmetic operation using that value to trap.</p></blockquote> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> + Real issue, since trapping can be turned on and off. Unclear what a + static query can say about a dynamic issue. The real advice we should + give users is to use cfenv for these sorts of queries. But this new + proposed resolution is at least consistent and slightly better than + nothing.</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="498"></a>498. Requirements for partition() and stable_partition() too strong</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.3.13 [alg.partitions] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Sean Parent, Joe Gottman <b>Opened:</b> 2005-05-04 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Problem: +The iterator requirements for partition() and stable_partition() [25.2.12] +are listed as BidirectionalIterator, however, there are efficient algorithms +for these functions that only require ForwardIterator that have been known +since before the standard existed. The SGI implementation includes these (see +<a href="http://www.sgi.com/tech/stl/partition.html">http://www.sgi.com/tech/stl/partition.html</a> +and +<a href="http://www.sgi.com/tech/stl/stable_partition.html">http://www.sgi.com/tech/stl/stable_partition.html</a>). +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-04-30 Alisdair adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Now we have concepts this is easier to express! +</p> +<p> +Proposed resolution: +</p> +<p> +Add the following signature to: +</p> +<p> +Header <tt><algorithm></tt> synopsis [algorithms.syn]<br> +p3 Partitions 25.3.13 [alg.partitions] +</p> +<blockquote><pre> template<ForwardIterator Iter, Predicate<auto, Iter::value_type> Pred> + requires ShuffleIterator<Iter> + && CopyConstructible<Pred> + Iter partition(Iter first, Iter last, Pred pred); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Update p3 Partitions 25.3.13 [alg.partitions]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Complexity:</i> <del>At most <tt>(last - first)/2</tt> swaps. Exactly <tt>last - first</tt> +applications of the predicate +are done.</del> +<ins> +If <tt>Iter</tt> satisfies <tt>BidirectionalIterator</tt>, at most <tt>(last - +first)/2</tt> swaps. Exactly <tt>last - first</tt> applications of the predicate +are done. +</ins> +</p> +<p><ins> +If <tt>Iter</tt> merely satisfied <tt>ForwardIterator</tt> at most <tt>(last - first)</tt> swaps +are done. Exactly <tt>(last - first)</tt> applications of the predicate are done. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +[Editorial note: I looked for existing precedent in how we might call out +distinct overloads overloads from a set of constrained templates, but there +is not much existing practice to lean on. advance/distance were the only +algorithms I could find, and that wording is no clearer.] +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Hinnant: if you want to partition your std::forward_list, you'll need +partition() to accept ForwardIterators. +</p> +<p> +No objection to Ready. +</p> +<p> +Move to Ready. +</p> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 25.2.12 from </p> +<blockquote><pre>template<class BidirectionalIterator, class Predicate> +BidirectionalIterator partition(BidirectionalIterato r first, + BidirectionalIterator last, + Predicate pred); +</pre></blockquote> +<p>to </p> +<blockquote><pre>template<class ForwardIterator, class Predicate> +ForwardIterator partition(ForwardIterator first, + ForwardIterator last, + Predicate pred); +</pre></blockquote> +<p>Change the complexity from </p> + +<blockquote><p> +At most (last - first)/2 swaps are done. Exactly (last - first) +applications of the predicate are done. +</p></blockquote> + +<p>to </p> + +<blockquote><p> +If ForwardIterator is a bidirectional_iterator, at most (last - first)/2 +swaps are done; otherwise at most (last - first) swaps are done. Exactly +(last - first) applications of the predicate are done. +</p></blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +Partition is a "foundation" algorithm useful in many contexts (like sorting +as just one example) - my motivation for extending it to include forward +iterators is foward_list - without this extension you can't partition an foward_list +(without writing your own partition). Holes like this in the standard +library weaken the argument for generic programming (ideally I'd be able +to provide a library that would refine std::partition() to other concepts +without fear of conflicting with other libraries doing the same - but +that is a digression). I consider the fact that partition isn't defined +to work for ForwardIterator a minor embarrassment. +</p> + +<p><i>[Mont Tremblant: Moved to Open, request motivation and use cases by next meeting. Sean provided further rationale by post-meeting mailing.]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="505"></a>505. Result_type in random distribution requirements</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.1 [rand.req], TR1 5.1.1 [tr.rand.req] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Walter Brown <b>Opened:</b> 2005-07-03 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#rand.req">issues</a> in [rand.req].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Table 17: Random distribution requirements +</p> +<p> +Row 1 requires that each random distribution provide a nested type "input_type"; +this type denotes the type of the values that the distribution consumes. +</p> +<p> +Inspection of all distributions in [tr.rand.dist] reveals that each distribution +provides a second typedef ("result_type") that denotes the type of the values the +distribution produces when called. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +It seems to me that this is also a requirement +for all distributions and should therefore be indicated as such via a new second +row to this table 17: +</p> +<table border="1" cellpadding="5"> +<tbody><tr><td>X::result_type</td><td>T</td><td>---</td><td>compile-time</td></tr> +</tbody></table> + +<p><i>[ +Berlin: Voted to WP. N1932 adopts the proposed resolution: see Table 5 row 1. +]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="507"></a>507. Missing requirement for variate_generator::operator()</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5 [rand], TR1 5.1.3 [tr.rand.var] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Walter Brown <b>Opened:</b> 2005-07-03 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#rand">issues</a> in [rand].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Paragraph 11 of [tr.rand.var] equires that the member template +</p> +<blockquote><pre>template<class T> result_type operator() (T value); +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +return +</p> +<blockquote><pre>distribution()(e, value) +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +However, not all distributions have an operator() with a corresponding signature. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Berlin: As a working group we voted in favor of N1932 which makes this moot: +variate_generator has been eliminated. Then in full committee we voted to give +this issue WP status (mistakenly). +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +We therefore recommend that we insert the following precondition before paragraph 11: +</p> +<blockquote><p> +Precondition: <tt>distribution().operator()(e,value)</tt> is well-formed. +</p></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="508"></a>508. Bad parameters for ranlux64_base_01</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.5 [rand.predef], TR1 5.1.5 [tr.rand.predef] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Walter Brown <b>Opened:</b> 2005-07-03 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#rand.predef">issues</a> in [rand.predef].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The fifth of these engines with predefined parameters, ranlux64_base_01, +appears to have an unintentional error for which there is a simple correction. +The two pre-defined subtract_with_carry_01 engines are given as: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>typedef subtract_with_carry_01<float, 24, 10, 24> ranlux_base_01; +typedef subtract_with_carry_01<double, 48, 10, 24> ranlux64_base_01; +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +We demonstrate below that ranlux64_base_01 fails to meet the intent of the +random number generation proposal, but that the simple correction to +</p> +<blockquote><pre>typedef subtract_with_carry_01<double, 48, 5, 12> ranlux64_base_01; +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +does meet the intent of defining well-known good parameterizations. +</p> +<p> +The ranlux64_base_01 engine as presented fails to meet the intent for +predefined engines, stated in proposal N1398 (section E): +</p> +<blockquote><p> +In order to make good random numbers available to a large number of library +users, this proposal not only defines generic random-number engines, but also +provides a number of predefined well-known good parameterizations for those. +</p></blockquote> +<p> +The predefined ranlux_base_01 engine has been proven [1,2,3] to have a very +long period and so meets this criterion. This property makes it suitable for +use in the excellent discard_block engines defined subsequently. The proof +of long period relies on the fact (proven in [1]) that 2**(w*r) - 2**(w*s) ++ 1 is prime (w, r, and s are template parameters to subtract_with_carry_01, +as defined in [tr.rand.eng.sub1]). +</p> +<p> +The ranlux64_base_01 engine as presented in [tr.rand.predef] uses w=48, r=24, s=10. +For these numbers, the combination 2**(w*r)-2**(w*s)+1 is non-prime (though +explicit factorization would be a challenge). In consequence, while it is +certainly possible for some seeding states that this engine would have a very +long period, it is not at all "well-known" that this is the case. The intent +in the N1398 proposal involved the base of the ranlux64 engine, which finds heavy +use in the physics community. This is isomorphic to the predefined ranlux_base_01, +but exploits the ability of double variables to hold (at least) 48 bits of mantissa, +to deliver 48 random bits at a time rather than 24. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +To achieve this intended behavior, the correct template parameteriztion would be: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>typedef subtract_with_carry_01<double, 48, 5, 12> ranlux64_base_01; +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +The sequence of mantissa bits delivered by this is isomorphic (treating each +double as having the bits of two floats) to that delivered by ranlux_base_01. +</p> +<p> +<b>References:</b> +</p> +<ol> +<li>F. James, Comput. Phys. Commun. 60(1990) 329</li> +<li>G. Marsaglia and A. Zaman, Ann. Appl. Prob 1(1991) 462</li> +<li>M. Luscher, Comput. Phys. Commun. 79(1994) 100-110</li> +</ol> + +<p><i>[ +Berlin: Voted to WP. N1932 adopts the proposed resolution in 26.3.5, +just above paragraph 5. +]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="518"></a>518. Are insert and erase stable for unordered_multiset and unordered_multimap?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2.5 [unord.req], TR1 6.3.1 [tr.unord.req] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 2005-07-03 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index-open.html#unord.req">active issues</a> in [unord.req].</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#unord.req">issues</a> in [unord.req].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Issue 371 deals with stability of multiset/multimap under insert and erase +(i.e. do they preserve the relative order in ranges of equal elements). +The same issue applies to unordered_multiset and unordered_multimap. +</p> +<p><i>[ +Moved to open (from review): There is no resolution. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Toronto: We have a resolution now. Moved to Review. Some concern was noted +as to whether this conflicted with existing practice or not. An additional +concern was in specifying (partial) ordering for an unordered container. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Wording for the proposed resolution is taken from the equivalent text for associative containers. +</p> + +<p> +Change 23.2.5 [unord.req], Unordered associative containers, paragraph 6 to: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +An unordered associative container supports <i>unique</i> keys if it may +contain at most one element for each key. Otherwise, it supports <i>equivalent +keys</i>. <tt>unordered_set</tt> and <tt>unordered_map</tt> support +unique keys. <tt>unordered_multiset</tt> and <tt>unordered_multimap</tt> +support equivalent keys. In containers that support equivalent keys, elements +with equivalent keys are adjacent to each other. <ins>For +<tt>unordered_multiset</tt> +and <tt>unordered_multimap</tt>,<tt> insert</tt> and <tt>erase</tt> +preserve the relative ordering of equivalent elements.</ins> +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +Change 23.2.5 [unord.req], Unordered associative containers, paragraph 8 to: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p>The elements of an unordered associative container are organized into <i> +buckets</i>. Keys with the same hash code appear in the same bucket. The number +of buckets is automatically increased as elements are added to an unordered +associative container, so that the average number of elements per bucket is kept +below a bound. Rehashing invalidates iterators, changes ordering between +elements, and changes which buckets elements appear in, but does not invalidate +pointers or references to elements. <ins>For <tt>unordered_multiset</tt> +and <tt>unordered_multimap</tt>, rehashing +preserves the relative ordering of equivalent elements.</ins></p> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="519"></a>519. Data() undocumented</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.3.1 [array], TR1 6.2.2 [tr.array.array] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Pete Becker <b>Opened:</b> 2005-07-03 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#array">issues</a> in [array].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +<tt>array<>::data()</tt> is present in the class synopsis, but not documented. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add a new section, after 6.2.2.3: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>T* data() +const T* data() const; +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +<b>Returns:</b> <tt>elems</tt>. +</p> +<p> +Change 6.2.2.4/2 to: +</p> +<blockquote><p> +In the case where <tt>N == 0</tt>, <tt>begin() == end()</tt>. The return value +of <tt>data()</tt> is unspecified. +</p></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="520"></a>520. Result_of and pointers to data members</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8.10.1 [func.bind], TR1 3.6 [tr.func.bind] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Pete Becker <b>Opened:</b> 2005-07-03 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In the original proposal for binders, the return type of bind() when +called with a pointer to member data as it's callable object was +defined to be mem_fn(ptr); when Peter Dimov and I unified the +descriptions of the TR1 function objects we hoisted the descriptions +of return types into the INVOKE pseudo-function and into result_of. +Unfortunately, we left pointer to member data out of result_of, so +bind doesn't have any specified behavior when called with a pointer +to member data. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p><i>[ +Pete and Peter will provide wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p> +In 20.5.4 [lib.func.ret] ([tr.func.ret]) p3 add the following bullet after bullet 2: +</p> +<ol start="3"> +<li>If <tt>F</tt> is a member data pointer type <tt>R T::*</tt>, <tt>type</tt> +shall be <tt><i>cv</i> R&</tt> when <tt>T1</tt> is <tt><i>cv</i> U1&</tt>, +<tt>R</tt> otherwise.</li> +</ol> + +<p><i>[ +Peter provided wording. +]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="521"></a>521. Garbled requirements for argument_type in reference_wrapper</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8.4 [refwrap], TR1 2.1.2 [tr.util.refwrp.refwrp] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Pete Becker <b>Opened:</b> 2005-07-03 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#refwrap">issues</a> in [refwrap].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +2.1.2/3, second bullet item currently says that reference_wrapper<T> is +derived from unary_function<T, R> if T is: +</p> +<blockquote><p> +a pointer to member function type with cv-qualifier cv and no arguments; +the type T1 is cv T* and R is the return type of the pointer to member function; +</p></blockquote> +<p> +The type of T1 can't be cv T*, 'cause that's a pointer to a pointer to member +function. It should be a pointer to the class that T is a pointer to member of. +Like this: +</p> +<blockquote><p> +a pointer to a member function R T0::f() cv (where cv represents the member +function's cv-qualifiers); the type T1 is cv T0* +</p></blockquote> +<p> +Similarly, bullet item 2 in 2.1.2/4 should be: +</p> +<blockquote><p> +a pointer to a member function R T0::f(T2) cv (where cv represents the member +function's cv-qualifiers); the type T1 is cv T0* +</p></blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +Change bullet item 2 in 2.1.2/3: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<ul> +<li> +a pointer to member function <del>type with cv-qualifier <tt><i>cv</i></tt> and no arguments; +the type <tt>T1</tt> is <tt><i>cv</i> T*</tt> and <tt>R</tt> is the return +type of the pointer to member function</del> <ins><tt>R T0::f() <i>cv</i></tt> +(where <tt><i>cv</i></tt> represents the member function's cv-qualifiers); +the type <tt>T1</tt> is <tt><i>cv</i> T0*</tt></ins> +</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change bullet item 2 in 2.1.2/4: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<ul> +<li> +a pointer to member function <del>with cv-qualifier <tt><i>cv</i></tt> and taking one argument +of type <tt>T2</tt>; the type <tt>T1</tt> is <tt><i>cv</i> T*</tt> and +<tt>R</tt> is the return type of the pointer to member function</del> +<ins><tt>R T0::f(T2) <i>cv</i></tt> (where <tt><i>cv</i></tt> represents the member +function's cv-qualifiers); the type <tt>T1</tt> is <tt><i>cv</i> T0*</tt></ins> +</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="522"></a>522. Tuple doesn't define swap</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.4 [tuple], TR1 6.1 [tr.tuple] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Andy Koenig <b>Opened:</b> 2005-07-03 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#tuple">issues</a> in [tuple].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Tuple doesn't define swap(). It should. +</p> +<p><i>[ +Berlin: Doug to provide wording. +]</i></p> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia: Howard to provide wording. +]</i></p> + +<p><i>[ +Toronto: Howard to provide wording (really this time). +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Bellevue: Alisdair provided wording. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +Add these signatures to 20.4 [tuple] +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class... Types> + void swap(tuple<Types...>& x, tuple<Types...>& y); +template <class... Types> + void swap(tuple<Types...>&& x, tuple<Types...>& y); +template <class... Types> + void swap(tuple<Types...>& x, tuple<Types...>&& y); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Add this signature to 20.4.2 [tuple.tuple] +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void swap(tuple&&); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Add the following two sections to the end of the tuple clauses +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +20.3.1.7 tuple swap [tuple.swap] +</p> + +<pre>void swap(tuple&& rhs); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Requires:</i> Each type in <tt>Types</tt> shall be <tt>Swappable</tt>. +</p> +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Calls <tt>swap</tt> for each element in <tt>*this</tt> and its corresponding element +in <tt>rhs</tt>. +</p> +<p> +<i>Throws:</i> Nothing, unless one of the element-wise <tt>swap</tt> calls throw an +exception. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +20.3.1.8 tuple specialized algorithms [tuple.special] +</p> + +<pre>template <class... Types> + void swap(tuple<Types...>& x, tuple<Types...>& y); +template <class... Types> + void swap(tuple<Types...>&& x, tuple<Types...>& y); +template <class... Types> + void swap(tuple<Types...>& x, tuple<Types...>&& y); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> x.swap(y) +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="524"></a>524. regex named character classes and case-insensitivity don't mix</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 28 [re] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Eric Niebler <b>Opened:</b> 2005-07-01 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#re">issues</a> in [re].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +This defect is also being discussed on the Boost developers list. The +full discussion can be found here: +http://lists.boost.org/boost/2005/07/29546.php +</p> +<p> +-- Begin original message -- +</p> +<p> +Also, I may have found another issue, closely related to the one under +discussion. It regards case-insensitive matching of named character +classes. The regex_traits<> provides two functions for working with +named char classes: lookup_classname and isctype. To match a char class +such as [[:alpha:]], you pass "alpha" to lookup_classname and get a +bitmask. Later, you pass a char and the bitmask to isctype and get a +bool yes/no answer. +</p> +<p> +But how does case-insensitivity work in this scenario? Suppose we're +doing a case-insensitive match on [[:lower:]]. It should behave as if it +were [[:lower:][:upper:]], right? But there doesn't seem to be enough +smarts in the regex_traits interface to do this. +</p> +<p> +Imagine I write a traits class which recognizes [[:fubar:]], and the +"fubar" char class happens to be case-sensitive. How is the regex engine +to know that? And how should it do a case-insensitive match of a +character against the [[:fubar:]] char class? John, can you confirm this +is a legitimate problem? +</p> +<p> +I see two options: +</p> +<p> +1) Add a bool icase parameter to lookup_classname. Then, +lookup_classname( "upper", true ) will know to return lower|upper +instead of just upper. +</p> +<p> +2) Add a isctype_nocase function +</p> +<p> +I prefer (1) because the extra computation happens at the time the +pattern is compiled rather than when it is executed. +</p> +<p> +-- End original message -- +</p> + +<p> +For what it's worth, John has also expressed his preference for option +(1) above. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Adopt the proposed resolution in +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2409.pdf">N2409</a>. +</p> + + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007): The LWG adopted the proposed resolution of N2409 for this issue. +The LWG voted to accelerate this issue to Ready status to be voted into the WP at Kona. +]</i></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="525"></a>525. type traits definitions not clear</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.7.4 [meta.unary], TR1 4.5 [tr.meta.unary] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Robert Klarer <b>Opened:</b> 2005-07-11 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-19</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#meta.unary">issues</a> in [meta.unary].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +It is not completely clear how the primary type traits deal with +cv-qualified types. And several of the secondary type traits +seem to be lacking a definition. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Berlin: Howard to provide wording. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Wording provided in <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2006/n2028.html">N2028</a>. +A +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2157.html">revision (N2157)</a> +provides more detail for motivation. +</p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +Solved by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2157.html">revision (N2157)</a> +in the WP. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="527"></a>527. tr1::bind has lost its Throws clause</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8.10.1.2 [func.bind.bind], TR1 3.6.3 [tr.func.bind.bind] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Peter Dimov <b>Opened:</b> 2005-10-01 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#func.bind.bind">issues</a> in [func.bind.bind].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The original bind proposal gives the guarantee that tr1::bind(f, t1, ..., tN) does not throw when the copy constructors of f, t1, ..., tN don't. +</p> + +<p> +This guarantee is not present in the final version of TR1. +</p> + +<p> +I'm pretty certain that we never removed it on purpose. Editorial omission? :-) +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Berlin: not quite editorial, needs proposed wording. +]</i></p> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia: Doug to translate wording to variadic templates. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Toronto: We agree but aren't quite happy with the wording. The "t"'s no +longer refer to anything. Alan to provide improved wording. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><i>[ +Pre-Bellevue: Alisdair provided wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p> +TR1 proposed resolution: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +In TR1 3.6.3 [tr.func.bind.bind], add a new paragraph after p2: +</p> +<blockquote><p> +<i>Throws:</i> Nothing unless one of the copy constructors of <tt>f, t1, t2, ..., tN</tt> +throws an exception. +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +Add a new paragraph after p4: +</p> +<blockquote><p> +<i>Throws:</i> nothing unless one of the copy constructors of <tt>f, t1, t2, ..., tN</tt> +throws an exception. +</p></blockquote> + +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 20.8.10.1.2 [func.bind.bind], add a new paragraph after p2: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Throws:</i> Nothing unless the copy constructor of <tt>F</tt> or of one of the types +in the <tt>BoundArgs...</tt> pack expansion throws an exception. +</blockquote> + +<p> +In 20.8.10.1.2 [func.bind.bind], add a new paragraph after p4: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Throws:</i> Nothing unless the copy constructor of <tt>F</tt> or of one of the types +in the <tt>BoundArgs...</tt> pack expansion throws an exception. +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="530"></a>530. Must elements of a string be contiguous?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.4 [basic.string] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 2005-11-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#basic.string">issues</a> in [basic.string].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#69">69</a>, which was incorporated into C++03, mandated + that the elements of a vector must be stored in contiguous memory. + Should the same also apply to <tt>basic_string</tt>?</p> + +<p>We almost require contiguity already. Clause 23.6.4 [multiset] + defines <tt>operator[]</tt> as <tt>data()[pos]</tt>. What's missing + is a similar guarantee if we access the string's elements via the + iterator interface.</p> + +<p>Given the existence of <tt>data()</tt>, and the definition of + <tt>operator[]</tt> and <tt>at</tt> in terms of <tt>data</tt>, + I don't believe it's possible to write a useful and standard- + conforming <tt>basic_string</tt> that isn't contiguous. I'm not + aware of any non-contiguous implementation. We should just require + it. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Add the following text to the end of 21.4 [basic.string], +paragraph 2. </p> + +<blockquote> + <p>The characters in a string are stored contiguously, meaning that if + <tt>s</tt> is a <tt>basic_string<charT, Allocator></tt>, then + it obeys the identity + <tt>&*(s.begin() + n) == &*s.begin() + n</tt> + for all <tt>0 <= n < s.size()</tt>. + </p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +Not standardizing this existing practice does not give implementors more +freedom. We thought it might a decade ago. But the vendors have spoken +both with their implementations, and with their voice at the LWG +meetings. The implementations are going to be contiguous no matter what +the standard says. So the standard might as well give string clients +more design choices. +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="531"></a>531. array forms of unformatted input functions</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.1.3 [istream.unformatted] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2005-11-23 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#istream.unformatted">issues</a> in [istream.unformatted].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The array forms of unformatted input functions don't seem to have well-defined +semantics for zero-element arrays in a couple of cases. The affected ones +(<tt>istream::get()</tt> and <tt>istream::getline()</tt>) are supposed to +terminate when <tt>(n - 1)</tt> characters are stored, which obviously can +never be true when <tt>(n == 0)</tt> holds to start with. See +c++std-lib-16071. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +I suggest changing 27.6.1.3, p7 (<tt>istream::get()</tt>), bullet 1 to read: +</p> + <ul> + <li> + <tt>(n < 1)</tt> is true or <tt>(n - 1)</tt> characters + are stored; + </li> + </ul> +<p> +Change 27.6.1.3, p9: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +If the function stores no characters, it calls <tt>setstate(failbit)</tt> (which +may throw <tt>ios_base::failure</tt> (27.4.4.3)). In any case, <ins>if <tt>(n +> 0)</tt> is true</ins> it then stores a null character into the next +successive location of the array. +</p></blockquote> + + <p> + +and similarly p17 (<tt>istream::getline()</tt>), bullet 3 to: + + </p> + <ul> + <li> + <tt>(n < 1)</tt> is true or <tt>(n - 1)</tt> characters + are stored (in which case the function calls + <tt>setstate(failbit)</tt>). + </li> + </ul> + + <p> + +In addition, to clarify that <tt>istream::getline()</tt> must not store the +terminating NUL character unless the the array has non-zero size, Robert +Klarer suggests in c++std-lib-16082 to change 27.6.1.3, p20 to read: + + </p> + <blockquote><p> + +In any case, provided <tt>(n > 0)</tt> is true, it then stores a null character +(using charT()) into the next successive location of the array. + + </p></blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +post-Redmond: Pete noticed that the current resolution for <tt>get</tt> requires +writing to out of bounds memory when <tt>n == 0</tt>. Martin provided fix. +]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="533"></a>533. typo in 2.2.3.10/1</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.10.2.11 [util.smartptr.getdeleter], TR1 2.2.3.10 [tr.util.smartptr.getdeleter] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Paolo Carlini <b>Opened:</b> 2005-11-09 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#util.smartptr.getdeleter">issues</a> in [util.smartptr.getdeleter].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +I'm seeing something that looks like a typo. The Return of <tt>get_deleter</tt> +says: +</p> +<blockquote><p> +If <tt>*this</tt> <i>owns</i> a deleter <tt>d</tt>... +</p></blockquote> +<p> +but <tt>get_deleter</tt> is a free function! +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Therefore, I think should be: +</p> +<blockquote><p> +If <tt><del>*this</del> <ins>p</ins></tt> <i>owns</i> a deleter <tt>d</tt>... +</p></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="534"></a>534. Missing basic_string members</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.4 [basic.string] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2005-11-16 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#basic.string">issues</a> in [basic.string].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +OK, we all know std::basic_string is bloated and already has way too +many members. However, I propose it is missing 3 useful members that +are often expected by users believing it is a close approximation of the +container concept. All 3 are listed in table 71 as 'optional' +</p> + +<p> +i/ pop_back. +</p> + +<p> +This is the one I feel most strongly about, as I only just discovered it +was missing as we are switching to a more conforming standard library +<g> +</p> + +<p> +I find it particularly inconsistent to support push_back, but not +pop_back. +</p> + +<p> +ii/ back. +</p> + +<p> +There are certainly cases where I want to examine the last character of +a string before deciding to append, or to trim trailing path separators +from directory names etc. *rbegin() somehow feels inelegant. +</p> + +<p> +iii/ front +</p> + +<p> +This one I don't feel strongly about, but if I can get the first two, +this one feels that it should be added as a 'me too' for consistency. +</p> + +<p> +I believe this would be similarly useful to the data() member recently +added to vector, or at() member added to the maps. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add the following members to definition of class template basic_string, 21.3p7 +</p> +<blockquote><pre>void pop_back () + +const charT & front() const +charT & front() + +const charT & back() const +charT & back() +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +Add the following paragraphs to basic_string description +</p> + +<p> +21.3.4p5 +</p> +<blockquote> +<pre>const charT & front() const +charT & front() +</pre> +<p> +<i>Precondition:</i> <tt>!empty()</tt> +</p> +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Equivalent to <tt>operator[](0)</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +21.3.4p6 +</p> +<blockquote> +<pre>const charT & back() const +charT & back() +</pre> +<p> +<i>Precondition:</i> <tt>!empty()</tt> +</p> +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Equivalent to <tt>operator[]( size() - 1)</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +21.3.5.5p10 +</p> +<blockquote> +<pre>void pop_back () +</pre> +<p> +<i>Precondition:</i> <tt>!empty()</tt> +</p> +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Equivalent to <tt>erase( size() - 1, 1 )</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Update Table 71: (optional sequence operations) +Add basic_string to the list of containers for the following operations. +</p> +<blockquote><pre>a.front() +a.back() +a.push_back() +a.pop_back() +a[n] +</pre></blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Berlin: Has support. Alisdair provided wording. +]</i></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="535"></a>535. std::string::swap specification poorly worded</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.4.6.8 [string::swap] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Beman Dawes <b>Opened:</b> 2005-12-14 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#string::swap">issues</a> in [string::swap].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +std::string::swap currently says for effects and postcondition: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Swaps the contents of the two strings. +</p> + +<p> +<i>Postcondition:</i> <tt>*this</tt> contains the characters that were in <tt><i>s</i></tt>, +<tt><i>s</i></tt> contains the characters that were in <tt>*this</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Specifying both Effects and Postcondition seems redundant, and the postcondition +needs to be made stronger. Users would be unhappy if the characters were not in +the same order after the swap. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<blockquote> +<p> +<del><i>Effects:</i> Swaps the contents of the two strings.</del> +</p> + +<p> +<i>Postcondition:</i> <tt>*this</tt> contains the <ins>same sequence of</ins> +characters that <del>were</del> <ins>was</ins> in <tt><i>s</i></tt>, +<tt><i>s</i></tt> contains the <ins>same sequence of</ins> characters that +<del>were</del> <ins>was</ins> in <tt>*this</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="537"></a>537. Typos in the signatures in 27.6.1.3/42-43 and 27.6.2.4</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.1.3 [istream.unformatted] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Paolo Carlini <b>Opened:</b> 2006-02-12 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#istream.unformatted">issues</a> in [istream.unformatted].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In the most recent working draft, I'm still seeing: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>seekg(off_type& off, ios_base::seekdir dir) +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +and +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>seekp(pos_type& pos) + +seekp(off_type& off, ios_base::seekdir dir) +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +that is, by reference off and pos arguments. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +After 27.6.1.3p42 change: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>basic_istream<charT,traits>& seekg(off_type<del>&</del> <i>off</i>, ios_base::seekdir <i>dir</i>); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +After 27.6.2.4p1 change: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>basic_ostream<charT,traits>& seekp(pos_type<del>&</del> <i>pos</i>); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +After 27.6.2.4p3 change: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>basic_ostream<charT,traits>& seekp(off_type<del>&</del> <i>off</i>, ios_base::seekdir <i>dir</i>); +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="538"></a>538. 241 again: Does unique_copy() require CopyConstructible and Assignable?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.3.9 [alg.unique] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2006-02-09 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#alg.unique">issues</a> in [alg.unique].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +I believe I botched the resolution of +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#241"> +241 "Does unique_copy() require CopyConstructible and Assignable?"</a> which now +has WP status. +</p> + +<p> +This talks about <tt>unique_copy</tt> requirements and currently reads: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +-5- <i>Requires:</i> The ranges <tt>[<i>first</i>, <i>last</i>)</tt> and +<tt>[<i>result</i>, <i>result</i>+(<i>last</i>-<i>first</i>))</tt> +shall not overlap. The expression <tt>*<i>result</i> = *<i>first</i></tt> shall +be valid. If neither <tt>InputIterator</tt> nor <tt>OutputIterator</tt> meets the +requirements of forward iterator then the value type of <tt>InputIterator</tt> +must be CopyConstructible (20.1.3). Otherwise CopyConstructible is not required. +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +The problem (which Paolo discovered) is that when the iterators are at their +most restrictive (<tt>InputIterator</tt>, <tt>OutputIterator</tt>), then we want +<tt>InputIterator::value_type</tt> to be both <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> and +<tt>CopyAssignable</tt> (for the most efficient implementation). However this +proposed resolution only makes it clear that it is <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>, +and that one can assign from <tt>*<i>first</i></tt> to <tt>*<i>result</i></tt>. +This latter requirement does not necessarily imply that you can: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>*<i>first</i> = *<i>first</i>; +</pre></blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<blockquote><p> +-5- <i>Requires:</i> The ranges <tt>[<i>first</i>, <i>last</i>)</tt> and +<tt>[<i>result</i>, <i>result</i>+(<i>last</i>-<i>first</i>))</tt> +shall not overlap. The expression <tt>*<i>result</i> = *<i>first</i></tt> +shall +be valid. If neither <tt>InputIterator</tt> nor <tt>OutputIterator</tt> meets the +requirements of forward iterator then the <del>value type</del> +<ins><tt>value_type</tt></ins> of <tt>InputIterator</tt> +must be CopyConstructible (20.1.3) <ins>and Assignable</ins>. +Otherwise CopyConstructible is not required. +</p></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="539"></a>539. partial_sum and adjacent_difference should mention requirements</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.7.3 [partial.sum] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Marc Schoolderman <b>Opened:</b> 2006-02-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +There are some problems in the definition of partial_sum and +adjacent_difference in 26.4 [lib.numeric.ops] +</p> + +<p> +Unlike <tt>accumulate</tt> and <tt>inner_product</tt>, these functions are not +parametrized on a "type T", instead, 26.4.3 [lib.partial.sum] simply +specifies the effects clause as; +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +Assigns to every element referred to by iterator <tt>i</tt> in the range +<tt>[result,result + (last - first))</tt> a value correspondingly equal to +</p> +<blockquote><pre>((...(* first + *( first + 1)) + ...) + *( first + ( i - result ))) +</pre></blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +And similarly for BinaryOperation. Using just this definition, it seems +logical to expect that: +</p> + + +<blockquote><pre>char i_array[4] = { 100, 100, 100, 100 }; +int o_array[4]; + +std::partial_sum(i_array, i_array+4, o_array); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Is equivalent to +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>int o_array[4] = { 100, 100+100, 100+100+100, 100+100+100+100 }; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +i.e. 100, 200, 300, 400, with addition happening in the <tt>result type</tt>, +<tt>int</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +Yet all implementations I have tested produce 100, -56, 44, -112, +because they are using an accumulator of the <tt>InputIterator</tt>'s +<tt>value_type</tt>, which in this case is <tt>char</tt>, not <tt>int</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +The issue becomes more noticeable when the result of the expression <tt>*i + +*(i+1)</tt> or <tt>binary_op(*i, *i-1)</tt> can't be converted to the +<tt>value_type</tt>. In a contrived example: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>enum not_int { x = 1, y = 2 }; +... +not_int e_array[4] = { x, x, y, y }; +std::partial_sum(e_array, e_array+4, o_array); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Is it the intent that the operations happen in the <tt>input type</tt>, or in +the <tt>result type</tt>? +</p> + +<p> +If the intent is that operations happen in the <tt>result type</tt>, something +like this should be added to the "Requires" clause of 26.4.3/4 +[lib.partial.sum]: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +The type of <tt>*i + *(i+1)</tt> or <tt>binary_op(*i, *(i+1))</tt> shall meet the +requirements of <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> (20.1.3) and <tt>Assignable</tt> +(23.1) types. +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +(As also required for <tt>T</tt> in 26.4.1 [lib.accumulate] and 26.4.2 +[lib.inner.product].) +</p> + +<p> +The "auto initializer" feature proposed in +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2005/n1894.pdf">N1894</a> +is not required to +implement <tt>partial_sum</tt> this way. The 'narrowing' behaviour can still be +obtained by using the <tt>std::plus<></tt> function object. +</p> + +<p> +If the intent is that operations happen in the <tt>input type</tt>, then +something like this should be added instead; +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +The type of *first shall meet the requirements of +<tt>CopyConstructible</tt> (20.1.3) and <tt>Assignable</tt> (23.1) types. +The result of <tt>*i + *(i+1)</tt> or <tt>binary_op(*i, *(i+1))</tt> shall be +convertible to this type. +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +The 'widening' behaviour can then be obtained by writing a custom proxy +iterator, which is somewhat involved. +</p> + +<p> +In both cases, the semantics should probably be clarified. +</p> + +<p> +26.4.4 [lib.adjacent.difference] is similarly underspecified, although +all implementations seem to perform operations in the 'result' type: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>unsigned char i_array[4] = { 4, 3, 2, 1 }; +int o_array[4]; + +std::adjacent_difference(i_array, i_array+4, o_array); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +o_array is 4, -1, -1, -1 as expected, not 4, 255, 255, 255. +</p> + +<p> +In any case, <tt>adjacent_difference</tt> doesn't mention the requirements on the +<tt>value_type</tt>; it can be brought in line with the rest of 26.4 +[lib.numeric.ops] by adding the following to 26.4.4/2 +[lib.adjacent.difference]: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +The type of <tt>*first</tt> shall meet the requirements of +<tt>CopyConstructible</tt> (20.1.3) and <tt>Assignable</tt> (23.1) types." +</p></blockquote> +<p><i>[ +Berlin: Giving output iterator's value_types very controversial. Suggestion of +adding signatures to allow user to specify "accumulator". +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Bellevue: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +The intent of the algorithms is to perform their calculations using the type of the input iterator. +Proposed wording provided. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Sophia Antipolis: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +We did not agree that the proposed resolution was correct. For example, +when the arguments are types <tt>(float*, float*, double*)</tt>, the +highest-quality solution would use double as the type of the +accumulator. If the intent of the wording is to require that the type of +the accumulator must be the <tt>input_iterator</tt>'s <tt>value_type</tt>, the wording +should specify it. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-09 Alisdair adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Now that we have the facility, the 'best' accumulator type could probably be +deduced as: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>std::common_type<InIter::value_type, OutIter::reference>::type +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +This type would then have additional requirements of constructability and +incrementability/assignability. +</p> +<p> +If this extracting an accumulator type from a pair/set of iterators (with +additional requirements on that type) is a problem for multiple functions, +it might be worth extracting into a SharedAccumulator concept or similar. +</p> +<p> +I'll go no further in writing up wording now, until the group gives a +clearer indication of preferred direction. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +The proposed resolution isn't quite right. For example, "the type of +*first" should be changed to "iterator::value_type" or similar. Daniel +volunteered to correct the wording. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-29 Daniel corrected wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + + + +<ol> +<li> +<p> +Change 26.7.3 [partial.sum]/1 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> <ins>Let <tt>VT</tt> be <tt>InputIterator</tt>'s value type. For a nonempty range, +initializes an accumulator <tt>acc</tt> of type <tt>VT</tt> with <tt>*first</tt> and performs +<tt>*result = acc</tt>. For every iterator <tt>i</tt> in <tt>[first + 1, last)</tt> in order, <tt>acc</tt> is then +modified by <tt>acc = acc + *i</tt> or <tt>acc = binary_op(acc, *i)</tt> and is assigned +to <tt>*(result + (i - first))</tt>.</ins> <del>Assigns to every element referred to by +iterator <tt>i</tt> in the range <tt>[result,result + (last - first))</tt> a value +correspondingly +equal to</del> +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del> +((...(*first + *(first + 1)) + ...) + *(first + (i - result))) +</del></pre></blockquote> + +<p><del> +or +</del></p> + +<blockquote><pre><del> +binary_op(binary_op(..., + binary_op(*first, *(first + 1)),...), *(first + (i - result))) +</del></pre></blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 26.7.3 [partial.sum]/3 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Complexity:</i> Exactly <tt><ins>max(</ins>(last - first) - 1<ins>, 0)</ins></tt> +applications +of <tt><del>binary_op</del></tt><ins>the binary operation</ins>. +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 26.7.3 [partial.sum]/4 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Requires:</i> <ins><tt>VT</tt> shall be constructible from the type of <tt>*first</tt>, the result of +<tt>acc + *i</tt> or <tt>binary_op(acc, *i)</tt> shall be implicitly convertible to <tt>VT</tt>, and +the result of the expression <tt>acc</tt> shall be writable to the <tt>result</tt> +output iterator.</ins> In the ranges <tt>[first,last]</tt> and +<tt>[result,result + (last - first)]</tt> [..] +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 26.7.4 [adjacent.difference]/1 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> <ins>Let <tt>VT</tt> be <tt>InputIterator</tt>'s value type. For a nonempty range, +initializes an accumulator <tt>acc</tt> of type <tt>VT</tt> with <tt>*first</tt> and performs +<tt>*result = acc</tt>. For every iterator <tt>i</tt> in <tt>[first + 1, last)</tt> in order, +initializes a +value <tt>val</tt> of type <tt>VT</tt> with <tt>*i</tt>, assigns the result of <tt>val - acc</tt> or +<tt>binary_op(val, acc)</tt> +to <tt>*(result + (i - first))</tt> and modifies <tt>acc = std::move(val)</tt>.</ins> +<del>Assigns to every element referred to by iterator <tt>i</tt> in the range +<tt>[result + 1, +result + (last - first))</tt> a value correspondingly equal to</del> +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del> +*(first + (i - result)) - *(first + (i - result) - 1) +</del></pre></blockquote> + +<p><del> +or +</del></p> + +<blockquote><pre><del> +binary_op(*(first + (i - result)), *(first + (i - result) - 1)). +</del></pre></blockquote> + +<p><del> +result gets the value of *first.</del> +</p> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 26.7.4 [adjacent.difference]/2 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Requires:</i> <ins><tt>VT</tt> shall be <tt>MoveAssignable</tt> ([moveassignable]) +and shall be +constructible from the type of <tt>*first</tt>. The result +of the expression <tt>acc</tt> and the result of the expression <tt>val - acc</tt> or +<tt>binary_op(val, acc)</tt> +shall be writable to the <tt>result</tt> output iterator.</ins> In the ranges +<tt>[first,last]</tt> [..] +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 26.7.4 [adjacent.difference]/5 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Complexity:</i> Exactly <tt><ins>max(</ins>(last - first) - 1<ins>, 0)</ins></tt> +applications +of <del><tt>binary_op</tt></del><ins>the binary operation</ins>. +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="540"></a>540. shared_ptr<void>::operator*()</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.10.2.5 [util.smartptr.shared.obs], TR1 2.2.3.5 [tr.util.smartptr.shared.obs] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2005-10-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#util.smartptr.shared.obs">issues</a> in [util.smartptr.shared.obs].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +I'm trying to reconcile the note in tr.util.smartptr.shared.obs, p6 +that talks about the operator*() member function of shared_ptr: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> + Notes: When T is void, attempting to instantiate this member function + renders the program ill-formed. [Note: Instantiating shared_ptr<void> + does not necessarily result in instantiating this member function. + --end note] +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +with the requirement in temp.inst, p1: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> + The implicit instantiation of a class template specialization causes + the implicit instantiation of the declarations, but not of the + definitions... +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +I assume that what the note is really trying to say is that +"instantiating shared_ptr<void> *must not* result in instantiating +this member function." That is, that this function must not be +declared a member of shared_ptr<void>. Is my interpretation +correct? +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 2.2.3.5p6 +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +-6- <del><i>Notes:</i></del> When <tt>T</tt> is <tt>void</tt>, <del>attempting to instantiate +this member function renders the program ill-formed. [<i>Note:</i> +Instantiating <tt>shared_ptr<void></tt> does not necessarily result in +instantiating this member function. <i>--end note</i>]</del> <ins>it is +unspecified whether this member function is declared or not, and if so, what its +return type is, except that the declaration (although not necessarily the +definition) of the function shall be well-formed.</ins> +</p></blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="541"></a>541. shared_ptr template assignment and void</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.10.2 [util.smartptr.shared], TR1 2.2.3 [tr.util.smartptr.shared] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2005-10-16 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#util.smartptr.shared">issues</a> in [util.smartptr.shared].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Is the void specialization of the template assignment operator taking +a shared_ptr<void> as an argument supposed be well-formed? +</p> +<p> +I.e., is this snippet well-formed: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>shared_ptr<void> p; +p.operator=<void>(p); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Gcc complains about auto_ptr<void>::operator*() returning a reference +to void. I suspect it's because shared_ptr has two template assignment +operators, one of which takes auto_ptr, and the auto_ptr template gets +implicitly instantiated in the process of overload resolution. +</p> + +<p> +The only way I see around it is to do the same trick with auto_ptr<void> +operator*() as with the same operator in shared_ptr<void>. +</p> + +<p> +PS Strangely enough, the EDG front end doesn't mind the code, even +though in a small test case (below) I can reproduce the error with +it as well. +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T> +struct A { T& operator*() { return *(T*)0; } }; + +template <class T> +struct B { + void operator= (const B&) { } + template <class U> + void operator= (const B<U>&) { } + template <class U> + void operator= (const A<U>&) { } +}; + +int main () +{ + B<void> b; + b.operator=<void>(b); +} +</pre></blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In [lib.memory] change: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>template<class X> class auto_ptr; +<ins>template<> class auto_ptr<void>;</ins> +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +In [lib.auto.ptr]/2 add the following before the last closing brace: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<> class auto_ptr<void> +{ +public: + typedef void element_type; +}; +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="542"></a>542. shared_ptr observers</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.10.2.5 [util.smartptr.shared.obs], TR1 2.2.3.5 [tr.util.smartptr.shared.obs] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2005-10-18 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#util.smartptr.shared.obs">issues</a> in [util.smartptr.shared.obs].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Peter Dimov wrote: +To: C++ libraries mailing list +Message c++std-lib-15614 +[...] +The intent is for both use_count() and unique() to work in a threaded environment. +They are intrinsically prone to race conditions, but they never return garbage. +</p> + +<p> +This is a crucial piece of information that I really wish were +captured in the text. Having this in a non-normative note would +have made everything crystal clear to me and probably stopped +me from ever starting this discussion :) Instead, the sentence +in p12 "use only for debugging and testing purposes, not for +production code" very strongly suggests that implementations +can and even are encouraged to return garbage (when threads +are involved) for performance reasons. +</p> +<p> +How about adding an informative note along these lines: +</p> +<blockquote><p> + Note: Implementations are encouraged to provide well-defined + behavior for use_count() and unique() even in the presence of + multiple threads. +</p></blockquote> +<p> +I don't necessarily insist on the exact wording, just that we +capture the intent. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 20.9.10.2.5 [util.smartptr.shared.obs] p12: +</p> +<blockquote><p> +[<i>Note:</i> <tt>use_count()</tt> is not necessarily efficient. <del>Use only for +debugging and testing purposes, not for production code.</del> --<i>end note</i>] +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +Change 20.9.10.3.5 [util.smartptr.weak.obs] p3: +</p> +<blockquote><p> +[<i>Note:</i> <tt>use_count()</tt> is not necessarily efficient. <del>Use only for +debugging and testing purposes, not for production code.</del> --<i>end note</i>] +</p></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="543"></a>543. valarray slice default constructor</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.6.4 [class.slice] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2005-11-03 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +If one explicitly constructs a slice or glice with the default +constructor, does the standard require this slice to have any usable +state? It says "creates a slice which specifies no elements", which +could be interpreted two ways: +</p> +<ol> +<li>There are no elements to which the slice refers (i.e. undefined).</li> +<li>The slice specifies an array with no elements in it (i.e. defined).</li> +</ol> +<p> +Here is a bit of code to illustrate: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>#include <iostream> +#include <valarray> + +int main() +{ + std::valarray<int> v(10); + std::valarray<int> v2 = v[std::slice()]; + std::cout << "v[slice()].size() = " << v2.size() << '\n'; +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Is the behavior undefined? Or should the output be: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>v[slice()].size() = 0 +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +There is a similar question and wording for gslice at 26.3.6.1p1. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p><i>[Martin suggests removing the second sentence in 26.6.4.1 [cons.slice] as well.]</i></p> + + +<p> +Change 26.6.4.1 [cons.slice]: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +1 - <del>The default constructor for <tt>slice</tt> creates a <tt>slice</tt> +which specifies no elements.</del> <ins>The default constructor is equivalent to +<tt>slice(0, 0, 0)</tt>.</ins> A default constructor is provided only to permit +the declaration of arrays of slices. The constructor with arguments for a slice +takes a start, length, and stride parameter. +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +Change 26.6.6.1 [gslice.cons]: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +1 - <del>The default constructor creates a <tt>gslice</tt> which specifies no +elements.</del> <ins>The default constructor is equivalent to <tt>gslice(0, +valarray<size_t>(), valarray<size_t>())</tt>.</ins> The constructor +with arguments builds a <tt>gslice</tt> based on a specification of start, +lengths, and strides, as explained in the previous section. +</p></blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="545"></a>545. When is a deleter deleted?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.10.2.11 [util.smartptr.getdeleter], TR1 2.2.3.2 [tr.util.smartptr.shared.dest] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 2006-01-10 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#util.smartptr.getdeleter">issues</a> in [util.smartptr.getdeleter].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The description of ~shared_ptr doesn't say when the shared_ptr's deleter, if +any, is destroyed. In principle there are two possibilities: it is destroyed +unconditionally whenever ~shared_ptr is executed (which, from an implementation +standpoint, means that the deleter is copied whenever the shared_ptr is copied), +or it is destroyed immediately after the owned pointer is destroyed (which, from +an implementation standpoint, means that the deleter object is shared between +instances). We should say which it is. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add after the first sentence of 20.9.10.2.11 [util.smartptr.getdeleter]/1: +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +The returned pointer remains valid as long as there exists a <tt>shared_ptr</tt> instance +that owns <tt><i>d</i></tt>. +</p> +<p> +[<i>Note:</i> it is unspecified whether the pointer remains valid longer than that. +This can happen if the implementation doesn't destroy the deleter until all +<tt>weak_ptr</tt> instances in the ownership group are destroyed. <i>-- end note</i>] +</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="550"></a>550. What should the return type of pow(float,int) be?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.8 [c.math] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2006-01-12 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#c.math">issues</a> in [c.math].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Assuming we adopt the +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2005/n1836.pdf">C +compatibility package from C99</a> what should be the return type of the +following signature be: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>? pow(float, int); +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +C++03 says that the return type should be <tt>float</tt>. +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2005/n1836.pdf"> +TR1</a> and C90/99 say the return type should be <tt>double</tt>. This can put +clients into a situation where C++03 provides answers that are not as high +quality as C90/C99/TR1. For example: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>#include <math.h> + +int main() +{ + float x = 2080703.375F; + double y = pow(x, 2); +} +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +Assuming an IEEE 32 bit float and IEEE 64 bit double, C90/C99/TR1 all suggest: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>y = 4329326534736.390625 +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +which is exactly right. While C++98/C++03 demands: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>y = 4329326510080. +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +which is only approximately right. +</p> + +<p> +I recommend that C++0X adopt the mixed mode arithmetic already adopted by +Fortran, C and TR1 and make the return type of <tt>pow(float,int)</tt> be +<tt>double</tt>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007): Other functions that are affected by this issue include +<tt>ldexp</tt>, <tt>scalbln</tt>, and <tt>scalbn</tt>. We also believe that there is a typo in +26.7/10: <tt>float nexttoward(float, long double);</tt> [sic] should be <tt>float +nexttoward(float, float);</tt> Proposed Disposition: Review (the proposed +resolution appears above, rather than below, the heading "Proposed +resolution") +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +</i></p><p><i> +Howard, post Kona: +</i></p><i> +<blockquote> +<p> +Unfortunately I strongly disagree with a part of the resolution +from Kona. I am moving from New to Open instead of to Review because I do not believe +we have consensus on the intent of the resolution. +</p> +<p> +This issue does not include <tt>ldexp</tt>, <tt>scalbln</tt>, and <tt>scalbn</tt> because +the second integral parameter in each of these signatures (from C99) is <b>not</b> a +<i>generic parameter</i> according to C99 7.22p2. The corresponding C++ overloads are +intended (as far as I know) to correspond directly to C99's definition of <i>generic parameter</i>. +</p> +<p> +For similar reasons, I do not believe that the second <tt>long double</tt> parameter of +<tt>nexttoward</tt>, nor the return type of this function, is in error. I believe the +correct signature is: +</p> +<blockquote> +<pre>float nexttoward(float, long double); +</pre> +</blockquote> +<p> +which is what both the C++0X working paper and C99 state (as far as I currently understand). +</p> +<p> +This is really <b>only</b> about <tt>pow(float, int)</tt>. And this is because C++98 took one +route (with <tt>pow</tt> only) and C99 took another (with many math functions in <tt><tgmath.h></tt>. +The proposed resolution basically says: C++98 got it wrong and C99 got it right; let's go with C99. +</p> +</blockquote> +]</i><p></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Bellevue: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +This signature was not picked up from C99. Instead, if one types +pow(2.0f,2), the promotion rules will invoke "double pow(double, +double)", which generally gives special treatment for integral +exponents, preserving full accuracy of the result. New proposed +wording provided. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 26.8 [c.math] p10: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +The added signatures are: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>... +<del>float pow(float, int);</del> +... +<del>double pow(double, int);</del> +... +<del>long double pow(long double, int);</del> +</pre></blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="551"></a>551. <ccomplex></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> X [cmplxh], TR1 8.3 [tr.c99.cmplxh] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2006-01-23 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Previously xxx.h was parsable by C++. But in the case of C99's <complex.h> +it isn't. Otherwise we could model it just like <string.h>, <cstring>, <string>: +</p> + +<ul> +<li><string> : C++ API in namespace std</li> +<li><cstring> : C API in namespace std</li> +<li><string.h> : C API in global namespace</li> +</ul> + +<p> +In the case of C's complex, the C API won't compile in C++. So we have: +</p> + +<ul> +<li><complex> : C++ API in namespace std</li> +<li><ccomplex> : ?</li> +<li><complex.h> : ?</li> +</ul> + +<p> +The ? can't refer to the C API. TR1 currently says: +</p> + +<ul> +<li><complex> : C++ API in namespace std</li> +<li><ccomplex> : C++ API in namespace std</li> +<li><complex.h> : C++ API in global namespace</li> +</ul> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 26.3.11 [cmplxh]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +The header behaves as if it includes the header +<tt><ccomplex></tt><ins>.</ins><del>, and provides sufficient using +declarations to declare in the global namespace all function and type names +declared or defined in the neader <tt><complex></tt>.</del> +<ins>[<i>Note:</i> <tt><complex.h></tt> does not promote any interface +into the global namespace as there is no C interface to promote. <i>--end +note</i>]</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="552"></a>552. random_shuffle and its generator</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.3.12 [alg.random.shuffle] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2006-01-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#alg.random.shuffle">issues</a> in [alg.random.shuffle].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +...is specified to shuffle its range by calling swap but not how +(or even that) it's supposed to use the RandomNumberGenerator +argument passed to it. +</p> +<p> +Shouldn't we require that the generator object actually be used +by the algorithm to obtain a series of random numbers and specify +how many times its operator() should be invoked by the algorithm? +</p> + +<p> +See <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2391.pdf">N2391</a> and +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2423.pdf">N2423</a> +for some further discussion. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Adopt the proposed resolution in +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2423.pdf">N2423</a>. +</p> + + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007): The LWG adopted the proposed resolution of N2423 for this issue. +The LWG voted to accelerate this issue to Ready status to be voted into the WP at Kona. +]</i></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="556"></a>556. is Compare a BinaryPredicate?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.4 [alg.sorting] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2006-02-05 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#alg.sorting">issues</a> in [alg.sorting].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In 25, p8 we allow BinaryPredicates to return a type that's convertible +to bool but need not actually be bool. That allows predicates to return +things like proxies and requires that implementations be careful about +what kinds of expressions they use the result of the predicate in (e.g., +the expression in if (!pred(a, b)) need not be well-formed since the +negation operator may be inaccessible or return a type that's not +convertible to bool). +</p> +<p> +Here's the text for reference: +</p> +<blockquote><p> + ...if an algorithm takes BinaryPredicate binary_pred as its argument + and first1 and first2 as its iterator arguments, it should work + correctly in the construct if (binary_pred(*first1, first2)){...}. +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +In 25.3, p2 we require that the Compare function object return true +of false, which would seem to preclude such proxies. The relevant text +is here: +</p> +<blockquote><p> + Compare is used as a function object which returns true if the first + argument is less than the second, and false otherwise... +</p></blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Portland: Jack to define "convertible to bool" such that short circuiting isn't +destroyed. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-28 Reopened by Alisdair. No longer solved by concepts. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Review once wording received. Stefanus to send proposed wording. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Review once wording received. Stefanus to send proposed wording. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10-24 Stefanus supplied wording. +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Review once wording received. Stefanus to send proposed wording. +Old proposed wording here: +<blockquote> +<p> +I think we could fix this by rewording 25.3, p2 to read somthing like: +</p> +<blockquote><p> +-2- <tt>Compare</tt> is <del>used as a function object which returns +<tt>true</tt> if the first argument</del> <ins>a <tt>BinaryPredicate</tt>. The +return value of the function call operator applied to an object of type +<tt>Compare</tt>, when converted to type <tt>bool</tt>, yields <tt>true</tt> +if the first argument of the call</ins> is less than the second, and +<tt>false</tt> otherwise. <tt>Compare <i>comp</i></tt> is used throughout for +algorithms assuming an ordering relation. It is assumed that <tt><i>comp</i></tt> +will not apply any non-constant function through the dereferenced iterator. +</p></blockquote> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-01-17: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Howard expresses concern that the current direction of the proposed +wording outlaws expressions such as: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>if (!comp(x, y)) +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Daniel provides wording which addresses that concern. +</p> + +<p> +The previous wording is saved here: +</p> + +<blockquote> + +<p> +Change 25.4 [alg.sorting] p2: +</p> +<blockquote> +<tt>Compare</tt> is used as a function object<ins>. The return value of +the function call operator applied to an object of type Compare, when +converted to type bool, yields true if the first argument of the +call</ins> <del>which returns <tt>true</tt> if the first argument</del> +is less than the second, and <tt>false</tt> otherwise. <tt>Compare +comp</tt> is used throughout for algorithms assuming an ordering +relation. It is assumed that <tt>comp</tt> will not apply any +non-constant function through the dereferenced iterator. +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-01-22 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<ol> +<li> +<p> +Change 25.1 [algorithms.general]/7+8 as indicated. <i>[This change is +recommended to bring the return value requirements of <tt>BinaryPredicate</tt> +and <tt>Compare</tt> in sync.]</i> +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +7 The <tt>Predicate</tt> parameter is used whenever an algorithm expects a +function object that when applied to the result of dereferencing the +corresponding iterator returns a value testable as <tt>true</tt>. In other +words, if an algorithm takes <tt>Predicate pred</tt> as its argument and +<tt>first</tt> as its iterator argument, it should work correctly in the +construct <del>if <tt>(pred(*first)){...}</tt></del> <ins><tt>pred(*first)</tt> +contextually converted to <tt>bool</tt> (4 [conv])</ins>. The +function object <tt>pred</tt> shall not apply any nonconstant function through +the dereferenced iterator. This function object may be a pointer to function, or +an object of a type with an appropriate function call operator. +</p> + +<p> +8 The <tt>BinaryPredicate</tt> parameter is used whenever an algorithm expects a +function object that when applied to the result of dereferencing two +corresponding iterators or to dereferencing an iterator and type <tt>T</tt> when +<tt>T</tt> is part of the signature returns a value testable as <tt>true</tt>. +In other words, if an algorithm takes <tt>BinaryPredicate</tt> +<tt>binary_pred</tt> as its argument and <tt>first1</tt> and <tt>first2</tt> as +its iterator arguments, it should work correctly in the construct <del><tt>if +(binary_pred(*first1, *first2)){...}</tt></del> <ins><tt>binary_pred(*first1, +*first2)</tt> contextually converted to <tt>bool</tt> (4 [conv])</ins>. <tt>BinaryPredicate</tt> always takes the first iterator +type as its first argument, that is, in those cases when <tt>T value</tt> is +part of the signature, it should work correctly in the <del>context of <tt>if +(binary_pred(*first1, value)){...}</tt></del> <ins>construct +<tt>binary_pred(*first1, value)</tt> contextually converted to <tt>bool</tt> +(4 [conv])</ins>. <tt>binary_pred</tt> shall not apply any +non-constant function through the dereferenced iterators. +</p> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 25.4 [alg.sorting]/2 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +2 <tt>Compare</tt> is <del>used as</del> a function object <ins>type (20.8 [function.objects]). The return value of the function call operation +applied to an object of type <tt>Compare</tt>, when contextually converted to +type <tt>bool</tt> (4 [conv]), yields <tt>true</tt> if the first +argument of the call</ins><del> which returns <tt>true</tt> if the first +argument</del> is less than the second, and <tt>false</tt> otherwise. +<tt>Compare comp</tt> is used throughout for algorithms assuming an ordering +relation. It is assumed that <tt>comp</tt> will not apply any non-constant +function through the dereferenced iterator. +</blockquote> +</li> + +</ol> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="559"></a>559. numeric_limits<const T></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.3.1 [limits] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2006-02-19 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#limits">issues</a> in [limits].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + <p> + +18.3.1 [limits], p2 requires implementations to provide specializations of the +<code>numeric_limits</code> template for each scalar type. While this +could be interepreted to include cv-qualified forms of such types such +an interepretation is not reflected in the synopsis of the +<code><limits></code> header. + + </p> + <p> + +The absence of specializations of the template on cv-qualified forms +of fundamental types makes <code>numeric_limits</code> difficult to +use in generic code where the constness (or volatility) of a type is +not always immediately apparent. In such contexts, the primary +template ends up being instantiated instead of the provided +specialization, typically yielding unexpected behavior. + + </p> + <p> + +Require that specializations of <code>numeric_limits</code> on +cv-qualified fundamental types have the same semantics as those on the +unqualifed forms of the same types. + + </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + <p> + +Add to the synopsis of the <code><limits></code> header, +immediately below the declaration of the primary template, the +following: +</p> + +<pre> +template <class T> class numeric_limits<const T>; +template <class T> class numeric_limits<volatile T>; +template <class T> class numeric_limits<const volatile T>; + +</pre> + + <p> + +Add a new paragraph to the end of 18.3.1.1 [numeric.limits], with the following +text: + + </p> + <p> + +-new-para- The value of each member of a <code>numeric_limits</code> +specialization on a cv-qualified T is equal to the value of the same +member of <code>numeric_limits<T></code>. + + </p> + +<p><i>[ +Portland: Martin will clarify that user-defined types get cv-specializations +automatically. +]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="561"></a>561. inserter overly generic</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 24.5.2.6.5 [inserter] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2006-02-21 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The declaration of <tt>std::inserter</tt> is: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class Container, class Iterator> +insert_iterator<Container> +inserter(Container& x, Iterator i); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +The template parameter <tt>Iterator</tt> in this function is completely unrelated +to the template parameter <tt>Container</tt> when it doesn't need to be. This +causes the code to be overly generic. That is, any type at all can be deduced +as <tt>Iterator</tt>, whether or not it makes sense. Now the same is true of +<tt>Container</tt>. However, for every free (unconstrained) template parameter +one has in a signature, the opportunity for a mistaken binding grows geometrically. +</p> + +<p> +It would be much better if <tt>inserter</tt> had the following signature instead: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class Container> +insert_iterator<Container> +inserter(Container& x, typename Container::iterator i); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Now there is only one free template parameter. And the second argument to +<tt>inserter</tt> must be implicitly convertible to the container's iterator, +else the call will not be a viable overload (allowing other functions in the +overload set to take precedence). Furthermore, the first parameter must have a +nested type named <tt>iterator</tt>, or again the binding to <tt>std::inserter</tt> +is not viable. Contrast this with the current situation +where any type can bind to <tt>Container</tt> or <tt>Iterator</tt> and those +types need not be anything closely related to containers or iterators. +</p> + +<p> +This can adversely impact well written code. Consider: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>#include <iterator> +#include <string> + +namespace my +{ + +template <class String> +struct my_type {}; + +struct my_container +{ +template <class String> +void push_back(const my_type<String>&); +}; + +template <class String> +void inserter(const my_type<String>& m, my_container& c) {c.push_back(m);} + +} // my + +int main() +{ + my::my_container c; + my::my_type<std::string> m; + inserter(m, c); +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Today this code fails because the call to <tt>inserter</tt> binds to +<tt>std::inserter</tt> instead of to <tt>my::inserter</tt>. However with the +proposed change <tt>std::inserter</tt> will no longer be a viable function which +leaves only <tt>my::inserter</tt> in the overload resolution set. Everything +works as the client intends. +</p> + +<p> +To make matters a little more insidious, the above example works today if you +simply change the first argument to an rvalue: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre> inserter(my::my_type(), c); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +It will also work if instantiated with some string type other than +<tt>std::string</tt> (or any other <tt>std</tt> type). It will also work if +<tt><iterator></tt> happens to not get included. +</p> + +<p> +And it will fail again for such inocuous reaons as <tt>my_type</tt> or +<tt>my_container</tt> privately deriving from any <tt>std</tt> type. +</p> + +<p> +It seems unfortunate that such simple changes in the client's code can result +in such radically differing behavior. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 24.2: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +<b>24.2 Header</b> <tt><iterator></tt> <b>synopsis</b> +</p> +<blockquote><pre>... +template <class Container<del>, class Iterator</del>> + insert_iterator<Container> inserter(Container& x, <del>Iterator</del> <ins>typename Container::iterator</ins> i); +... +</pre></blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 24.4.2.5: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +<b>24.4.2.5 Class template</b> <tt>insert_iterator</tt></p> +<blockquote><pre>... +template <class Container<del>, class Iterator</del>> + insert_iterator<Container> inserter(Container& x, <del>Iterator</del> <ins>typename Container::iterator</ins> i); +... +</pre></blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 24.4.2.6.5: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<b>24.4.2.6.5</b> <tt>inserter</tt> +</p> +<pre>template <class Container<del>, class Inserter</del>> + insert_iterator<Container> inserter(Container& x, <del>Inserter</del> <ins>typename Container::iterator</ins> i); +</pre> +<blockquote><p> +-1- <i>Returns:</i> <tt>insert_iterator<Container>(x,<del>typename Container::iterator(</del>i<del>)</del>)</tt>. +</p></blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007): This issue will probably be addressed as a part of the concepts overhaul of the library anyway, but the proposed resolution is correct in the absence of concepts. +Proposed Disposition: Ready +]</i></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="562"></a>562. stringbuf ctor inefficient</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.8 [string.streams] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2006-02-23 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#string.streams">issues</a> in [string.streams].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + <p> + +For better efficiency, the requirement on the stringbuf ctor that +takes a string argument should be loosened up to let it set +<code>epptr()</code> beyond just one past the last initialized +character just like <code>overflow()</code> has been changed to be +allowed to do (see issue 432). That way the first call to +<code>sputc()</code> on an object won't necessarily cause a call to +<code>overflow</code>. The corresponding change should be made to the +string overload of the <code>str()</code> member function. + + </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + <p> + +Change 27.7.1.1, p3 of the Working Draft, N1804, as follows: + + </p> + +<blockquote><pre>explicit basic_stringbuf(const basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>& <i>s<del>tr</del></i>, + ios_base::openmode <i>which</i> = ios_base::in | ios_base::out); +</pre> + +<p> +-3- <i>Effects:</i> Constructs an object of class <tt>basic_stringbuf</tt>, +initializing the base class with <tt>basic_streambuf()</tt> +(27.5.2.1), and initializing <tt><i>mode</i></tt> with <tt><i>which</i></tt>. +Then <ins>calls <tt>str(<i>s</i>)</tt>.</ins> <del>copies the content of +<i>str</i> into the <tt>basic_stringbuf</tt> underlying character +sequence. If <tt><i>which</i> & ios_base::out</tt> is true, initializes the +output sequence such that <tt>pbase()</tt> points to the first underlying +character, <tt>epptr()</tt> points one past the last underlying character, and +<tt>pptr()</tt> is equal to <tt>epptr()</tt> if <tt><i>which</i> & ios_base::ate</tt> +is true, otherwise <tt>pptr()</tt> is equal to <tt>pbase()</tt>. If +<tt>which & ios_base::in</tt> is true, initializes the input sequence such +that <tt>eback()</tt> and <tt>gptr()</tt> point to the first underlying +character and <tt>egptr()</tt> points one past the last underlying character.</del> +</p> +</blockquote> + + <p> + +Change the Effects clause of the <code>str()</code> in 27.7.1.2, p2 to +read: + + </p> +<blockquote> +<p> +-2- <i>Effects:</i> Copies the content<ins>s</ins> of <tt><i>s</i></tt> into the +<tt>basic_stringbuf</tt> underlying character sequence <ins>and +initializes the input and output sequences according to <tt><i>mode</i></tt></ins>. +<del>If +<tt><i>mode</i> & ios_base::out</tt> is true, initializes the output +sequence such that <tt>pbase()</tt> points to the first underlying character, +<tt>epptr()</tt> points one past the last underlying character, and <tt>pptr()</tt> +is equal to <tt>epptr()</tt> if <tt><i>mode</i> & ios_base::in</tt> +is true, otherwise <tt>pptr()</tt> is equal to <tt>pbase()</tt>. If +<tt>mode & ios_base::in</tt> is true, initializes the input sequence +such that <tt>eback()</tt> and <tt>gptr()</tt> point to the first underlying +character and <tt>egptr()</tt> points one past the last underlying character.</del> +</p> + + <p> + +<ins>-3- <i>Postconditions:</i> If <code>mode & ios_base::out</code> is true, +<code>pbase()</code> points to the first underlying character and +<code>(epptr() >= pbase() + s.size())</code> holds; in addition, if +<code>mode & ios_base::in</code> is true, <code>(pptr() == pbase() ++ s.data())</code> holds, otherwise <code>(pptr() == pbase())</code> +is true. If <code>mode & ios_base::in</code> is true, +<code>eback()</code> points to the first underlying character, and +<code>(gptr() == eback())</code> and <code>(egptr() == eback() + +s.size())</code> hold.</ins> + + </p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007) Moved to Ready. +]</i></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="563"></a>563. stringbuf seeking from end</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.8.1.4 [stringbuf.virtuals] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2006-02-23 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#stringbuf.virtuals">issues</a> in [stringbuf.virtuals].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +According to Table 92 (unchanged by issue 432), when <code>(way == +end)</code> the <code>newoff</code> value in out mode is computed as +the difference between <code>epptr()</code> and <code>pbase()</code>. +</p> + <p> + +This value isn't meaningful unless the value of <code>epptr()</code> +can be precisely controlled by a program. That used to be possible +until we accepted the resolution of issue 432, but since then the +requirements on <code>overflow()</code> have been relaxed to allow it +to make more than 1 write position available (i.e., by setting +<code>epptr()</code> to some unspecified value past +<code>pptr()</code>). So after the first call to +<code>overflow()</code> positioning the output sequence relative to +end will have unspecified results. + + </p> + <p> + +In addition, in <code>in|out</code> mode, since <code>(egptr() == +epptr())</code> need not hold, there are two different possible values +for <code>newoff</code>: <code>epptr() - pbase()</code> and +<code>egptr() - eback()</code>. + + </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + <p> + +Change the <code>newoff</code> column in the last row of Table 94 to +read: + + </p> +<blockquote><p> + +the <del>end</del> <ins>high mark</ins> pointer minus the beginning +pointer (<code><del>xend</del> <ins>high_mark</ins> - xbeg</code>). + +</p></blockquote> + + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007) Moved to Ready. +]</i></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="564"></a>564. stringbuf seekpos underspecified</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.8.1.4 [stringbuf.virtuals] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2006-02-23 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#stringbuf.virtuals">issues</a> in [stringbuf.virtuals].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The effects of the <code>seekpos()</code> member function of +<code>basic_stringbuf</code> simply say that the function positions +the input and/or output sequences but fail to spell out exactly +how. This is in contrast to the detail in which <code>seekoff()</code> +is described. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + <p> + +Change 27.7.1.3, p13 to read: + + </p> +<blockquote> +<p> +-13- <i>Effects:</i> <ins>Equivalent to <tt>seekoff(off_type(<i>sp</i>), ios_base::beg, +<i>which</i>)</tt>.</ins> <del>Alters the stream position within the controlled sequences, +if possible, to correspond to the stream position stored in <tt><i>sp</i></tt> +(as described below).</del> +</p> +<ul> +<li><del>If <tt>(<i>which</i> & ios_base::in) != 0</tt>, positions the input sequence.</del></li> +<li><del>If <tt>(<i>which</i> & ios_base::out) != 0</tt>, positions the output sequence.</del></li> +<li><del>If <tt><i>sp</i></tt> is an invalid stream position, or if the function +positions neither sequence, the positioning operation fails. If <tt><i>sp</i></tt> +has not been obtained by a previous successful call to one of the positioning +functions (<tt>seekoff</tt>, <tt>seekpos</tt>, <tt>tellg</tt>, <tt>tellp</tt>) +the effect is undefined.</del></li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007): A <tt>pos_type</tt> is a position in a stream by +definition, so there is no ambiguity as to what it means. Proposed +Disposition: NAD +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Post-Kona Martin adds: +I'm afraid I disagree +with the Kona '07 rationale for marking it NAD. The only text +that describes precisely what it means to position the input +or output sequence is in <tt>seekoff()</tt>. The <tt>seekpos()</tt> Effects +clause is inadequate in comparison and the proposed resolution +plugs the hole by specifying <tt>seekpos()</tt> in terms of <tt>seekoff()</tt>. +]</i></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="565"></a>565. xsputn inefficient</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.6.2.4.5 [streambuf.virt.put] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2006-02-23 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + <p> + +<tt>streambuf::xsputn()</tt> is specified to have the effect of +"writing up to <tt>n</tt> characters to the output sequence as if by +repeated calls to <tt>sputc(c)</tt>." + + </p> + <p> + +Since <tt>sputc()</tt> is required to call <tt>overflow()</tt> when +<tt>(pptr() == epptr())</tt> is true, strictly speaking +<tt>xsputn()</tt> should do the same. However, doing so would be +suboptimal in some interesting cases, such as in unbuffered mode or +when the buffer is <tt>basic_stringbuf</tt>. + + </p> + <p> + +Assuming calling <tt>overflow()</tt> is not really intended to be +required and the wording is simply meant to describe the general +effect of appending to the end of the sequence it would be worthwhile +to mention in <tt>xsputn()</tt> that the function is not actually +required to cause a call to <tt>overflow()</tt>. + + </p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + <p> + +Add the following sentence to the <tt>xsputn()</tt> Effects clause in +27.5.2.4.5, p1 (N1804): + + </p> + <blockquote> + <p> +-1- <i>Effects:</i> Writes up to <tt><i>n</i></tt> characters to the output +sequence as if by repeated calls to <tt>sputc(<i>c</i>)</tt>. The characters +written are obtained from successive elements of the array whose first element +is designated by <tt><i>s</i></tt>. Writing stops when either <tt><i>n</i></tt> +characters have been written or a call to <tt>sputc(<i>c</i>)</tt> would return +<tt>traits::eof()</tt>. <ins>It is uspecified whether the function calls +<tt>overflow()</tt> when <tt>(pptr() == epptr())</tt> becomes true or whether +it achieves the same effects by other means.</ins> + </p> + </blockquote> + <p> + +In addition, I suggest to add a footnote to this function with the +same text as Footnote 292 to make it extra clear that derived classes +are permitted to override <tt>xsputn()</tt> for efficiency. + + </p> + + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007): We want to permit a <tt>streambuf</tt> that streams output directly +to a device without making calls to <tt>sputc</tt> or <tt>overflow</tt>. We believe that +has always been the intention of the committee. We believe that the +proposed wording doesn't accomplish that. Proposed Disposition: Open +]</i></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="566"></a>566. array forms of unformatted input function undefined for zero-element arrays</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.1.3 [istream.unformatted] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2006-02-23 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#istream.unformatted">issues</a> in [istream.unformatted].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + <p> + +The array forms of unformatted input functions don't have well-defined +semantics for zero-element arrays in a couple of cases. The affected +ones (<tt>istream::get()</tt> and <tt>getline()</tt>) are supposed to +terminate when <tt>(n - 1)</tt> characters are stored, which obviously +can never be true when <tt>(n == 0)</tt> to start with. + + </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + <p> + +I propose the following changes (references are relative to the +Working Draft (document N1804). + + </p> + <p> + +Change 27.6.1.3, p8 (<tt>istream::get()</tt>), bullet 1 as follows: + + </p> + <blockquote> + <p> + +<ins>if <tt>(n < 1)</tt> is true or </ins> <tt>(n - 1)</tt> +characters are stored; + + </p> + </blockquote> + <p> + +Similarly, change 27.6.1.3, p18 (<tt>istream::getline()</tt>), bullet +3 as follows: + + </p> + <blockquote> + <p> + +<ins><tt>(n < 1)</tt> is true or </ins><tt>(n - 1)</tt> characters +are stored (in which case the function calls +<tt>setstate(failbit)</tt>). + + </p> + </blockquote> + <p> + +Finally, change p21 as follows: + + </p> + <blockquote> + <p> + +In any case, <ins>provided <tt>(n > 0)</tt> is true, </ins>it then +stores a null character (using charT()) into the next successive +location of the array. + + </p> + </blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="567"></a>567. streambuf inserter and extractor should be unformatted</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7 [iostream.format] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2006-02-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#iostream.format">issues</a> in [iostream.format].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + <p> + +Issue 60 explicitly made the extractor and inserter operators that +take a <tt>basic_streambuf*</tt> argument formatted input and output +functions, respectively. I believe that's wrong, certainly in the +case of the extractor, since formatted functions begin by extracting +and discarding whitespace. The extractor should not discard any +characters. + + </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + <p> + +I propose to change each operator to behave as unformatted input and +output function, respectively. The changes below are relative to the +working draft document number N1804. + + </p> + <p> + +Specifically, change 27.6.1.2.3, p14 as follows: + + </p> + + <blockquote> + <p> + +<i>Effects</i>: Behaves as a<ins>n un</ins>formatted input function +(as described in <del>27.6.1.2.1</del><ins>27.6.1.3, paragraph +1</ins>). + + </p> + </blockquote> + <p> + +And change 27.6.2.5.3, p7 as follows: + + </p> + + <blockquote> + <p> + +<i>Effects</i>: Behaves as a<ins>n un</ins>formatted output function +(as described in <del>27.6.2.5.1</del><ins>27.6.2.6, paragraph +1</ins>). + + </p> + </blockquote> + + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007): Proposed Disposition: Ready +]</i></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="574"></a>574. DR 369 Contradicts Text</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.4 [iostream.objects] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Pete Becker <b>Opened:</b> 2006-04-18 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#iostream.objects">issues</a> in [iostream.objects].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +lib.iostream.objects requires that the standard stream objects are never +destroyed, and it requires that they be destroyed. +</p> +<p> +DR 369 adds words to say that we really mean for ios_base::Init objects to force +construction of standard stream objects. It ends, though, with the phrase "these +stream objects shall be destroyed after the destruction of dynamically ...". +However, the rule for destruction is stated in the standard: "The objects are +not destroyed during program execution." +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 27.4 [iostream.objects]/1: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-2- The objects are constructed and the associations are established at +some time prior to or during the first time an object of class +<tt>ios_base::Init</tt> is constructed, and in any case before the body of main +begins execution.<sup>290)</sup> The objects are not destroyed during program +execution.<sup>291)</sup> If a translation unit includes <tt><iostream&t;</tt> or explicitly +constructs an <tt>ios_base::Init</tt> object, these stream objects shall be +constructed before dynamic initialization of non-local objects defined +later in that translation unit<del>, and these stream objects shall be +destroyed after the destruction of dynamically initialized non-local +objects defined later in that translation unit</del>. +</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007): From 27.4 [iostream.objects]/2, strike the words "...and these stream objects +shall be destroyed after the destruction of dynamically initialized +non-local objects defined later in that translation unit." Proposed +Disposition: Review +]</i></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="575"></a>575. the specification of ~shared_ptr is MT-unfriendly, makes implementation assumptions</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.10.2.2 [util.smartptr.shared.dest], TR1 2.2.3.2 [tr.util.smartptr.shared.dest] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Peter Dimov <b>Opened:</b> 2006-04-23 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#util.smartptr.shared.dest">issues</a> in [util.smartptr.shared.dest].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +[tr.util.smartptr.shared.dest] says in its second bullet: +</p> + +<p> +"If *this shares ownership with another shared_ptr instance (use_count() > 1), +decrements that instance's use count." +</p> + +<p> +The problem with this formulation is that it presupposes the existence of an +"use count" variable that can be decremented and that is part of the state of a +shared_ptr instance (because of the "that instance's use count".) +</p> + +<p> +This is contrary to the spirit of the rest of the specification that carefully +avoids to require an use count variable. Instead, use_count() is specified to +return a value, a number of instances. +</p> + +<p> +In multithreaded code, the usual implicit assumption is that a shared variable +should not be accessed by more than one thread without explicit synchronization, +and by introducing the concept of an "use count" variable, the current wording +implies that two shared_ptr instances that share ownership cannot be destroyed +simultaneously. +</p> + +<p> +In addition, if we allow the interpretation that an use count variable is part +of shared_ptr's state, this would lead to other undesirable consequences WRT +multiple threads. For example, +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>p1 = p2; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +would now visibly modify the state of p2, a "write" operation, requiring a lock. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change the first two bullets of [lib.util.smartptr.shared.dest]/1 to: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<ul> +<li>If <tt>*this</tt> is <i>empty</i> <ins>or shares ownership with another +<tt>shared_ptr</tt> instance (<tt>use_count() > 1</tt>)</ins>, there are no side effects.</li> +<li><del>If <tt>*this</tt> <i>shares ownership</i> with another <tt>shared_ptr</tt> instance +(<tt>use_count() > 1</tt>), decrements that instance's use count.</del></li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Add the following paragraph after [lib.util.smartptr.shared.dest]/1: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +[<i>Note:</i> since the destruction of <tt>*this</tt> decreases the number of instances in +<tt>*this</tt>'s ownership group by one, all <tt>shared_ptr</tt> instances that share ownership +with <tt>*this</tt> will report an <tt>use_count()</tt> that is one lower than its previous value +after <tt>*this</tt> is destroyed. <i>--end note</i>] +</p></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="576"></a>576. find_first_of is overconstrained</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.2.7 [alg.find.first.of] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Doug Gregor <b>Opened:</b> 2006-04-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#alg.find.first.of">issues</a> in [alg.find.first.of].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In 25.1.4 Find First [lib.alg.find.first], the two iterator type parameters to +find_first_of are specified to require Forward Iterators, as follows: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class ForwardIterator1, class ForwardIterator2> + ForwardIterator1 + find_first_of(ForwardIterator1 first1, ForwardIterator1 last1, + ForwardIterator2 first2, ForwardIterator2 last2); +template<class ForwardIterator1, class ForwardIterator2, + class BinaryPredicate> +ForwardIterator1 + find_first_of(ForwardIterator1 first1, ForwardIterator1 last1, + ForwardIterator2 first2, ForwardIterator2 last2, + BinaryPredicate pred); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +However, ForwardIterator1 need not actually be a Forward Iterator; an Input +Iterator suffices, because we do not need the multi-pass property of the Forward +Iterator or a true reference. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change the declarations of <tt>find_first_of</tt> to: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class <del>ForwardIterator1</del><ins>InputIterator1</ins>, class ForwardIterator2> + <del>ForwardIterator1</del><ins>InputIterator1</ins> + find_first_of(<del>ForwardIterator1</del><ins>InputIterator1</ins> first1, <del>ForwardIterator1</del><ins>InputIterator1</ins> last1, + ForwardIterator2 first2, ForwardIterator2 last2); +template<class <del>ForwardIterator1</del><ins>InputIterator1</ins>, class ForwardIterator2, + class BinaryPredicate> +<del>ForwardIterator1</del><ins>InputIterator1</ins> + find_first_of(<del>ForwardIterator1</del><ins>InputIterator1</ins> first1, <del>ForwardIterator1</del><ins>InputIterator1</ins> last1, + ForwardIterator2 first2, ForwardIterator2 last2, + BinaryPredicate pred); +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="577"></a>577. upper_bound(first, last, ...) cannot return last</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.4.3.2 [upper.bound] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Seungbeom Kim <b>Opened:</b> 2006-05-03 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +ISO/IEC 14882:2003 says: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +25.3.3.2 upper_bound +</p> +<p> +<i>Returns:</i> The furthermost iterator <tt>i</tt> in the range +<tt>[<i>first</i>, <i>last</i>)</tt> such that +for any iterator <tt>j</tt> in the range <tt>[<i>first</i>, i)</tt> the following corresponding +conditions hold: <tt>!(value < *j)</tt> or <tt><i>comp</i>(<i>value</i>, *j) == false</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +From the description above, upper_bound cannot return last, since it's +not in the interval [first, last). This seems to be a typo, because if +value is greater than or equal to any other values in the range, or if +the range is empty, returning last seems to be the intended behaviour. +The corresponding interval for lower_bound is also [first, last]. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change [lib.upper.bound]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Returns:</i> The furthermost iterator <tt>i</tt> in the range +<tt>[<i>first</i>, <i>last</i><del>)</del><ins>]</ins></tt> such that +for any iterator <tt>j</tt> in the range <tt>[<i>first</i>, i)</tt> the following corresponding +conditions hold: <tt>!(value < *j)</tt> or <tt><i>comp</i>(<i>value</i>, *j) == false</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="578"></a>578. purpose of hint to allocator::allocate()</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.5.1 [allocator.members] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2006-05-17 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#allocator.members">issues</a> in [allocator.members].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + <p> + +The description of the allocator member function +<code>allocate()</code> requires that the <i>hint</i> argument be +either 0 or a value previously returned from <code>allocate()</code>. +Footnote 227 further suggests that containers may pass the address of +an adjacent element as this argument. + + </p> + <p> + +I believe that either the footnote is wrong or the normative +requirement that the argument be a value previously returned from a +call to <code>allocate()</code> is wrong. The latter is supported by +the resolution to issue 20-004 proposed in c++std-lib-3736 by Nathan +Myers. In addition, the <i>hint</i> is an ordinary void* and not the +<code>pointer</code> type returned by <code>allocate()</code>, with +the two types potentially being incompatible and the requirement +impossible to satisfy. + + </p> + <p> + +See also c++std-lib-14323 for some more context on where this came up +(again). + + </p> + + + <p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + <p> + +Remove the requirement in 20.6.1.1, p4 that the hint be a value +previously returned from <code>allocate()</code>. Specifically, change +the paragraph as follows: + + </p> +<p> +<del><i>Requires</i>: <i>hint</i> either 0 or previously obtained from member +<code>allocate</code> and not yet passed to member <code>deallocate</code>. +The value hint may be used by an implementation to help improve performance +<sup>223)</sup>.</del> <ins>[<i>Note:</i> The value <i>hint</i> may be used by an +implementation to help improve performance. -- <i>end note</i>]</ins> +</p> +<blockquote><p> +<del>[Footnote: <sup>223)</sup>In a container member function, the address of an +adjacent element is often a good choice to pass for this argument.</del> +</p></blockquote> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="581"></a>581. <code>flush()</code> not unformatted function</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.2.7 [ostream.unformatted] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2006-06-14 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#ostream.unformatted">issues</a> in [ostream.unformatted].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + <p> + +The resolution of issue 60 changed <code>basic_ostream::flush()</code> +so as not to require it to behave as an unformatted output function. +That has at least two in my opinion problematic consequences: + + </p> + <p> + +First, <code>flush()</code> now calls <code>rdbuf()->pubsync()</code> +unconditionally, without regard to the state of the stream. I can't +think of any reason why <code>flush()</code> should behave differently +from the vast majority of stream functions in this respect. + + </p> + <p> + +Second, <code>flush()</code> is not required to catch exceptions from +<code>pubsync()</code> or set <code>badbit</code> in response to such +events. That doesn't seem right either, as most other stream functions +do so. + + </p> + + + <p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + <p> + +I propose to revert the resolution of issue 60 with respect to +<code>flush()</code>. Specifically, I propose to change 27.6.2.6, p7 +as follows: + + </p> + +<p> +Effects: <ins>Behaves as an unformatted output function (as described +in 27.6.2.6, paragraph 1). </ins>If <code>rdbuf()</code> is not a null +pointer, <ins>constructs a sentry object. If this object returns +<code>true</code> when converted to a value of type bool the function +</ins>calls <code>rdbuf()->pubsync()</code>. If that function returns +-1 calls <code>setstate(badbit)</code> (which may throw +<code>ios_base::failure</code> (27.4.4.3)). <ins>Otherwise, if the +sentry object returns <code>false</code>, does nothing.</ins><del>Does +not behave as an unformatted output function (as described in +27.6.2.6, paragraph 1).</del> +</p> + + + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007): Proposed Disposition: Ready +]</i></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="586"></a>586. string inserter not a formatted function</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.4.8.9 [string.io] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2006-06-22 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#string.io">issues</a> in [string.io].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + <p> + +Section and paragraph numbers in this paper are relative to the +working draft document number N2009 from 4/21/2006. + + </p> + + <p> + +The <code>basic_string</code> extractor in 21.3.7.9, p1 is clearly +required to behave as a formatted input function, as is the +<code>std::getline()</code> overload for string described in p7. + + </p> + <p> + +However, the <code>basic_string</code> inserter described in p5 of the +same section has no such requirement. This has implications on how the +operator responds to exceptions thrown from <code>xsputn()</code> +(formatted output functions are required to set <code>badbit</code> +and swallow the exception unless <code>badbit</code> is also set in +<code>exceptions()</code>; the string inserter doesn't have any such +requirement). + + </p> + <p> + +I don't see anything in the spec for the string inserter that would +justify requiring it to treat exceptions differently from all other +similar operators. (If it did, I think it should be made this explicit +by saying that the operator "does not behave as a formatted output +function" as has been made customary by the adoption of the resolution +of issue 60). + + </p> + + + <p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + <p> + +I propose to change the Effects clause in 21.3.7.9, p5, as follows: + + </p> + <blockquote> + <p> + +<i>Effects</i>: <del>Begins by constructing a sentry object k as if k +were constructed by typename <code>basic_ostream<charT, +traits>::sentry k (os)</code>. If <code>bool(k)</code> is +<code>true</code>, </del><ins>Behaves as a formatted output function +(27.6.2.5.1). After constructing a <code>sentry</code> object, if +this object returns <code>true</code> when converted to a value of +type <code>bool</code>, determines padding as described in +22.2.2.2.2</ins>, then inserts the resulting sequence of characters +<code><i>seq</i></code> as if by calling <code>os.rdbuf()->sputn(seq , +n)</code>, where <code><i>n</i></code> is the larger of +<code>os.width()</code> and <code>str.size()</code>; then calls +<code>os.width(0)</code>. <del>If the call to sputn fails, calls +<code>os.setstate(ios_base::failbit)</code>.</del> + + </p> + </blockquote> + <p> + +This proposed resilution assumes the resolution of issue 394 (i.e., +that all formatted output functions are required to set +<code>ios_base::badbit</code> in response to any kind of streambuf +failure), and implicitly assumes that a return value of +<code>sputn(seq, <i>n</i>)</code> other than <code><i>n</i></code> +indicates a failure. + + </p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="589"></a>589. Requirements on iterators of member template functions of containers</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2 [container.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Peter Dimov <b>Opened:</b> 2006-08-02 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#container.requirements">issues</a> in [container.requirements].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#536">536</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +There appears to be no requirements on the InputIterators used in sequences in 23.1.1 in +terms of their value_type, and the requirements in 23.1.2 appear to be overly strict +(requires InputIterator::value_type be the same type as the container's value_type). +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 23.1.1 p3: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +In Tables 82 and 83, <tt>X</tt> denotes a sequence class, <tt>a</tt> denotes a +value of <tt>X</tt>, <tt>i</tt> and <tt>j</tt> denote iterators satisfying input +iterator requirements <ins>and refer to elements <ins>implicitly +convertible to</ins> <tt>value_type</tt></ins>, <tt>[i, j)</tt> denotes a valid +range, <tt>n</tt> denotes a value of <tt>X::size_type</tt>, <tt>p</tt> denotes a +valid iterator to <tt>a</tt>, <tt>q</tt> denotes a valid dereferenceable +iterator to <tt>a</tt>, <tt>[q1, q2)</tt> denotes a valid range in <tt>a</tt>, +and <tt>t</tt> denotes a value of <tt>X::value_type</tt>. +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +Change 23.1.2 p7: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +In Table 84, <tt>X</tt> is an associative container class, <tt>a</tt> is a value +of <tt>X</tt>, <tt>a_uniq</tt> is a value of <tt>X</tt> when <tt>X</tt> supports +unique keys, and <tt>a_eq</tt> is a value of <tt>X</tt> when <tt>X</tt> supports +multiple keys, <tt>i</tt> and <tt>j</tt> satisfy input iterator requirements and +refer to elements <del>of</del> <ins>implicitly convertible to</ins> +<tt>value_type</tt>, <tt>[i, j)</tt> is a valid range, <tt>p</tt> is a valid +iterator to <tt>a</tt>, <tt>q</tt> is a valid dereferenceable iterator to +<tt>a</tt>, <tt>[q1, q2)</tt> is a valid range in <tt>a</tt>, <tt>t</tt> is a +value of <tt>X::value_type</tt>, <tt>k</tt> is a value of <tt>X::key_type</tt> +and <tt>c</tt> is a value of type <tt>X::key_compare</tt>. +</p></blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +Concepts will probably come in and rewrite this section anyway. But just in case it is +easy to fix this up as a safety net and as a clear statement of intent. +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="593"></a>593. __STDC_CONSTANT_MACROS</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.4 [cstdint], TR1 8.22 [tr.c99.cstdint] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Walter Brown <b>Opened:</b> 2006-08-28 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#cstdint">issues</a> in [cstdint].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Clause 18.3 of the current Working Paper (N2009) deals with the new C++ headers +<cstdint> and <stdint.h>. These are of course based on the C99 header +<stdint.h>, and were part of TR1. +</p> + +<p> +Per 18.3.1/1, these headers define a number of macros and function macros. +While the WP does not mention __STDC_CONSTANT_MACROS in this context, C99 +footnotes do mention __STDC_CONSTANT_MACROS. Further, 18.3.1/2 states that "The +header defines all ... macros the same as C99 subclause 7.18." +</p> + +<p> +Therefore, if I wish to have the above-referenced macros and function macros +defined, must I #define __STDC_CONSTANT_MACROS before I #include <cstdint>, or +does the C++ header define these macros/function macros unconditionally? +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +To put this issue to rest for C++0X, I propose the following addition to +18.3.1/2 of the Working Paper N2009: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +[Note: The macros defined by <cstdint> are provided unconditionally: in +particular, the symbols __STDC_LIMIT_MACROS and __STDC_CONSTANT_MACROS +(mentioned in C99 footnotes 219, 220, and 222) play no role in C++. --end note] +</p></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="594"></a>594. Disadvantages of defining Swappable in terms of CopyConstructible and Assignable</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.2.1 [utility.arg.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Niels Dekker <b>Opened:</b> 2006-11-02 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-19</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#utility.arg.requirements">issues</a> in [utility.arg.requirements].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p> +It seems undesirable to define the Swappable requirement in terms of +CopyConstructible and Assignable requirements. And likewise, once the +MoveConstructible and MoveAssignable requirements (N1860) have made it +into the Working Draft, it seems undesirable to define the Swappable +requirement in terms of those requirements. Instead, it appears +preferable to have the Swappable requirement defined exclusively in +terms of the existence of an appropriate swap function. +</p> + +<p> +Section 20.1.4 [lib.swappable] of the current Working Draft (N2009) +says: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +The Swappable requirement is met by satisfying one or more of the +following conditions:</p> +<ul> +<li> +T is Swappable if T satisfies the CopyConstructible requirements +(20.1.3) and the Assignable requirements (23.1); +</li> +<li> +T is Swappable if a namespace scope function named swap exists in the +same namespace as the definition of T, such that the expression +swap(t,u) is valid and has the semantics described in Table 33. +</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + +<p> +I can think of three disadvantages of this definition: +</p> + +<ol> +<li> +<p> +If a client's type T satisfies the first condition (T is both +CopyConstructible and Assignable), the client cannot stop T from +satisfying the Swappable requirement without stopping T from +satisfying the first condition. +</p> +<p> +A client might want to stop T from satisfying the Swappable +requirement, because swapping by means of copy construction and +assignment might throw an exception, and she might find a throwing +swap unacceptable for her type. On the other hand, she might not feel +the need to fully implement her own swap function for this type. In +this case she would want to be able to simply prevent algorithms that +would swap objects of type T from being used, e.g., by declaring a +swap function for T, and leaving this function purposely undefined. +This would trigger a link error, if an attempt would be made to use +such an algorithm for this type. For most standard library +implementations, this practice would indeed have the effect of +stopping T from satisfying the Swappable requirement. +</p> +</li> +<li> +<p> +A client's type T that does not satisfy the first condition can not be +made Swappable by providing a specialization of std::swap for T. +</p> +<p> +While I'm aware about the fact that people have mixed feelings about +providing a specialization of std::swap, it is well-defined to do so. +It sounds rather counter-intuitive to say that T is not Swappable, if +it has a valid and semantically correct specialization of std::swap. +Also in practice, providing such a specialization will have the same +effect as satisfying the Swappable requirement. +</p> +</li> +<li> +<p> +For a client's type T that satisfies both conditions of the Swappable +requirement, it is not specified which of the two conditions prevails. +After reading section 20.1.4 [lib.swappable], one might wonder whether +objects of T will be swapped by doing copy construction and +assignments, or by calling the swap function of T. +</p> +<p> +I'm aware that the intention of the Draft is to prefer calling the +swap function of T over doing copy construction and assignments. Still +in my opinion, it would be better to make this clear in the wording of +the definition of Swappable. +</p> +</li> +</ol> + +<p> +I would like to have the Swappable requirement defined in such a way +that the following code fragment will correctly swap two objects of a +type T, if and only if T is Swappable: +</p> + +<pre> using std::swap; + swap(t, u); // t and u are of type T. +</pre> + +<p> +This is also the way Scott Meyers recommends calling a swap function, +in Effective C++, Third Edition, item 25. +</p> + +<p> +Most aspects of this issue have been dealt with in a discussion on +comp.std.c++ about the Swappable requirement, from 13 September to 4 +October 2006, including valuable input by David Abrahams, Pete Becker, +Greg Herlihy, Howard Hinnant and others. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Recommend NAD. Solved by +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2774.pdf">N2774</a>. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Open. Waiting for non-concepts draft. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-08 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +This issue is very closely related to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#742">742</a>. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-03 Sean Hunt adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +While reading N3000, I independently came across Issue 594. Having seen that +it's an issue under discussion, I think the proposed wording needs fixing to +something more like "...function call swap(t,u) that includes std::swap in its +overload set is valid...", because "...is valid within the namespace std..." +does not allow other libraries to simply use the Swappable requirement by +referring to the standard's definition, since they cannot actually perform any +calls within std. +</p> + +<p> +This wording I suggested would also make overloads visible in the same scope as +the `using std::swap` valid for Swappable requirements; a more complex wording +limiting the non-ADL overload set to std::swap might be required. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010 Pittsburgh: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to NAD Editorial. Rationale added. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +Solved by N3048. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change section 20.1.4 [lib.swappable] as follows: +</p> +<blockquote><p> +The Swappable requirement is met by satisfying +<del>one or more of the following conditions:</del> +<ins>the following condition:</ins></p> +<ul> + +<li> +<del>T is Swappable if T satisfies the CopyConstructible requirements +(20.1.3) and the Assignable requirements (23.1);</del> +</li> +<li> +<del> +T is Swappable if a namespace scope function named swap exists in the +same namespace as the definition of T, such that the expression +swap(t,u) is valid and has the semantics described in Table 33. +</del> +T is Swappable if an unqualified function call swap(t,u) is valid +within the namespace std, and has the semantics described in Table 33. +</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="595"></a>595. TR1/C++0x: fabs(complex<T>) redundant / wrongly specified</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.4.7 [complex.value.ops] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Stefan Große Pawig <b>Opened:</b> 2006-09-24 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#complex.value.ops">issues</a> in [complex.value.ops].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +TR1 introduced, in the C compatibility chapter, the function +fabs(complex<T>): +</p> +<blockquote><pre>----- SNIP ----- +8.1.1 Synopsis [tr.c99.cmplx.syn] + + namespace std { + namespace tr1 { +[...] + template<class T> complex<T> fabs(const complex<T>& x); + } // namespace tr1 + } // namespace std + +[...] + +8.1.8 Function fabs [tr.c99.cmplx.fabs] + +1 Effects: Behaves the same as C99 function cabs, defined in + subclause 7.3.8.1. +----- SNIP ----- +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +The current C++0X draft document (n2009.pdf) adopted this +definition in chapter 26.3.1 (under the comment // 26.3.7 values) +and 26.3.7/7. +</p> +<p> +But in C99 (ISO/IEC 9899:1999 as well as the 9899:TC2 draft document +n1124), the referenced subclause reads +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>----- SNIP ----- +7.3.8.1 The cabs functions + + Synopsis + +1 #include <complex.h> + double cabs(double complex z); + float cabsf(float complex z); + long double cabsl(long double z); + + Description + +2 The cabs functions compute the complex absolute value (also called + norm, modulus, or magnitude) of z. + + Returns + +3 The cabs functions return the complex absolute value. +----- SNIP ----- +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Note that the return type of the cabs*() functions is not a complex +type. Thus, they are equivalent to the already well established + template<class T> T abs(const complex<T>& x); +(26.2.7/2 in ISO/IEC 14882:1998, 26.3.7/2 in the current draft +document n2009.pdf). +</p> +<p> +So either the return value of fabs() is specified wrongly, or fabs() +does not behave the same as C99's cabs*(). +</p> + +<b>Possible Resolutions</b> + +<p> +This depends on the intention behind the introduction of fabs(). +</p> +<p> +If the intention was to provide a /complex/ valued function that +calculates the magnitude of its argument, this should be +explicitly specified. In TR1, the categorization under "C +compatibility" is definitely wrong, since C99 does not provide +such a complex valued function. +</p> +<p> +Also, it remains questionable if such a complex valued function +is really needed, since complex<T> supports construction and +assignment from real valued arguments. There is no difference +in observable behaviour between +</p> +<blockquote><pre> complex<double> x, y; + y = fabs(x); + complex<double> z(fabs(x)); +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +and +</p> +<blockquote><pre> complex<double> x, y; + y = abs(x); + complex<double> z(abs(x)); +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +If on the other hand the intention was to provide the intended +functionality of C99, fabs() should be either declared deprecated +or (for C++0X) removed from the standard, since the functionality +is already provided by the corresponding overloads of abs(). +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Bellevue: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Bill believes that abs() is a suitable overload. We should remove fabs(). +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +Change the synopsis in 26.4.1 [complex.syn]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>template<class T> complex<T> fabs(const complex<T>&);</del> +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Remove 26.4.7 [complex.value.ops], p7: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre><del>template<class T> complex<T> fabs(const complex<T>& <i>x</i>);</del> +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<del>-7- <i>Effects:</i> Behaves the same as C99 function <tt>cabs</tt>, defined in subclause 7.3.8.1.</del> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007): Change the return type of <tt>fabs(complex)</tt> to <tt>T</tt>. +Proposed Disposition: Ready +]</i></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="596"></a>596. 27.8.1.3 Table 112 omits "a+" and "a+b" modes</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.9.1.4 [filebuf.members] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Thomas Plum <b>Opened:</b> 2006-09-26 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#filebuf.members">issues</a> in [filebuf.members].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In testing 27.9.1.4 [filebuf.members], Table 112 (in the latest N2009 draft), we invoke +</p> +<blockquote><pre> ostr.open("somename", ios_base::out | ios_base::in | ios_base::app) +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +and we expect the open to fail, because out|in|app is not listed in +Table 92, and just before the table we see very specific words: +</p> +<blockquote><p> + If mode is not some combination of flags shown in the table + then the open fails. +</p></blockquote> +<p> +But the corresponding table in the C standard, 7.19.5.3, provides two +modes "a+" and "a+b", to which the C++ modes out|in|app and +out|in|app|binary would presumably apply. +</p> +<p> +We would like to argue that the intent of Table 112 was to match the +semantics of 7.19.5.3 and that the omission of "a+" and "a+b" was +unintentional. (Otherwise there would be valid and useful behaviors +available in C file I/O which are unavailable using C++, for no +valid functional reason.) +</p> +<p> +We further request that the missing modes be explicitly restored to +the WP, for inclusion in C++0x. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Martin adds: +]</i></p> + + +<p> +...besides "a+" and "a+b" the C++ table is also missing a row +for a lone app bit which in at least two current implementation +as well as in Classic Iostreams corresponds to the C stdio "a" +mode and has been traditionally documented as implying ios::out. +Which means the table should also have a row for in|app meaning +the same thing as "a+" already proposed in the issue. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add to the table "File open modes" in 27.9.1.4 [filebuf.members]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption> File open modes</caption> +<tbody><tr> +<th colspan="5"><tt>ios_base</tt> Flag combination</th> +<th><tt>stdio</tt> equivalent</th> +</tr> +<tr> +<th><tt>binary</tt></th><th><tt>in</tt></th><th><tt>out</tt></th><th><tt>trunc</tt></th><th><tt>app</tt></th><th><tt> </tt></th> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> </td> <td> </td> <td><tt>+</tt></td> <td> </td> <td> </td> <td><tt>"w"</tt></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td> </td> <td> </td> <td><tt>+</tt></td> <td> </td> <td><tt>+</tt></td> <td><tt>"a"</tt></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td> </td> <td> </td> <td> </td> <td> </td> <td><ins><tt>+</tt></ins></td> <td><ins><tt>"a"</tt></ins></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td> </td> <td> </td> <td><tt>+</tt></td> <td><tt>+</tt></td> <td> </td> <td><tt>"w"</tt></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td> </td> <td><tt>+</tt></td> <td> </td> <td> </td> <td> </td> <td><tt>"r"</tt></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td> </td> <td><tt>+</tt></td> <td><tt>+</tt></td> <td> </td> <td> </td> <td><tt>"r+"</tt></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td> </td> <td><tt>+</tt></td> <td><tt>+</tt></td> <td><tt>+</tt></td> <td> </td> <td><tt>"w+"</tt></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td> </td> <td><ins><tt>+</tt></ins></td> <td><ins><tt>+</tt></ins></td> <td> </td> <td><ins><tt>+</tt></ins></td> <td><ins><tt>"a+"</tt></ins></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td> </td> <td><ins><tt>+</tt></ins></td> <td> </td> <td> </td> <td><ins><tt>+</tt></ins></td> <td><ins><tt>"a+"</tt></ins></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>+</tt></td> <td> </td> <td><tt>+</tt></td> <td> </td> <td> </td> <td><tt>"wb"</tt></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><tt>+</tt></td> <td> </td> <td><tt>+</tt></td> <td> </td> <td><tt>+</tt></td> <td><tt>"ab"</tt></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><ins><tt>+</tt></ins></td> <td> </td> <td> </td> <td> </td> <td><ins><tt>+</tt></ins></td> <td><ins><tt>"ab"</tt></ins></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><tt>+</tt></td> <td> </td> <td><tt>+</tt></td> <td><tt>+</tt></td> <td> </td> <td><tt>"wb"</tt></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><tt>+</tt></td> <td><tt>+</tt></td> <td> </td> <td> </td> <td> </td> <td><tt>"rb"</tt></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><tt>+</tt></td> <td><tt>+</tt></td> <td><tt>+</tt></td> <td> </td> <td> </td> <td><tt>"r+b"</tt></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><tt>+</tt></td> <td><tt>+</tt></td> <td><tt>+</tt></td> <td><tt>+</tt></td> <td> </td> <td><tt>"w+b"</tt></td> +</tr><tr> +<td><ins><tt>+</tt></ins></td> <td><ins><tt>+</tt></ins></td> <td><ins><tt>+</tt></ins></td> <td> </td> <td><ins><tt>+</tt></ins></td> <td><ins><tt>"a+b"</tt></ins></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><ins><tt>+</tt></ins></td> <td><ins><tt>+</tt></ins></td> <td> </td> <td> </td> <td><ins><tt>+</tt></ins></td> <td><ins><tt>"a+b"</tt></ins></td> +</tr> + + +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007) Added proposed wording and moved to Review. +]</i></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="598"></a>598. Decimal: Conversion to integral should truncate, not round.</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> TRDecimal 3.2 [trdec.types.types] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TRDec">TRDec</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krugler <b>Opened:</b> 2006-05-28 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#trdec.types.types">issues</a> in [trdec.types.types].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TRDec">TRDec</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p> +In a private email, Daniel writes: +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +I would like to +ask, what where the reason for the decision to +define the semantics of the integral conversion of the decimal types, namely +</p> +<pre>"operator long long() const; + + Returns: Returns the result of the +conversion of *this to the type long long, as if +performed by the expression llrounddXX(*this)." +</pre> +<p> +where XX stands for either 32, 64, or 128, +corresponding to the proper decimal type. The +exact meaning of llrounddXX is not given in that +paper, so I compared it to the corresponding +definition given in C99, 2nd edition (ISO 9899), which says in 7.12.9.7 p. 2: +</p> +<p> +"The lround and llround functions round their +argument to the nearest integer value, +rounding halfway cases away from zero, regardless +of the current rounding direction. [..]" +</p> +<p> +Now considering the fact that integral conversion +of the usual floating-point types ("4.9 +Floating-integral conversions") has truncation +semantic I wonder why this conversion behaviour +has not been transferred for the decimal types. +</p> +</blockquote> +<p> +Robert comments: +</p> +<p> +Also, there is a further error in the <b>Returns:</b> clause for converting <code>decimal::decimal128</code> to <code>long long</code>. It currently calls <code>llroundd64</code>, not <code>llroundd128</code>. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change the <b>Returns:</b> clause in 3.2.2.4 to: +</p> +<blockquote><p> +<b>Returns:</b> Returns the result of the conversion of <code>*this</code> to the type <code>long long</code>, as if performed by the expression <code>llroundd32(*this)</code> <ins>while the decimal rounding direction mode [3.5.2] <code>FE_DEC_TOWARD_ZERO</code> is in effect</ins>. +</p></blockquote> +<p> +Change the <b>Returns:</b> clause in 3.2.3.4 to: +</p> +<blockquote><p> +<b>Returns:</b> Returns the result of the conversion of <code>*this</code> to the type <code>long long</code>, as if performed by the expression <code>llroundd64(*this)</code> <ins>while the decimal rounding direction mode [3.5.2] <code>FE_DEC_TOWARD_ZERO</code> is in effect</ins>. +</p></blockquote> +<p> +Change the <b>Returns:</b> clause in 3.2.4.4 to: +</p> +<blockquote><p> +<b>Returns:</b> Returns the result of the conversion of <code>*this</code> to the type <code>long long</code>, as if performed by the expression <del><code>llroundd64(*this)</code></del> <ins><code>llroundd128(*this)</code> while the decimal rounding direction mode [3.5.2] <code>FE_DEC_TOWARD_ZERO</code> is in effect</ins>. +</p></blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="599"></a>599. Decimal: Say "octets" instead of "bytes."</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> TRDecimal 3.1 [trdec.types.encodings] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TRDec">TRDec</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krugler <b>Opened:</b> 2006-05-28 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TRDec">TRDec</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Daniel writes in a private email: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +- 3.1 'Decimal type encodings' says in its note: +</p> +<pre>"this implies that +sizeof(std::decimal::decimal32) == 4, +sizeof(std::decimal::decimal64) == 8, and +sizeof(std::decimal::decimal128) == 16." +</pre> +<p> +This is a wrong assertion, because the definition +of 'byte' in 1.7 'The C+ + memory model' of ISO +14882 (2nd edition) does not specify that a byte +must be necessarily 8 bits large, which would be +necessary to compare with the specified bit sizes +of the types decimal32, decimal64, and decimal128. +</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 3.1 as follows: +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +The three decimal encoding formats defined in IEEE-754R correspond to the three decimal floating types as follows: +</p> +<ul> +<li> +decimal32 is a <em>decimal32</em> number, which is encoded in four consecutive <del>bytes</del> <ins>octets</ins> (32 bits) +</li> +<li> +decimal64 is a <em>decimal64</em> number, which is encoded in eight consecutive <del>bytes</del> <ins>octets</ins> (64 bits) + +</li> +<li> +decimal128 is a <em>decimal128</em> number, which is encoded in 16 consecutive <del>bytes</del> <ins>octets</ins> (128 bits) +</li> +</ul> +<p> +<del>[<i>Note:</i> this implies that <code>sizeof(std::decimal::decimal32) == 4</code>, <code>sizeof(std::decimal::decimal64) == 8</code>, and <code>sizeof(std::decimal::decimal128) == 16</code>. <i>--end note</i>]</del> +</p> +</blockquote> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="600"></a>600. Decimal: Wrong parameters for wcstod* functions</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> TRDecimal 3.9 [trdec.types.cwchar] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TRDec">TRDec</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krugler <b>Opened:</b> 2006-05-28 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TRDec">TRDec</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Daniel writes: +</p> +<blockquote><p> +- 3.9.1 'Additions to <cwchar>' provides wrong +signatures to the wcstod32, wcstod64, and +wcstod128 functions ([the parameters have type pointer-to-] char instead of wchar_t). +</p></blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change "3.9.1 Additions to <code><cwchar></code> synopsis" to: +</p> +<pre> namespace std { + namespace decimal { + // 3.9.2 wcstod functions: + decimal32 wcstod32 (const <del>char</del> <ins>wchar_t</ins> * nptr, <del>char</del> <ins>wchar_t</ins> ** endptr); + decimal64 wcstod64 (const <del>char</del> <ins>wchar_t</ins> * nptr, <del>char</del> <ins>wchar_t</ins> ** endptr); + decimal128 wcstod128 (const <del>char</del> <ins>wchar_t</ins> * nptr, <del>char</del> <ins>wchar_t</ins> ** endptr); + } + } +</pre> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="601"></a>601. Decimal: numeric_limits typos</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> TRDecimal 3.3 [trdec.types.limits] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TRDec">TRDec</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krugler <b>Opened:</b> 2006-05-28 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TRDec">TRDec</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Daniel writes in a private email: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +- 3.3 'Additions to header <limits>' contains two +errors in the specialisation of numeric_limits<decimal::decimal128>: +</p> +<ol> +<li>The static member max() returns DEC128_MIN, this should be DEC128_MAX.</li> +<li>The static member digits is assigned to 384, +this should be 34 (Probably mixed up with the +max. exponent for decimal::decimal64).</li> +</ol> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In "3.3 Additions to header <code><limits></code>" change numeric_limits<decimal::decimal128> as follows: +</p> +<pre> template<> class numeric_limits<decimal::decimal128> { + public: + static const bool is_specialized = true; + + static decimal::decimal128 min() throw() { return DEC128_MIN; } + static decimal::decimal128 max() throw() { return <del>DEC128_MIN;</del> <ins>DEC128_MAX;</ins> } + + static const int digits = <del>384</del> <ins>34</ins>; + /* ... */ +</pre> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="602"></a>602. Decimal: "generic floating type" not defined.</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> TRDecimal 3 [trdec.types] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TRDec">TRDec</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krugler <b>Opened:</b> 2006-05-28 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#trdec.types">issues</a> in [trdec.types].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TRDec">TRDec</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The document uses the term "generic floating types," but defines it nowhere. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change the first paragraph of "3 Decimal floating-point types" as follows: +</p> +<blockquote><p> +This Technical Report introduces three decimal floating-point types, named +decimal32, decimal64, and decimal128. The set of values of type decimal32 is a +subset of the set of values of type decimal64; the set of values of the type +decimal64 is a subset of the set of values of the type decimal128. Support for +decimal128 is optional. <ins>These types supplement the Standard C++ types +<code>float</code>, <code>double</code>, and <code>long double</code>, which are +collectively described as the <i>basic floating types</i></ins>. +</p></blockquote> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="603"></a>603. Decimal: Trivially simplifying decimal classes.</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> TRDecimal 3 [trdec.types] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TRDec">TRDec</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2006-05-28 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#trdec.types">issues</a> in [trdec.types].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TRDec">TRDec</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>In c++std-lib-17198, Martin writes:</p> + +<blockquote><p> +Each of the three classes proposed in the paper (decimal32, decimal64, +and decimal128) explicitly declares and specifies the semantics of its +copy constructor, copy assignment operator, and destructor. Since the +semantics of all three functions are identical to the trivial versions +implicitly generated by the compiler in the absence of any declarations +it is safe to drop them from the spec. This change would make the +proposed classes consistent with other similar classes already in the +standard (e.g., std::complex). +</p></blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change "3.2.2 Class <code>decimal32</code>" as follows: +</p> +<pre> namespace std { + namespace decimal { + class decimal32 { + public: + // 3.2.2.1 construct/copy/destroy: + decimal32(); + <del>decimal32(const decimal32 & d32);</del> + <del>decimal32 & operator=(const decimal32 & d32);</del> + <del>~decimal32();</del> + /* ... */ +</pre> +<p> +Change "3.2.2.1 construct/copy/destroy" as follows: +</p> +<pre> decimal32(); + + Effects: Constructs an object of type decimal32 with the value 0; + + <del>decimal32(const decimal32 & d32);</del> + <del>decimal32 & operator=(const decimal32 & d32);</del> + + <del>Effects: Copies an object of type decimal32.</del> + + <del>~decimal32();</del> + + <del>Effects: Destroys an object of type decimal32.</del> + +</pre> +<p> +Change "3.2.3 Class <code>decimal64</code>" as follows: +</p> +<pre> namespace std { + namespace decimal { + class decimal64 { + public: + // 3.2.3.1 construct/copy/destroy: + decimal64(); + <del>decimal64(const decimal64 & d64);</del> + <del>decimal64 & operator=(const decimal64 & d64);</del> + <del>~decimal64();</del> + /* ... */ +</pre> +<p> +Change "3.2.3.1 construct/copy/destroy" as follows: +</p> +<pre> decimal64(); + + Effects: Constructs an object of type decimal64 with the value 0; + + <del>decimal64(const decimal64 & d64);</del> + <del>decimal64 & operator=(const decimal64 & d64);</del> + + <del>Effects: Copies an object of type decimal64.</del> + + <del>~decimal64();</del> + + <del>Effects: Destroys an object of type decimal64.</del> + +</pre> +<p> +Change "3.2.4 Class <code>decimal128</code>" as follows: +</p> +<pre> namespace std { + namespace decimal { + class decimal128 { + public: + // 3.2.4.1 construct/copy/destroy: + decimal128(); + <del>decimal128(const decimal128 & d128);</del> + <del>decimal128 & operator=(const decimal128 & d128);</del> + <del>~decimal128();</del> + /* ... */ +</pre> +<p> +Change "3.2.4.1 construct/copy/destroy" as follows: +</p> +<pre> decimal128(); + + Effects: Constructs an object of type decimal128 with the value 0; + + <del>decimal128(const decimal128 & d128);</del> + <del>decimal128 & operator=(const decimal128 & d128);</del> + + <del>Effects: Copies an object of type decimal128.</del> + + <del>~decimal128();</del> + + <del>Effects: Destroys an object of type decimal128.</del> + +</pre> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="604"></a>604. Decimal: Storing a reference to a facet unsafe.</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> TRDecimal 3 [trdec.types] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TRDec">TRDec</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2006-05-28 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#trdec.types">issues</a> in [trdec.types].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TRDec">TRDec</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In c++std-lib-17197, Martin writes: +</p> +<blockquote><p> +The extended_num_get and extended_num_put facets are designed +to store a reference to a num_get or num_put facet which the +extended facets delegate the parsing and formatting of types +other than decimal. One form of the extended facet's ctor (the +default ctor and the size_t overload) obtains the reference +from the global C++ locale while the other form takes this +reference as an argument. +</p></blockquote> +<blockquote><p> +The problem with storing a reference to a facet in another +object (as opposed to storing the locale object in which the +facet is installed) is that doing so bypasses the reference +counting mechanism designed to prevent a facet that is still +being referenced (i.e., one that is still installed in some +locale) from being destroyed when another locale that contains +it is destroyed. Separating a facet reference from the locale +it comes from van make it cumbersome (and in some cases might +even make it impossible) for programs to prevent invalidating +the reference. (The danger of this design is highlighted in +the paper.) +</p></blockquote> +<blockquote><p> +This problem could be easily avoided by having the extended +facets store a copy of the locale from which they would extract +the base facet either at construction time or when needed. To +make it possible, the forms of ctors of the extended facets that +take a reference to the base facet would need to be changed to +take a locale argument instead. +</p></blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +1. Change the <code>extended_num_get</code> synopsis in 3.10.2 as follows: +</p> +<pre> extended_num_get(const <del>std::num_get<charT, InputIterator></del> <ins>std::locale</ins> & <i>b</i>, size_t <i>refs</i> = 0); + + /* ... */ + + <del>// <i>const std::num_get<charT, InputIterator> & <b>base</b></i>; <i><b>exposition only</b></i></del> + <ins>// <i>std::locale <b>baseloc</b></i>; <i><b>exposition only</b></i></ins> +</pre> +<p> +2. Change the description of the above constructor in 3.10.2.1: +</p> +<pre> extended_num_get(const <del>std::num_get<charT, InputIterator></del> <ins>std::locale</ins> & <i>b</i>, size_t <i>refs</i> = 0); + +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<b>Effects:</b> Constructs an <code>extended_num_get</code> facet as if by: +</p> +<pre> extended_num_get(const <del>std::num_get<charT, InputIterator></del> <ins>std::locale</ins> & <i>b</i>, size_t <i>refs</i> = 0) + : facet(<i>refs</i>), <i>base<ins>loc</ins></i>(<i>b</i>) + { /* ... */ } + +</pre> +<p> +<del><b>Notes:</b> Care must be taken by the implementation to ensure that the lifetime of the facet referenced by <i>base</i> exceeds that of the resulting <code>extended_num_get</code> facet.</del> +</p> +</blockquote> +<p> +3. Change the <b>Returns:</b> clause for <code>do_get(iter_type, iter_type, ios_base &, ios_base::iostate &, bool &) const</code>, <i>et al</i> to +</p> +<blockquote><p> +<b>Returns:</b> <code><del><i>base</i></del> <ins>std::use_facet<std::num_get<charT, InputIterator> >(<i>baseloc</i>)</ins>.get(<i>in</i>, <i>end</i>, <i>str</i>, <i>err</i>, <i>val</i>)</code>. +</p></blockquote> +<p> +4. Change the <code>extended_num_put</code> synopsis in 3.10.3 as follows: +</p> +<pre> extended_num_put(const <del>std::num_put<charT, OutputIterator></del> <ins>std::locale</ins> & <i>b</i>, size_t <i>refs</i> = 0); + + /* ... */ + + <del>// <i>const std::num_put<charT, OutputIterator> & <b>base</b></i>; <i><b>exposition only</b></i></del> + <ins>// <i>std::locale <b>baseloc</b></i>; <i><b>exposition only</b></i></ins> +</pre> +<p> +5. Change the description of the above constructor in 3.10.3.1: +</p> +<pre> extended_num_put(const <del>std::num_put<charT, OutputIterator></del> <ins>std::locale</ins> & <i>b</i>, size_t <i>refs</i> = 0); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<b>Effects:</b> Constructs an <code>extended_num_put</code> facet as if by: +</p> +<pre> extended_num_put(const <del>std::num_put<charT, OutputIterator></del> <ins>std::locale</ins> & <i>b</i>, size_t <i>refs</i> = 0) + : facet(<i>refs</i>), <i>base<ins>loc</ins></i>(<i>b</i>) + { /* ... */ } + +</pre> +<p> +<del><b>Notes:</b> Care must be taken by the implementation to ensure that the lifetime of the facet referenced by <i>base</i> exceeds that of the resulting <code>extended_num_put</code> facet.</del> +</p> +</blockquote> +<p> +6. Change the <b>Returns:</b> clause for <code>do_put(iter_type, ios_base &, char_type, bool &) const</code>, <i>et al</i> to +</p> +<blockquote><p> +<b>Returns:</b> <code><del><i>base</i></del> <ins>std::use_facet<std::num_put<charT, OutputIterator> >(<i>baseloc</i>)</ins>.put(<i>s</i>, <i>f</i>, <i>fill</i>, <i>val</i>)</code>. +</p></blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Redmond: We would prefer to rename "extended" to "decimal". +]</i></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="605"></a>605. Decimal: <decfloat.h> doesn't live here anymore.</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> TRDecimal 3.4 [trdec.types.cdecfloat] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#TRDec">TRDec</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Robert Klarer <b>Opened:</b> 2006-10-17 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#TRDec">TRDec</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In Berlin, WG14 decided to drop the <decfloat.h> header. The contents of that header have been moved into <float.h>. For the sake of C compatibility, we should make corresponding changes. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +1. Change the heading of subclause 3.4, "Headers <code><cdecfloat></code> and <code><decfloat.h></code>" to "Additions to headers <code><cfloat></code> and <code><float.h></code>." +</p> +<p> +2. Change the text of subclause 3.4 as follows: +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +<del>The standard C++ headers <code><cfloat></code> and <code><float.h></code> define characteristics of the floating-point types <code>float</code>, <code>double</code>, and <code>long double</code>. Their contents remain unchanged by this Technical Report.</del> +</p> +<p> +<del>Headers <code><cdecfloat></code> and <code><decfloat.h></code> define characteristics of the decimal floating-point types <code>decimal32</code>, <code>decimal64</code>, and <code>decimal128</code>. As well, <code><decfloat.h></code> defines the convenience typedefs <code>_Decimal32</code>, <code>_Decimal64</code>, and <code>_Decimal128</code>, for compatibilty with the C programming language.</del> +</p> +<p> +<ins>The header <code><cfloat></code> is described in [tr.c99.cfloat]. The header <code><float.h></code> is described in [tr.c99.floath]. These headers are extended by this Technical Report to define characteristics of the decimal floating-point types <code>decimal32</code>, <code>decimal64</code>, and <code>decimal128</code>. As well, <code><float.h></code> is extended to define the convenience typedefs <code>_Decimal32</code>, <code>_Decimal64</code>, and <code>_Decimal128</code> for compatibility with the C programming language.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +<p> +3. Change the heading of subclause 3.4.1, "Header <code><cdecfloat></code> synopsis" to "Additions to header <code><cfloat></code> synopsis." +</p> +<p> +4. Change the heading of subclause 3.4.2, "Header <code><decfloat.h></code> synopsis" to "Additions to header <code><float.h></code> synopsis." +</p> +<p> +5. Change the contents of 3.4.2 as follows: +</p> +<pre> <del>#include <cdecfloat></del> + + // <i>C-compatibility convenience typedefs:</i> + + typedef std::decimal::decimal32 _Decimal32; + typedef std::decimal::decimal64 _Decimal64; + typedef std::decimal::decimal128 _Decimal128; +</pre> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="607"></a>607. Concern about short seed vectors</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.7.1 [rand.util.seedseq] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Charles Karney <b>Opened:</b> 2006-10-26 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#rand.util.seedseq">issues</a> in [rand.util.seedseq].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Short seed vectors of 32-bit quantities all result in different states. However +this is not true of seed vectors of 16-bit (or smaller) quantities. For example +these two seeds +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>unsigned short seed = {1, 2, 3}; +unsigned short seed = {1, 2, 3, 0}; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +both pack to +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>unsigned seed = {0x20001, 0x3}; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +yielding the same state. +</p> + +<p> +See <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2391.pdf">N2391</a> and +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2423.pdf">N2423</a> +for some further discussion. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Adopt the proposed resolution in +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2423.pdf">N2423</a>. +</p> + + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007): The LWG adopted the proposed resolution of N2423 for this issue. +The LWG voted to accelerate this issue to Ready status to be voted into the WP at Kona. +]</i></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="608"></a>608. Unclear seed_seq construction details</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.7.1 [rand.util.seedseq] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Charles Karney <b>Opened:</b> 2006-10-26 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#rand.util.seedseq">issues</a> in [rand.util.seedseq].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In 26.4.7.1 [rand.util.seedseq] /6, the order of packing the inputs into b and the +treatment of signed quantities is unclear. Better to spell it out. +</p> + +<p> +See <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2391.pdf">N2391</a> and +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2423.pdf">N2423</a> +for some further discussion. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Adopt the proposed resolution in +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2423.pdf">N2423</a>. +</p> + + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007): The LWG adopted the proposed resolution of N2423 for this issue. +The LWG voted to accelerate this issue to Ready status to be voted into the WP at Kona. +]</i></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="609"></a>609. missing static const</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.4.2 [rand.adapt.ibits], TR1 5.1 [tr.rand] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Walter E. Brown <b>Opened:</b> 2006-11-02 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In preparing N2111, an error on my part resulted in the omission of the +following line from the template synopsis in the cited section: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>static const size_t word_size = w; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +(This same constant is found, for example, in 26.4.3.3 [rand.eng.sub].) +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add the above declaration as the first line after the comment in [rand.adapt.ibits] p4: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>// engine characteristics +<ins>static const size_t word_size = w;</ins> +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +and accept my apologies for the oversight. +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="610"></a>610. Suggested non-normative note for C++0x</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8.14.2.1 [func.wrap.func.con], TR1 3.7.2.1 [tr.func.wrap.func.con] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Scott Meyers <b>Opened:</b> 2006-11-02 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#func.wrap.func.con">issues</a> in [func.wrap.func.con].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +My suggestion is that implementers of both tr1::function and its +official C++0x successor be explicitly encouraged (but not required) to +optimize for the cases mentioned above, i.e., function pointers and +small function objects. They could do this by using a small internal +buffer akin to the buffer used by implementations of the small string +optimization. (That would make this the small functor optimization -- +SFO :-}) The form of this encouragement could be a note in the standard +akin to footnote 214 of the current standard. +</p> + +<p> +Dave Abrahams notes: +</p> + +<p> +"shall not throw exceptions" should really be "nothing," both to be more +grammatical and to be consistent with existing wording in the standard. +</p> + +<p> +Doug Gregor comments: I think this is a good idea. Currently, implementations of +tr1::function are required to have non-throwing constructors and assignment +operators when the target function object is a function pointer or a +reference_wrapper. The common case, however, is for a tr1::function to store +either an empty function object or a member pointer + an object pointer. +</p> +<p> +The function implementation in the upcoming Boost 1.34.0 uses the +"SFO", so that the function objects for typical bind expressions like +</p> +<blockquote><pre>bind(&X::f, this, _1, _2, _3) +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +do not require heap allocation when stored in a boost::function. I +believe Dinkumware's implementation also performs this optimization. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Revise 20.5.14.2.1 p6 [func.wrap.func.con] to add a note as follows: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Throws:</i> shall not throw exceptions if <tt>f</tt>'s target is a function +pointer or a function object passed via <tt>reference_wrapper</tt>. Otherwise, +may throw <tt>bad_alloc</tt> or any exception thrown by the copy constructor of +the stored function object. +</p> +<p> +<ins><i>Note:</i> Implementations are encouraged to avoid the use of dynamically +allocated memory for "small" function objects, e.g., where <tt>f</tt>'s target +is an object holding only a pointer or reference to an object and a member +function pointer (a "bound member function").</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="611"></a>611. Standard library templates and incomplete types</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17.6.3.8 [res.on.functions] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nicola Musatti <b>Opened:</b> 2006-11-13 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#res.on.functions">issues</a> in [res.on.functions].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In the latest available draft standard +(<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2006/n2134.pdf">N2134</a>) +§ 17.4.3.6 [res.on.functions] states: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-1- In certain cases (replacement functions, handler functions, operations on +types used to instantiate standard library template components), the C++ +Standard Library depends on components supplied by a C++ program. If these +components do not meet their requirements, the Standard places no requirements +on the implementation. +</p> + +<p> +-2- In particular, the effects are undefined in the following cases: +</p> +<p> +[...] +</p> +<ul> +<li>if an incomplete type (3.9) is used as a template argument when +instantiating a template component. </li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + +<p> +This is contradicted by § 20.6.6.2/2 [util.smartptr.shared] which +states: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +[...] +</p> + +<p> +The template parameter <tt>T</tt> of <tt>shared_ptr</tt> may be an incomplete type. +</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Modify the last bullet of § 17.4.3.6/2 [res.on.functions] to allow for +exceptions: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<ul> +<li>if an incomplete type (3.9) is used as a template argument when +instantiating a template component<ins>, unless specifically allowed for the +component</ins>. </li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="612"></a>612. numeric_limits::is_modulo insufficiently defined</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.3.1.2 [numeric.limits.members] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Chris Jefferson <b>Opened:</b> 2006-11-10 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#numeric.limits.members">issues</a> in [numeric.limits.members].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +18.2.1.2 55 states that "A type is modulo if it is possible to add two +positive numbers together and have a result that wraps around to a +third number that is less". +This seems insufficient for the following reasons: +</p> + +<ol> +<li>Doesn't define what that value received is.</li> +<li>Doesn't state the result is repeatable</li> +<li> Doesn't require that doing addition, subtraction and other +operations on all values is defined behaviour.</li> +</ol> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia: Related to +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2144.pdf">N2144</a>. +Pete: is there an ISO definition of modulo? Underflow on signed behavior is undefined. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Bellevue: accept resolution, move to ready status. +Does this mandate that is_modulo be true on platforms for which int +happens to b modulo? A: the standard already seems to require that. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Suggest 18.3.1.2 [numeric.limits.members], paragraph 57 is amended to: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +A type is modulo if<ins>,</ins> <del>it is possible to add two positive numbers +and have a result that wraps around to a third number that is less.</del> +<ins>given any operation involving +,- or * on values of that type whose value +would fall outside the range <tt>[min(), max()]</tt>, then the value returned +differs from the true value by an integer multiple of <tt>(max() - min() + +1)</tt>.</ins> +</p></blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="613"></a>613. max_digits10 missing from numeric_limits</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.3.1.5 [numeric.special] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Bo Persson <b>Opened:</b> 2006-11-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#numeric.special">issues</a> in [numeric.special].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Section 18.3.1.5 [numeric.special] starts out by saying that "All members shall be provided +for all specializations." +</p> +<p> +Then it goes on to show specializations for float and bool, where one member +is missing (max_digits10). +</p> + +<p> +Maarten Kronenburg adds: +</p> + +<p> +I agree, just adding the comment that the exact number of decimal digits +is digits * ln(radix) / ln(10), where probably this real number is +rounded downward for digits10, and rounded upward for max_digits10 +(when radix=10, then digits10=max_digits10). +Why not add this exact definition also to the standard, so the user +knows what these numbers exactly mean. +</p> + +<p> +Howard adds: +</p> + +<p> +For reference, here are the correct formulas from +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG21/docs/papers/2005/n1822.pdf">N1822</a>: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>digits10 = floor((digits-1) * log10(2)) +max_digits10 = ceil((1 + digits) * log10(2)) +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +We are also missing a statement regarding for what specializations this member has meaning. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change and add after 18.3.1.2 [numeric.limits.members], p11: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>static const int max_digits10;</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +-11- Number of base 10 digits required to ensure that values which +differ <del>by only one epsilon</del> are always differentiated. +</p> +<p><ins> +-12- Meaningful for all floating point types. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 18.3.1.5 [numeric.special], p2: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<> class numeric_limits<float> { +public: + static const bool is_specialized = true; + ... + static const int digits10 = 6; + <ins>static const int max_digits10 = 9</ins>; + ... +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Change 18.3.1.5 [numeric.special], p3: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<> class numeric_limits<bool> { +public: + static const bool is_specialized = true; + ... + static const int digits10 = 0; + <ins>static const int max_digits10 = 0</ins>; + ... +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="616"></a>616. missing 'typename' in ctype_byname</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.1.2 [locale.ctype.byname] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Bo Persson <b>Opened:</b> 2006-12-16 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#locale.ctype.byname">issues</a> in [locale.ctype.byname].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Section 22.2.1.2 defines the ctype_byname class template. It contains the +line +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>typedef ctype<charT>::mask mask; +</pre></blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +as this is a dependent type, it should obviously be +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>typedef <ins>typename</ins> ctype<charT>::mask mask; +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="618"></a>618. valarray::cshift() effects on empty array</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.6.2.7 [valarray.members] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Gabriel Dos Reis <b>Opened:</b> 2007-01-10 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +I would respectfully request an issue be opened with the intention to +clarify the wording for <tt>size() == 0</tt> for <tt>cshift</tt>. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 26.6.2.7 [valarray.members], paragraph 10: +</p> + +<blockquote> + +<pre>valarray<T> cshift(int <i>n</i>) const; +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +This function returns an object of class <tt>valarray<T></tt>, of +length <tt>size()</tt>, <del>each of whose elements <tt>I</tt> is +<tt>(*this)[(I + n ) % size()]</tt>. Thus, if element zero is taken as +the leftmost element, a positive value of <i>n</i> shifts the elements +circularly left <i>n</i> places.</del> <ins>that is a circular shift of <tt>*this</tt>. If +element zero is taken as the leftmost element, a non-negative value of +<i>n</i> shifts the elements circularly left <i>n</i> places and a +negative value of <i>n</i> shifts the elements circularly right +-<i>n</i> places.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +We do not believe that there is any real ambiguity about what happens +when <tt>size() == 0</tt>, but we do believe that spelling this out as a C++ +expression causes more trouble that it solves. The expression is +certainly wrong when <tt>n < 0</tt>, since the sign of % with negative arguments +is implementation defined. +</p> + + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007) Changed proposed wording, added rationale and set to Review. +]</i></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="619"></a>619. Longjmp wording problem</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.10 [support.runtime] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Lawrence Crowl <b>Opened:</b> 2007-01-12 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#support.runtime">issues</a> in [support.runtime].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The wording for <tt>longjmp</tt> is confusing. +</p> +<p> +18.10 [support.runtime] -4- Other runtime support +</p> +<blockquote><p> +The function signature <tt>longjmp(jmp_buf jbuf, int val)</tt> has more restricted +behavior in this International Standard. If any automatic objects would +be destroyed by a thrown exception transferring control to another +(destination) point in the program, then a call to <tt>longjmp(jbuf, val)</tt> that +the throw point that transfers control to the same (destination) point has +undefined behavior. +</p></blockquote> +<p> +Someone at Google thinks that should say "then a call to <tt>longjmp(jbuf, val)</tt> +*at* the throw point that transfers control". +</p> +<p> +Bill Gibbons thinks it should say something like "If any automatic objects +would be destroyed by an exception thrown at the point of the longjmp and +caught only at the point of the setjmp, the behavior is undefined." +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In general, accept Bill Gibbons' recommendation, +but add "call" to indicate that the undefined behavior +comes from the dynamic call, not from its presence in the code. +In 18.10 [support.runtime] paragraph 4, change +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +The function signature <tt>longjmp(jmp_buf jbuf, int val)</tt> has more +restricted behavior in this International Standard. <del>If any automatic +objects would be destroyed by a thrown exception transferring control to another +(destination) point in the program, then a call to <tt>longjmp(jbuf, val)</tt> +that the throw point that transfers control to the same (destination) point has +undefined behavior.</del> <ins>A <tt>setjmp</tt>/<tt>longjmp</tt> call pair has +undefined behavior if replacing the <tt>setjmp</tt> and <tt>longjmp</tt> by +<tt>catch</tt> and <tt>throw</tt> would destroy any automatic objects.</ins> +</p></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="620"></a>620. valid uses of empty valarrays</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.6.2.1 [valarray.cons] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2007-01-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#valarray.cons">issues</a> in [valarray.cons].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + <p> + +The <i>Effects</i> clause for the default <code>valarray</code> ctor +suggests that it is possible to increase the size of an empty +<code>valarray</code> object by calling other non-const member +functions of the class besides <code>resize()</code>. However, such an +interpretation would be contradicted by the requirement on the copy +assignment operator (and apparently also that on the computed +assignments) that the assigned arrays be the same size. See the +reflector discussion starting with c++std-lib-17871. + + </p> + <p> + +In addition, <i>Footnote</i> 280 uses some questionable normative +language. + + </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + <p> + +Reword the <i>Effects</i> clause and <i>Footnote 280</i> as follows (26.6.2.1 [valarray.cons]): + + </p> + <blockquote> + <p> + +<code>valarray();</code> + + </p> + <p> + +<i>Effects</i>: Constructs an object of class +<code>valarray<T></code>,<sup>279)</sup> which has zero +length<del> until it is passed into a library function as a modifiable +lvalue or through a non-constant this pointer</del>.<sup>280)</sup> + + </p> + <p> + +<ins><i>Postcondition</i>: <code>size() == 0</code>.</ins> + + </p> + <p> + +<i>Footnote 280</i>: This default constructor is essential, since +arrays of <code>valarray</code> <del>are likely to prove useful. +There shall also be a way to change the size of an array after +initialization; this is supplied by the semantics</del> <ins>may be +useful. The length of an empty array can be increased after +initialization by means</ins> of the <code>resize()</code> member +function. + + </p> + </blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="621"></a>621. non-const copy assignment operators of helper arrays</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.6 [numarray] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2007-01-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#numarray">issues</a> in [numarray].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + <p> + +The computed and "fill" assignment operators of <code>valarray</code> +helper array class templates (<code>slice_array</code>, +<code>gslice_array</code>, <code>mask_array</code>, and +<code>indirect_array</code>) are const member functions of each class +template (the latter by the resolution of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#123">123</a> +since they have reference semantics and thus do not affect +the state of the object on which they are called. However, the copy +assignment operators of these class templates, which also have +reference semantics, are non-const. The absence of constness opens +the door to speculation about whether they really are intended to have +reference semantics (existing implementations vary widely). + + </p> + +<p> +Pre-Kona, Martin adds: +</p> + +<p> +I realized that adding the const qualifier to the +functions as I suggested would break the const correctness of the +classes. A few possible solutions come to mind: +</p> + +<ol> +<li>Add the const qualifier to the return types of these functions.</li> +<li>Change the return type of all the functions to void to match +the signatures of all the other assignment operators these classes +define.</li> +<li>Prohibit the copy assignment of these classes by declaring the +copy assignment operators private (as is done and documented by +some implementations).</li> +</ol> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + <p> + +Declare the copy assignment operators of all four helper array +class templates const. + + </p> + <p> + +Specifically, make the following edits: + + </p> + <p> + +Change the signature in 26.6.5 [template.slice.array] and +26.6.5.1 [slice.arr.assign] as follows: + + </p> + <blockquote><pre> +<code><ins>const</ins> slice_array& operator= (const slice_array&)<ins> const</ins>;</code> + + </pre></blockquote> + <p> + +Change the signature in 26.6.7 [template.gslice.array] and +26.6.7.1 [gslice.array.assign] as follows: + + </p> + <blockquote><pre> +<code><ins>const</ins> gslice_array& operator= (const gslice_array&)<ins> const</ins>;</code> + + </pre></blockquote> + <p> + +Change the signature in 26.6.8 [template.mask.array] and 26.6.8.1 [mask.array.assign] as +follows: + + </p> + <blockquote><pre> +<code><ins>const</ins> mask_array& operator= (const mask_array&)<ins> const</ins>;</code> + + </pre></blockquote> + <p> + +Change the signature in 26.6.9 [template.indirect.array] and +26.6.9.1 [indirect.array.assign] as follows: + + </p> + <blockquote><pre> +<code><ins>const</ins> indirect_array& operator= (const indirect_array&)<ins> const</ins>;</code> + + </pre></blockquote> + + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007) Added const qualification to the return types and set to Ready. +]</i></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="622"></a>622. behavior of <code>filebuf</code> dtor and <code>close</code> on error</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.9.1.17 [fstream.members] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2007-01-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + <p> + +<code>basic_filebuf</code> dtor is specified to have the following +straightforward effects: + + </p> + <blockquote><p> + +<i>Effects</i>: Destroys an object of class +<code>basic_filebuf</code>. Calls <code>close()</code>. + + </p></blockquote> + <p> + +<code>close()</code> does a lot of potentially complicated processing, +including calling <code>overflow()</code> to write out the termination +sequence (to bring the output sequence to its initial shift +state). Since any of the functions called during the processing can +throw an exception, what should the effects of an exception be on the +dtor? Should the dtor catch and swallow it or should it propagate it +to the caller? The text doesn't seem to provide any guidance in this +regard other than the general restriction on throwing (but not +propagating) exceptions from destructors of library classes in +17.6.4.12 [res.on.exception.handling]. + + </p> + <p> + +Further, the last thing <code>close()</code> is specified to do is +call <code>fclose()</code> to close the <code>FILE</code> pointer. The +last sentence of the <i>Effects</i> clause reads: + + </p> + <blockquote><p> + +... If any of the calls to <code>overflow</code> or +<code>std::fclose</code> fails then <code>close</code> fails. + + </p></blockquote> + <p> + +This suggests that <code>close()</code> might be required to call +<code>fclose()</code> if and only if none of the calls to +<code>overflow()</code> fails, and avoid closing the <code>FILE</code> +otherwise. This way, if <code>overflow()</code> failed to flush out +the data, the caller would have the opportunity to try to flush it +again (perhaps after trying to deal with whatever problem may have +caused the failure), rather than losing it outright. + + </p> + <p> + +On the other hand, the function's <i>Postcondition</i> specifies that +<code>is_open() == false</code>, which suggests that it should call +<code>fclose()</code> unconditionally. However, since +<i>Postcondition</i> clauses are specified for many functions in the +standard, including constructors where they obviously cannot apply +after an exception, it's not clear whether this <i>Postcondition</i> +clause is intended to apply even after an exception. + + </p> + <p> + +It might be worth noting that the traditional behavior (Classic +Iostreams <code>fstream::close()</code> and C <code>fclose()</code>) +is to close the <code>FILE</code> unconditionally, regardless of +errors. + + </p> + +<p><i>[ +See <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#397">397</a> and <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#418">418</a> for related issues. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + <p> + +After discussing this on the reflector (see the thread starting with +c++std-lib-17650) we propose that <code>close()</code> be clarified to +match the traditional behavior, that is to close the <code>FILE</code> +unconditionally, even after errors or exceptions. In addition, we +propose the dtor description be amended so as to explicitly require it +to catch and swallow any exceptions thrown by <code>close()</code>. + + </p> + <p> + +Specifically, we propose to make the following edits in +27.9.1.4 [filebuf.members]: + + </p> + <blockquote> + <pre> +<code>basic_filebuf<charT,traits>* close();</code> + + </pre> + <p> + +<i>Effects</i>: If <code>is_open() == false</code>, returns a null +pointer. If a put area exists, calls +<code>overflow(traits::eof())</code> to flush characters. If the last +virtual member function called on <code>*this</code> (between +<code>underflow</code>, <code>overflow</code>, <code>seekoff</code>, +and <code>seekpos</code>) was <code>overflow</code> then calls +<code>a_codecvt.unshift</code> (possibly several times) to determine a +termination sequence, inserts those characters and calls +<code>overflow(traits::eof())</code> again. Finally<ins>, regardless +of whether any of the preceding calls fails or throws an exception, +the function</ins> <del>it</del> closes the file ("as if" by calling +<code>std::fclose(file)</code>).<sup>334)</sup> If any of the calls +<ins>made by the function</ins><del>to <code>overflow</code> +or</del><ins>, including </ins><code>std::fclose</code><ins>, </ins> +fails then <code>close</code> fails<ins> by returning a null pointer. +If one of these calls throws an exception, the exception is caught and +rethrown after closing the file.</ins> + + </p> + </blockquote> + <p> + +And to make the following edits in 27.9.1.2 [filebuf.cons]. + + </p> + <blockquote> + <pre> +<code>virtual ~basic_filebuf();</code> + + </pre> + <p> + +<i>Effects</i>: Destroys an object of class +<code>basic_filebuf<charT,traits></code>. Calls +<code>close()</code>. <ins>If an exception occurs during the +destruction of the object, including the call to <code>close()</code>, +the exception is caught but not rethrown (see +17.6.4.12 [res.on.exception.handling]).</ins> + + </p> + </blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="623"></a>623. <code>pubimbue</code> forbidden to call <code>imbue</code></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.2.1 [iostream.limits.imbue] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2007-01-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + <p> + +27.2.1 [iostream.limits.imbue] specifies that "no function described in +clause 27 except for <code>ios_base::imbue</code> causes any instance +of <code>basic_ios::imbue</code> or +<code>basic_streambuf::imbue</code> to be called." + + </p> + <p> + +That contradicts the <i>Effects</i> clause for +<code>basic_streambuf::pubimbue()</code> which requires the function +to do just that: call <code>basic_streambuf::imbue()</code>. + + </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + <p> + +To fix this, rephrase the sentence above to allow +<code>pubimbue</code> to do what it was designed to do. Specifically. +change 27.2.1 [iostream.limits.imbue], p1 to read: + + </p> + <blockquote><p> + +No function described in clause 27 except for +<code>ios_base::imbue</code> <ins>and <code>basic_filebuf::pubimbue</code></ins> +causes any instance of <code>basic_ios::imbue</code> or +<code>basic_streambuf::imbue</code> to be called. ... + + </p></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="624"></a>624. <code>valarray</code> assignment and arrays of unequal length</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.6.2.2 [valarray.assign] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2007-01-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + <p> + +The behavior of the <code>valarray</code> copy assignment operator is +defined only when both sides have the same number of elements and the +spec is explicit about assignments of arrays of unequal lengths having +undefined behavior. + + </p> + <p> + +However, the generalized subscripting assignment operators overloaded +on <code>slice_array</code> et al (26.6.2.2 [valarray.assign]) don't have any +such restriction, leading the reader to believe that the behavior of +these overloads is well defined regardless of the lengths of the +arguments. + + </p> + <p> + +For example, based on the reading of the spec the behavior of the +snippet below can be expected to be well-defined: + + </p> + <pre> const std::slice from_0_to_3 (0, 3, 1); // refers to elements 0, 1, 2 + const std::valarray<int> a (1, 3); // a = { 1, 1, 1 } + std::valarray<int> b (2, 4); // b = { 2, 2, 2, 2 } + + b = a [from_0_to_3]; + </pre> + <p> + +In practice, <code>b</code> may end up being <code>{ 1, 1, 1 }</code>, +<code>{ 1, 1, 1, 2 }</code>, or anything else, indicating that +existing implementations vary. + + </p> + +<p> +Quoting from Section 3.4, Assignment operators, of Al Vermeulen's +Proposal for Standard C++ Array Classes (see c++std-lib-704; +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/1993/N0308.asc">N0308</a>): +</p> +<blockquote><p> + ...if the size of the array on the right hand side of the equal + sign differs from the size of the array on the left, a run time + error occurs. How this error is handled is implementation + dependent; for compilers which support it, throwing an exception + would be reasonable. +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +And see more history in +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG21/docs/papers/1993/N0280.pdf">N0280</a>. +</p> + + <p> + +It has been argued in discussions on the committee's reflector that +the semantics of all <code>valarray</code> assignment operators should +be permitted to be undefined unless the length of the arrays being +assigned is the same as the length of the one being assigned from. See +the thread starting at c++std-lib-17786. + + </p> + <p> + +In order to reflect such views, the standard must specify that the +size of the array referred to by the argument of the assignment must +match the size of the array under assignment, for example by adding a +<i>Requires</i> clause to 26.6.2.2 [valarray.assign] as follows: + + </p> + <blockquote><p> + +<i>Requires</i>: The length of the array to which the argument refers +equals <code>size()</code>. + + </p></blockquote> + + <p> + +Note that it's far from clear that such leeway is necessary in order +to implement <code>valarray</code> efficiently. + + </p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Insert new paragraph into 26.6.2.2 [valarray.assign]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>valarray<T>& operator=(const slice_array<T>&); +valarray<T>& operator=(const gslice_array<T>&); +valarray<T>& operator=(const mask_array<T>&); +valarray<T>& operator=(const indirect_array<T>&); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p><ins> +<i>Requires</i>: The length of the array to which the argument refers +equals <code>size()</code>. +</ins></p> +<p> +These operators allow the results of a generalized subscripting operation to be assigned directly to a <tt>valarray</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="625"></a>625. mixed up <i>Effects</i> and <i>Returns</i> clauses</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17 [library] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2007-01-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-19</p> +<p><b>View other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index-open.html#library">active issues</a> in [library].</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#library">issues</a> in [library].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#895">895</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + <p> + +Many member functions of <code>basic_string</code> are overloaded, +with some of the overloads taking a <code>string</code> argument, +others <code>value_type*</code>, others <code>size_type</code>, and +others still <code>iterators</code>. Often, the requirements on one of +the overloads are expressed in the form of <i>Effects</i>, +<i>Throws</i>, and in the Working Paper +(<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2006/n2134.pdf">N2134</a>) +also <i>Remark</i> clauses, while those on the rest of the overloads +via a reference to this overload and using a <i>Returns</i> clause. +</p> + +<p> +The difference between the two forms of specification is that per +17.5.1.4 [structure.specifications], p3, an <i>Effects</i> clause specifies +<i>"actions performed by the functions,"</i> i.e., its observable +effects, while a <i>Returns</i> clause is <i>"a description of the +return value(s) of a function"</i> that does not impose any +requirements on the function's observable effects. +</p> + +<p> +Since only <i>Notes</i> are explicitly defined to be informative and +all other paragraphs are explicitly defined to be normative, like +<i>Effects</i> and <i>Returns</i>, the new <i>Remark</i> clauses also +impose normative requirements. +</p> + +<p> +So by this strict reading of the standard there are some member +functions of <code>basic_string</code> that are required to throw an +exception under some conditions or use specific traits members while +many other otherwise equivalent overloads, while obliged to return the +same values, aren't required to follow the exact same requirements +with regards to the observable effects. +</p> + +<p> +Here's an example of this problem that was precipitated by the change +from informative Notes to normative <i>Remark</i>s (presumably made to +address <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#424">424</a>): +</p> + +<p> +In the Working Paper, <code>find(string, size_type)</code> contains a +<i>Remark</i> clause (which is just a <i>Note</i> in the current +standard) requiring it to use <code>traits::eq()</code>. +</p> + +<p> +<code>find(const charT *s, size_type pos)</code> is specified to +return <code>find(string(s), pos)</code> by a <i>Returns</i> clause +and so it is not required to use <code>traits::eq()</code>. However, +the Working Paper has replaced the original informative <i>Note</i> +about the function using <code>traits::length()</code> with a +normative requirement in the form of a <i>Remark</i>. Calling +<code>traits::length()</code> may be suboptimal, for example when the +argument is a very long array whose initial substring doesn't appear +anywhere in <code>*this</code>. +</p> + +<p> +Here's another similar example, one that existed even prior to the +introduction of <i>Remark</i>s: +</p> + +<p> +<code> insert(size_type pos, string, size_type, size_type)</code> is +required to throw <code>out_of_range</code> if <code>pos > +size()</code>. +</p> + +<p> +<code>insert(size_type pos, string str)</code> is specified to return +<code>insert(pos, str, 0, npos)</code> by a <i>Returns</i> clause and +so its effects when <code>pos > size()</code> are strictly speaking +unspecified. +</p><p> + +</p> +I believe a careful review of the current <i>Effects</i> and +<i>Returns</i> clauses is needed in order to identify all such +problematic cases. In addition, a review of the Working Paper should +be done to make sure that the newly introduced normative <i>Remark</i> +clauses do not impose any undesirable normative requirements in place +of the original informative <i>Notes</i>. +<p></p> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia: Alan and Pete to work. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Bellevue: Marked as NAD Editorial. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Post-Sophia Antipolis: +Martin indicates there is still work to be done on this issue. +Reopened. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +Tom proposes we say that, unless specified otherwise, +it is always the caller's responsibility to verify that supplied arguments +meet the called function's requirements. +If further semantics are specified +(e.g., that the function throws under certain conditions), +then it is up to the implementer to check those conditions. +Alan feels strongly that our current use of Requires in this context +is confusing, especially now that <tt>requires</tt> is a new keyword. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Tentatively NAD. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Open. Martin will work on proposed wording. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010 Pittsburgh: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to NAD Editorial, solved by revision to N3021. +</blockquote> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +Solved by revision to N3021. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="628"></a>628. Inconsistent definition of basic_regex constructor</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 28.8 [re.regex] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Bo Persson <b>Opened:</b> 2007-01-23 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#re.regex">issues</a> in [re.regex].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Section 28.8 [re.regex] lists a constructor +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class InputIterator> +basic_regex(InputIterator first, InputIterator last, + flag_type f = regex_constants::ECMAScript); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +However, in section 28.8.2 [re.regex.construct], this constructor takes a +pair of <tt>ForwardIterator</tt>. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 28.8.2 [re.regex.construct]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class <del>ForwardIterator</del> <ins>InputIterator</ins>> + basic_regex(<del>ForwardIterator</del> <ins>InputIterator</ins> first, <del>ForwardIterator</del> <ins>InputIterator</ins> last, + flag_type f = regex_constants::ECMAScript); +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="629"></a>629. complex<t> insertion and locale dependence</t></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.4.6 [complex.ops] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Gabriel Dos Reis <b>Opened:</b> 2007-01-28 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#complex.ops">issues</a> in [complex.ops].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +is there an issue opened for (0,3) as complex number with +the French local? With the English local, the above parses as an +imaginery complex number. With the French locale it parses as a +real complex number. +</p> + +<p> +Further notes/ideas from the lib-reflector, messages 17982-17984: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Add additional entries in num_punct to cover the complex separator (French would be ';'). +</p> +<p> +Insert a space before the comma, which should eliminate the ambiguity. +</p> +<p> +Solve the problem for ordered sequences in general, perhaps with a +dedicated facet. Then complex should use that solution. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Bellevue: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +After much discussion, we agreed on the following: Add a footnote: +</p> +<p> +[In a locale in which comma is being used as a decimal point character, +inserting "showbase" into the output stream forces all outputs to show +an explicit decimal point character; then all inserted complex sequences +will extract unambiguously.] +</p> +<p> +And move this to READY status. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Pre-Sophia Antipolis, Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Changed "showbase" to "showpoint" and changed from Ready to Review. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Post-Sophia Antipolis: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I neglected to pull this issue from the formal motions page after the "showbase" to "showpoint" change. +In Sophia Antipolis this change was reviewed by the LWG and the issue was set to Ready. We subsequently +voted the footnote into the WP with "showbase". +</p> +<p> +I'm changing from WP back to Ready to pick up the "showbase" to "showpoint" change. +</p> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add a footnote to 26.4.6 [complex.ops] p16: +</p> + +<blockquote> +[In a locale in which comma is being used as a decimal point character, +inserting <tt>showpoint</tt> into the output stream forces all outputs to show +an explicit decimal point character; then all inserted complex sequences +will extract unambiguously.] +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="630"></a>630. arrays of valarray</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.6.2.1 [valarray.cons] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2007-01-28 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#valarray.cons">issues</a> in [valarray.cons].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + <p> + +Section 26.2 [numeric.requirements], p1 suggests that a +<code>valarray</code> specialization on a type <code>T</code> that +satisfies the requirements enumerated in the paragraph is itself a +valid type on which <code>valarray</code> may be instantiated +(Footnote 269 makes this clear). I.e., +<code>valarray<valarray<T> ></code> is valid as long as +<code>T</code> is valid. However, since implementations of +<code>valarray</code> are permitted to initialize storage allocated by +the class by invoking the default ctor of <code>T</code> followed by +the copy assignment operator, such implementations of +<code>valarray</code> wouldn't work with (perhaps user-defined) +specializations of <code>valarray</code> whose assignment operator had +undefined behavior when the size of its argument didn't match the size +of <code>*this</code>. By <i>"wouldn't work"</i> I mean that it would +be impossible to resize such an array of arrays by calling the +<code>resize()</code> member function on it if the function used the +copy assignment operator after constructing all elements using the +default ctor (e.g., by invoking <code>new value_type[N]</code>) to +obtain default-initialized storage) as it's permitted to do. + + </p> + <p> + +Stated more generally, the problem is that +<code>valarray<valarray<T> >::resize(size_t)</code> isn't +required or guaranteed to have well-defined semantics for every type +<code>T</code> that satisfies all requirements in +26.2 [numeric.requirements]. + + </p> + <p> + +I believe this problem was introduced by the adoption of the +resolution outlined in <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/1996/N0857.asc">N0857</a>, +<i>Assignment of valarrays</i>, from 1996. The copy assignment +operator of the original numerical array classes proposed in <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/1993/N0280.pdf">N0280</a>, +as well as the one proposed in <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/1993/N0308.asc">N0308</a> +(both from 1993), had well-defined semantics for arrays of unequal +size (the latter explicitly only when <code>*this</code> was empty; +assignment of non empty arrays of unequal size was a runtime error). + + </p> + <p> + +The justification for the change given in N0857 was the "loss of +performance [deemed] only significant for very simple operations on +small arrays or for architectures with very few registers." + + </p> + <p> + +Since tiny arrays on a limited subset of hardware architectures are +likely to be an exceedingly rare case (despite the continued +popularity of x86) I propose to revert the resolution and make the +behavior of all <code>valarray</code> assignment operators +well-defined even for non-conformal arrays (i.e., arrays of unequal +size). I have implemented this change and measured no significant +degradation in performance in the common case (non-empty arrays of +equal size). I have measured a 50% (and in some cases even greater) +speedup in the case of assignments to empty arrays versus calling +<code>resize()</code> first followed by an invocation of the copy +assignment operator. + + </p> + +<p><i>[ +Bellevue: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +If no proposed wording by June meeting, this issue should be closed NAD. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Move resolution 1 to Ready. +</p> +<p> +Howard: second resolution has been commented out (made invisible). +Can be brought back on demand. +</p> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + <p> + +Change 26.6.2.2 [valarray.assign], p1 as follows: + + </p> + <blockquote> + <p> + <code> + +valarray<T>& operator=(const valarray<T>&<ins> x</ins>); + + </code> + </p> + <p> + +-1- Each element of the <code>*this</code> array is assigned the value +of the corresponding element of the argument array. <del>The +resulting behavior is undefined if </del><ins>When </ins>the length of +the argument array is not equal to the length of the *this +array<del>.</del><ins> resizes <code>*this</code> to make the two +arrays the same length, as if by calling +<code>resize(x.size())</code>, before performing the assignment.</ins> + + </p> + </blockquote> + <p> + +And add a new paragraph just below paragraph 1 with the following +text: + + </p> + <blockquote> + <p> + +<ins>-2- <i>Postcondition</i>: <code>size() == x.size()</code>.</ins> + + </p> + </blockquote> + <p> + +Also add the following paragraph to 26.6.2.2 [valarray.assign], immediately after p4: + + </p> + <blockquote> + <p> + +<ins>-?- When the length, <i><code>N</code></i> of the array referred +to by the argument is not equal to the length of <code>*this</code>, +the operator resizes <code>*this</code> to make the two arrays the +same length, as if by calling <code>resize(<i>N</i>)</code>, before +performing the assignment.</ins> + + </p> + </blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +pre-Sophia Antipolis, Martin adds the following compromise wording, but +prefers the original proposed resolution: +]</i></p> + + + + + + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007): Gaby to propose wording for an alternative resolution in +which you can assign to a <tt>valarray</tt> of size 0, but not to any other +<tt>valarray</tt> whose size is unequal to the right hand side of the assignment. +]</i></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="634"></a>634. <tt>allocator.address()</tt> doesn't work for types overloading <tt>operator&</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.5.1 [allocator.members] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2007-02-07 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#allocator.members">issues</a> in [allocator.members].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#350">350</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p> +20.9.5.1 [allocator.members] says: +</p> +<blockquote> +<pre>pointer address(reference <i>x</i>) const;</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +-1- <i>Returns:</i> <tt>&<i>x</i></tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +20.9.5.1 [allocator.members] defines <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> which currently not +only defines the semantics of copy construction, but also restricts what an overloaded +<tt>operator&</tt> may do. I believe proposals are in the works (such as concepts +and rvalue reference) to decouple these two requirements. Indeed it is not evident +that we should disallow overloading <tt>operator&</tt> to return something other +than the address of <tt>*this</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +An example of when you want to overload <tt>operator&</tt> to return something +other than the object's address is proxy references such as <tt>vector<bool></tt> +(or its replacement, currently code-named <tt>bit_vector</tt>). Taking the address of +such a proxy reference should logically yield a proxy pointer, which when dereferenced, +yields a copy of the original proxy reference again. +</p> + +<p> +On the other hand, some code truly needs the address of an object, and not a proxy +(typically for determining the identity of an object compared to a reference object). +<a href="http://www.boost.org/">boost</a> has long recognized this dilemma and solved it with +<a href="http://www.boost.org/libs/utility/utility.htm#addressof"><tt>boost::addressof</tt></a>. +It appears to me that this would be useful functionality for the default allocator. Adopting +this definition for <tt>allocator::address</tt> would free the standard of requiring +anything special from types which overload <tt>operator&</tt>. Issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#580">580</a> +is expected to make use of <tt>allocator::address</tt> mandatory for containers. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 20.9.5.1 [allocator.members]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>pointer address(reference <i>x</i>) const;</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +-1- <i>Returns:</i> <del><tt>&<i>x</i></tt>.</del> <ins>The actual address of object referenced by <i>x</i>, +even in the presence of an overloaded <tt>operator&</tt>.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> + +<pre>const_pointer address(address(const_reference <i>x</i>) const;</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +-2- <i>Returns:</i> <del><tt>&<i>x</i></tt>.</del> <ins>The actual address of object referenced by <i>x</i>, +even in the presence of an overloaded <tt>operator&</tt>.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +post Oxford: This would be rendered NAD Editorial by acceptance of +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2257.html">N2257</a>. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007): The LWG adopted the proposed resolution of N2387 for this issue which +was subsequently split out into a separate paper N2436 for the purposes of voting. +The resolution in N2436 addresses this issue. The LWG voted to accelerate this +issue to Ready status to be voted into the WP at Kona. +]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="635"></a>635. domain of <tt>allocator::address</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.2.5 [allocator.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2007-02-08 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-20</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#allocator.requirements">issues</a> in [allocator.requirements].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The table of allocator requirements in 20.2.5 [allocator.requirements] describes +<tt>allocator::address</tt> as: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>a.address(r) +a.address(s) +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +where <tt>r</tt> and <tt>s</tt> are described as: +</p> +<blockquote><p> +a value of type <tt>X::reference</tt> obtained by the expression <tt>*p</tt>. +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +and <tt>p</tt> is +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +a value of type <tt>X::pointer</tt>, obtained by calling <tt>a1.allocate</tt>, +where <tt>a1 == a</tt> +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +This all implies that to get the address of some value of type <tt>T</tt> that +value must have been allocated by this allocator or a copy of it. +</p> + +<p> +However sometimes container code needs to compare the address of an external value of +type <tt>T</tt> with an internal value. For example <tt>list::remove(const T& t)</tt> +may want to compare the address of the external value <tt>t</tt> with that of a value +stored within the list. Similarly <tt>vector</tt> or <tt>deque insert</tt> may +want to make similar comparisons (to check for self-referencing calls). +</p> + +<p> +Mandating that <tt>allocator::address</tt> can only be called for values which the +allocator allocated seems overly restrictive. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +post San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Pablo recommends NAD Editorial, solved by +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2768.pdf">N2768</a>. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-04-28 Pablo adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Tentatively-ready NAD Editorial as fixed by +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2768.pdf">N2768</a>. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Fixed by N2768. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-28 Reopened by Alisdair. No longer solved by concepts. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<del>NAD Editorial</del><ins>Resolved</ins>. Addressed by +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2982.pdf">N2982</a>. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 20.2.5 [allocator.requirements]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<tt>r</tt> : a value of type <tt>X::reference</tt> <del>obtained by the expression *p</del>. +</p> +<p> +<tt>s</tt> : a value of type <tt>X::const_reference</tt> <del>obtained by the +expression <tt>*q</tt> or by conversion from a value <tt>r</tt></del>. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +post Oxford: This would be rendered NAD Editorial by acceptance of +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2257.html">N2257</a>. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007): This issue is section 8 of N2387. There was some discussion of it but +no resolution to this issue was recorded. Moved to Open. +]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="638"></a>638. deque end invalidation during erase</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.3.2.3 [deque.modifiers] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Steve LoBasso <b>Opened:</b> 2007-02-17 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The standard states at 23.3.2.3 [deque.modifiers]/4: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>deque erase(...) +</pre> + <p> +<i>Effects:</i> ... An erase at either end of the deque invalidates only +the iterators and the references to the erased elements. +</p> +</blockquote> +<p> +This does not state that iterators to end will be invalidated. +It needs to be amended in such a way as to account for end invalidation. +</p> +<p> +Something like: +</p> +<blockquote><p> +Any time the last element is erased, iterators to end are invalidated. +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +This would handle situations like: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>erase(begin(), end()) +erase(end() - 1) +pop_back() +resize(n, ...) where n < size() +pop_front() with size() == 1 + +</pre></blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Post Kona, Steve LoBasso notes: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +My only issue with the proposed resolution is that it might not be clear +that <tt>pop_front()</tt> [where <tt>size() == 1</tt>] can invalidate past-the-end +iterators. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 23.3.2.3 [deque.modifiers], p4: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>iterator erase(const_iterator position); +iterator erase(const_iterator first, const_iterator last); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-4- <i>Effects:</i> An erase in the middle of the <tt>deque</tt> +invalidates all the iterators and references to elements of the +<tt>deque</tt> <ins>and the past-the-end iterator</ins>. An erase at +either end of the <tt>deque</tt> invalidates only the iterators and the +references to the erased elements<ins>, except that erasing at the end +also invalidates the past-the-end iterator</ins>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007): Proposed wording added and moved to Review. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Bellevue: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Note that there is existing code that relies on iterators not being +invalidated, but there are also existing implementations that do +invalidate iterators. Thus, such code is not portable in any case. There +is a pop_front() note, which should possibly be a separate issue. Mike +Spertus to evaluate and, if need be, file an issue. +</blockquote> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="640"></a>640. 27.6.2.5.2 does not handle (unsigned) long long</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.2.6.2 [ostream.inserters.arithmetic] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2007-02-17 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#ostream.inserters.arithmetic">issues</a> in [ostream.inserters.arithmetic].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The arithmetic inserters are described in 27.7.2.6.2 [ostream.inserters.arithmetic]. +Although the section starts with a listing of the inserters including +the new ones: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>operator<<(long long val ); +operator<<(unsigned long long val ); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +the text in paragraph 1, which describes the corresponding effects +of the inserters, depending on the actual type of val, does not +handle the types <tt>long long</tt> and <tt>unsigned long long</tt>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Alisdair: In addition to the (unsigned) long long problem, that whole paragraph +misses any reference to extended integral types supplied by the +implementation - one of the additions by core a couple of working papers +back. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 27.7.2.6.2 [ostream.inserters.arithmetic]/1 change the third sentence +</p> + +<blockquote> +When val is of type <tt>bool</tt>, <tt>long</tt>, <tt>unsigned +long</tt>, <ins>long long, unsigned long long,</ins> <tt>double</tt>, +<tt>long double</tt>, or <tt>const void*</tt>, the formatting conversion +occurs as if it performed the following code fragment: +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="643"></a>643. Impossible "as if" clauses</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.9.1.1 [filebuf], 22.4.2.2.2 [facet.num.put.virtuals] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2007-02-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The current standard 14882:2003(E) as well as N2134 have the +following +defects: +</p> + +<p> +27.9.1.1 [filebuf]/5 says: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +In order to support file I/O and multibyte/wide character conversion, conversions are performed using members of a +facet, referred to as <tt><i>a_codecvt</i></tt> in following sections, obtained "as if" by +</p> +<blockquote><pre>codecvt<charT,char,typename traits::state_type> <i>a_codecvt</i> = + use_facet<codecvt<charT,char,typename traits::state_type> >(getloc()); +</pre></blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +<tt>use_facet</tt> returns a <tt>const facet</tt> reference and no facet is +copyconstructible, so the codecvt construction should fail to compile. +</p> + +<p> +A similar issue arises in 22.4.2.2.2 [facet.num.put.virtuals]/15 for <tt>num_punct</tt>. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 27.9.1.1 [filebuf]/5 change the "as if" code +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>const </ins>codecvt<charT,char,typename traits::state_type><ins>&</ins> <i>a_codecvt</i> = + use_facet<codecvt<charT,char,typename traits::state_type> >(getloc()); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +In 22.4.2.2.2 [facet.num.put.virtuals]/15 (This is para 5 in N2134) change +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +A local variable <tt><i>punct</i></tt> is initialized via +</p> +<blockquote><pre><ins>const </ins>numpunct<charT><ins>&</ins> <i>punct</i> = use_facet< numpunct<charT> >(<i>str</i>.getloc() )<ins>;</ins> +</pre></blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +(Please note also the additional provided trailing semicolon) +</p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="646"></a>646. const incorrect match_result members</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 28.10.5 [re.results.form] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2007-02-26 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +28.10.5 [re.results.form] (root and para 3) in N2134 defines the two function template +members format as non-const functions, although they are declared +as const in 28.10 [re.results]/3. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add the missing <tt>const</tt> specifier to both <tt>format</tt> overloads described +in section 28.10.5 [re.results.form]. +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="650"></a>650. regex_token_iterator and const correctness</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 28.12.2 [re.tokiter] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2007-03-05 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#re.tokiter">issues</a> in [re.tokiter].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Both the class definition of regex_token_iterator (28.12.2 [re.tokiter]/6) and the latter member specifications (28.12.2.2 [re.tokiter.comp]/1+2) declare both comparison operators as +non-const functions. Furtheron, both dereference operators are +unexpectedly also declared as non-const in 28.12.2 [re.tokiter]/6 +as well as in (28.12.2.3 [re.tokiter.deref]/1+2). +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +1) In (28.12.2 [re.tokiter]/6) change the current declarations +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>bool operator==(const regex_token_iterator&) <ins>const</ins>; +bool operator!=(const regex_token_iterator&) <ins>const</ins>; +const value_type& operator*() <ins>const</ins>; +const value_type* operator->() <ins>const</ins>; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +2) In 28.12.2.2 [re.tokiter.comp] change the following declarations +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>bool operator==(const regex_token_iterator& right) <ins>const</ins>; +bool operator!=(const regex_token_iterator& right) <ins>const</ins>; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +3) In 28.12.2.3 [re.tokiter.deref] change the following declarations +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>const value_type& operator*() <ins>const</ins>; +const value_type* operator->() <ins>const</ins>; +</pre></blockquote> + + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007): The LWG adopted the proposed resolution of N2409 for this issue (which +is to adopt the proposed wording in this issue). +The LWG voted to accelerate this issue to Ready status to be voted into the WP at Kona. +]</i></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="651"></a>651. Missing preconditions for regex_token_iterator c'tors</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 28.12.2.1 [re.tokiter.cnstr] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2007-03-05 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#re.tokiter.cnstr">issues</a> in [re.tokiter.cnstr].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The text provided in 28.12.2.1 [re.tokiter.cnstr]/2+3 describes +the effects of the three non-default constructors of class +template regex_token_iterator but is does not clarify which values +are legal values for submatch/submatches. This becomes +an issue, if one takes 28.12.2 [re.tokiter]/9 into account, which explains +the notion of a "current match" by saying: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +The <i>current match</i> is <tt>(*position).prefix()</tt> if <tt>subs[N] +== -1</tt>, or <tt>(*position)[subs[N]]</tt> for any other value of +<tt>subs[N]</tt>. +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +It's not clear to me, whether other negative values except -1 +are legal arguments or not - it seems they are not. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add the following precondition paragraph just before the current +28.12.2.1 [re.tokiter.cnstr]/2: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +<i>Requires:</i> Each of the initialization values of <tt>subs</tt> must be <tt>>= -1</tt>. +</p></blockquote> + + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007): The LWG adopted the proposed resolution of N2409 for this issue (which +is to adopt the proposed wording in this issue). +The LWG voted to accelerate this issue to Ready status to be voted into the WP at Kona. +]</i></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="652"></a>652. regex_iterator and const correctness</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 28.12.1 [re.regiter] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2007-03-05 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Both the class definition of regex_iterator (28.12.1 [re.regiter]/1) and the latter member specification (28.12.1.2 [re.regiter.comp]/1+2) declare both comparison operators as +non-const functions. Furtheron, both dereference operators are +unexpectedly also declared as non-const in 28.12.1 [re.regiter]/1 +as well as in (28.12.1.3 [re.regiter.deref]/1+2). +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +1) In (28.12.1 [re.regiter]/1) change the current declarations +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>bool operator==(const regex_iterator&) <ins>const</ins>; +bool operator!=(const regex_iterator&) <ins>const</ins>; +const value_type& operator*() <ins>const</ins>; +const value_type* operator->() <ins>const</ins>; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +2) In 28.12.1.3 [re.regiter.deref] change the following declarations +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>const value_type& operator*() <ins>const</ins>; +const value_type* operator->() <ins>const</ins>; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +3) In 28.12.1.2 [re.regiter.comp] change the following declarations +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>bool operator==(const regex_iterator& right) <ins>const</ins>; +bool operator!=(const regex_iterator& right) <ins>const</ins>; +</pre></blockquote> + + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007): The LWG adopted the proposed resolution of N2409 for this issue (which +is to adopt the proposed wording in this issue). +The LWG voted to accelerate this issue to Ready status to be voted into the WP at Kona. +]</i></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="654"></a>654. Missing IO roundtrip for random number engines</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.1.4 [rand.req.eng] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2007-03-08 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#rand.req.eng">issues</a> in [rand.req.eng].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Table 98 and para 5 in 26.5.1.4 [rand.req.eng] specify +the IO insertion and extraction semantic of random +number engines. It can be shown, v.i., that the specification +of the extractor cannot guarantee to fulfill the requirement +from para 5: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +If a textual representation written via os << x was +subsequently read via is >> v, then x == v provided that +there have been no intervening invocations of x or of v. +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +The problem is, that the extraction process described in +table 98 misses to specify that it will initially set the +if.fmtflags to ios_base::dec, see table 104: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +dec: converts integer input or generates integer output +in decimal base +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +Proof: The following small program demonstrates the violation +of requirements (exception safety not fulfilled): +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>#include <cassert> +#include <ostream> +#include <iostream> +#include <iomanip> +#include <sstream> + +class RanNumEngine { + int state; +public: + RanNumEngine() : state(42) {} + + bool operator==(RanNumEngine other) const { + return state == other.state; + } + + template <typename Ch, typename Tr> + friend std::basic_ostream<Ch, Tr>& operator<<(std::basic_ostream<Ch, Tr>& os, RanNumEngine engine) { + Ch old = os.fill(os.widen(' ')); // Sets space character + std::ios_base::fmtflags f = os.flags(); + os << std::dec << std::left << engine.state; // Adds ios_base::dec|ios_base::left + os.fill(old); // Undo + os.flags(f); + return os; + } + + template <typename Ch, typename Tr> + friend std::basic_istream<Ch, Tr>& operator>>(std::basic_istream<Ch, Tr>& is, RanNumEngine& engine) { + // Uncomment only for the fix. + + //std::ios_base::fmtflags f = is.flags(); + //is >> std::dec; + is >> engine.state; + //is.flags(f); + return is; + } +}; + +int main() { + std::stringstream s; + s << std::setfill('#'); // No problem + s << std::oct; // Yikes! + // Here starts para 5 requirements: + RanNumEngine x; + s << x; + RanNumEngine v; + s >> v; + assert(x == v); // Fails: 42 == 34 +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +A second, minor issue seems to be, that the insertion +description from table 98 unnecessarily requires the +addition of ios_base::fixed (which only influences floating-point +numbers). Its not entirely clear to me whether the proposed +standard does require that the state of random number engines +is stored in integral types or not, but I have the impression +that this is the indent, see e.g. p. 3 +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +The specification of each random number engine defines the +size of its state in multiples of the size of its result_type. +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +If other types than integrals are supported, then I wonder why +no requirements are specified for the precision of the stream. +</p> + +<p> +See <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2391.pdf">N2391</a> and +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2423.pdf">N2423</a> +for some further discussion. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Adopt the proposed resolution in +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2423.pdf">N2423</a>. +</p> + + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007): The LWG adopted the proposed resolution of N2423 for this issue. +The LWG voted to accelerate this issue to Ready status to be voted into the WP at Kona. +]</i></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="655"></a>655. Signature of generate_canonical not useful</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.7.2 [rand.util.canonical] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2007-03-08 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#rand.util.canonical">issues</a> in [rand.util.canonical].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In 26.5.2 [rand.synopsis] we have the declaration +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class RealType, class UniformRandomNumberGenerator, + size_t bits> +result_type generate_canonical(UniformRandomNumberGenerator& g); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Besides the "result_type" issue (already recognized by Bo Persson +at Sun, 11 Feb 2007 05:26:47 GMT in this group) it's clear, that +the template parameter order is not reasonably choosen: Obviously +one always needs to specify all three parameters, although usually +only two are required, namely the result type RealType and the +wanted bits, because UniformRandomNumberGenerator can usually +be deduced. +</p> + +<p> +See <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2391.pdf">N2391</a> and +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2423.pdf">N2423</a> +for some further discussion. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Adopt the proposed resolution in +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2423.pdf">N2423</a>. +</p> + + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007): The LWG adopted the proposed resolution of N2423 for this issue. +The LWG voted to accelerate this issue to Ready status to be voted into the WP at Kona. +]</i></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="658"></a>658. Two unspecified function comparators in [function.objects]</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8 [function.objects] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2007-03-19 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-19</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#function.objects">issues</a> in [function.objects].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The header <tt><functional></tt> synopsis in 20.8 [function.objects] +contains the following two free comparison operator templates +for the <tt>function</tt> class template +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class Function1, class Function2> +void operator==(const function<Function1>&, const function<Function2>&); +template<class Function1, class Function2> +void operator!=(const function<Function1>&, const function<Function2>&); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +which are nowhere described. I assume that they are relicts before the +corresponding two private and undefined member templates in the function +template (see 20.8.14.2 [func.wrap.func] and [func.wrap.func.undef]) have been introduced. The original free +function templates should be removed, because using an undefined entity +would lead to an ODR violation of the user. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Remove the above mentioned two function templates from +the header <tt><functional></tt> synopsis (20.8 [function.objects]) +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>template<class Function1, class Function2> +void operator==(const function<Function1>&, const function<Function2>&); +template<class Function1, class Function2> +void operator!=(const function<Function1>&, const function<Function2>&);</del> +</pre></blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +Fixed by +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2292.html">N2292</a> +Standard Library Applications for Deleted Functions. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="659"></a>659. istreambuf_iterator should have an operator->()</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 24.6.3 [istreambuf.iterator] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Niels Dekker <b>Opened:</b> 2007-03-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#istreambuf.iterator">issues</a> in [istreambuf.iterator].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Greg Herlihy has clearly demonstrated that a user defined input +iterator should have an operator->(), even if its +value type is a built-in type (comp.std.c++, "Re: Should any iterator +have an operator->() in C++0x?", March 2007). And as Howard +Hinnant remarked in the same thread that the input iterator +<tt>istreambuf_iterator</tt> doesn't have one, this must be a +defect! +</p> +<p> +Based on Greg's example, the following code demonstrates the issue: +</p><pre> #include <iostream> + #include <fstream> + #include <streambuf> + + typedef char C; + int main () + { + std::ifstream s("filename", std::ios::in); + std::istreambuf_iterator<char> i(s); + + (*i).~C(); // This is well-formed... + i->~C(); // ... so this should be supported! + } +</pre> +<p></p> +<p> +Of course, operator-> is also needed when the value_type of +istreambuf_iterator is a class. +</p> +<p> +The operator-> could be implemented in various ways. For instance, +by storing the current value inside the iterator, and returning its +address. Or by returning a proxy, like operator_arrow_proxy, from +<a href="http://www.boost.org/boost/iterator/iterator_facade.hpp">http://www.boost.org/boost/iterator/iterator_facade.hpp</a> +</p> +<p> +I hope that the resolution of this issue will contribute to getting a +clear and consistent definition of iterator concepts. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007): The proposed resolution is inconsistent because the return +type of <tt>istreambuf_iterator::operator->()</tt> is specified to be <tt>pointer</tt>, +but the proposed text also states that "<tt>operator-></tt> may return a proxy." +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Niels Dekker (mailed to Howard Hinnant): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +The proposed resolution does +not seem inconsistent to me. <tt>istreambuf_iterator::operator->()</tt> should +have <tt>istreambuf_iterator::pointer</tt> as return type, and this return type +may in fact be a proxy. +</p> +<p> +AFAIK, the resolution of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#445">445</a> ("<tt>iterator_traits::reference</tt> +unspecified for some iterator categories") implies that for any iterator +class <tt>Iter</tt>, the return type of <tt>operator->()</tt> is <tt>Iter::pointer</tt>, by +definition. I don't think <tt>Iter::pointer</tt> needs to be a raw pointer. +</p> +<p> +Still I wouldn't mind if the text "<tt>operator-></tt> may return a proxy" would +be removed from the resolution. I think it's up to the library +implementation, how to implement <tt>istreambuf_iterator::operator->()</tt>. As +longs as it behaves as expected: <tt>i->m</tt> should have the same effect as +<tt>(*i).m</tt>. Even for an explicit destructor call, <tt>i->~C()</tt>. The main issue +is just: <tt>istreambuf_iterator</tt> should have an <tt>operator->()</tt>! +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-04-30 Alisdair adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Note that operator-> is now a requirement in the <tt>InputIterator</tt> concept, so +this issue cannot be ignored or existing valid programs will break when +compiled with an 0x library. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-29 Alisdair adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I agree with the observation that in principle the type 'pointer' may be a +proxy, and the words highlighting this are redundant. +</p> +<p> +However, in the current draught <tt>pointer</tt> is required to be exactly '<tt>charT *</tt>' +by the derivation from <tt>std::iterator</tt>. At a minimum, the 4th parameter of +this base class template should become unspecified. That permits the +introduction of a proxy as a nested class in some further undocumented (not +even exposition-only) base. +</p> +<p> +It also permits the <tt>istream_iterator</tt> approach where the cached value is +stored in the iterator itself, and the iterator serves as its own proxy for +post-increment <tt>operator++</tt> - removing the need for the existing +exposition-only nested class <tt>proxy</tt>. +</p> +<p> +Note that the current <tt>proxy</tt> class also has exactly the right properties to +serve as the pointer <tt>proxy</tt> too. This is likely to be a common case where an +<tt>InputIterator</tt> does not hold internal state but delegates to another class. +</p> +<p> +Proposed Resolution: +</p> +<p> +In addition to the current proposal: +</p> +<p> +24.6.3 [istreambuf.iterator] +</p> +<blockquote><pre>template<class charT, class traits = char_traits<charT> > +class istreambuf_iterator + : public iterator<input_iterator_tag, charT, + typename traits::off_type, <del>charT*</del> <ins><i>unspecified</i></ins>, charT> { +</pre></blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Move the additional part into the proposed resolution, and wrap the +descriptive text in a Note. +</p> +<p><i>[Howard: done.]</i></p> + +<p> +Move to Ready. +</p> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add to the synopsis in 24.6.3 [istreambuf.iterator]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>charT operator*() const; +<ins>pointer operator->() const;</ins> +istreambuf_iterator<charT,traits>& operator++(); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +24.6.3 [istreambuf.iterator] +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class charT, class traits = char_traits<charT> > +class istreambuf_iterator + : public iterator<input_iterator_tag, charT, + typename traits::off_type, <del>charT*</del> <ins><i>unspecified</i></ins>, charT> { +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Change 24.6.3 [istreambuf.iterator], p1: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +The class template <tt>istreambuf_iterator</tt> reads successive +characters from the <tt>streambuf</tt> for which it was constructed. +<tt>operator*</tt> provides access to the current input character, if +any. <ins>[<i>Note:</i> <tt>operator-></tt> may return a proxy. — +<i>end note</i>]</ins> Each time +<tt>operator++</tt> is evaluated, the iterator advances to the next +input character. If the end of stream is reached +(<tt>streambuf_type::sgetc()</tt> returns <tt>traits::eof()</tt>), the +iterator becomes equal to the end of stream iterator value. The default +constructor <tt>istreambuf_iterator()</tt> and the constructor +<tt>istreambuf_iterator(0)</tt> both construct an end of stream iterator +object suitable for use as an end-of-range. +</p></blockquote> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="660"></a>660. Missing Bitwise Operations</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8 [function.objects] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Beman Dawes <b>Opened:</b> 2007-04-02 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#function.objects">issues</a> in [function.objects].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Section 20.8 [function.objects] provides <span id="st" name="st" class="st">function</span> +<span id="st" name="st" class="st">objects</span> for some unary and binary +operations, but others are missing. In a LWG reflector discussion, beginning +with c++std-lib-18078, pros and cons of adding some of the missing operations +were discussed. Bjarne Stroustrup commented "Why standardize what isn't used? +Yes, I see the chicken and egg problems here, but it would be nice to see a +couple of genuine uses before making additions."</p> +<p>A number of libraries, including Rogue Wave, GNU, Adobe ASL, and Boost, have +already added these functions, either publicly or for internal use. For example, +Doug Gregor commented: "Boost will also add ... (|, &, ^) in 1.35.0, because we +need those <span id="st" name="st" class="st">function</span> +<span id="st" name="st" class="st">objects</span> to represent various parallel +collective operations (reductions, prefix reductions, etc.) in the new Message +Passing Interface (MPI) library."</p> +<p>Because the bitwise operators have the strongest use cases, the proposed +resolution is limited to them.</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>To 20.8 [function.objects], Function objects, paragraph 2, add to the header +<functional> synopsis:</p> +<blockquote> + <pre>template <class T> struct bit_and; +template <class T> struct bit_or; +template <class T> struct bit_xor;</pre> +</blockquote> +<p>At a location in clause 20 to be determined by the Project Editor, add:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>The library provides basic function object classes for all of the bitwise + operators in the language ([expr.bit.and], [expr.or], [exp.xor]).</p> + <pre>template <class T> struct bit_and : binary_function<T,T,T> { + T operator()(const T& x , const T& y ) const; +};</pre> + <blockquote> + <p><code>operator()</code> returns<code> x & y</code> .</p> + </blockquote> + <pre>template <class T> struct bit_or : binary_function<T,T,T> { + T operator()(const T& x , const T& y ) const; +};</pre> + <blockquote> + <p><code>operator()</code> returns <code>x | y</code> .</p> + </blockquote> + <pre>template <class T> struct bit_xor : binary_function<T,T,T> { + T operator()(const T& x , const T& y ) const; +};</pre> + <blockquote> + <p><code>operator()</code> returns <code>x ^ y</code> .</p> + </blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="661"></a>661. New 27.6.1.2.2 changes make special extractions useless</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.1.2.2 [istream.formatted.arithmetic] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2007-04-01 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#istream.formatted.arithmetic">issues</a> in [istream.formatted.arithmetic].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +To the more drastic changes of 27.7.1.2.2 [istream.formatted.arithmetic] in the current draft N2134 belong +the explicit description of the extraction of the types short and int in +terms of as-if code fragments. +</p> + +<ol> +<li> +The corresponding as-if extractions in paragraph 2 and 3 will never +result in a change of the operator>> argument val, because the +contents of the local variable lval is in no case written into val. +Furtheron both fragments need a currently missing parentheses in the +beginning of the if-statement to be valid C++. +</li> +<li> +I would like to ask whether the omission of a similar explicit +extraction of unsigned short and unsigned int in terms of long - +compared to their corresponding new insertions, as described in 27.7.2.6.2 [ostream.inserters.arithmetic], is a deliberate decision or an +oversight. +</li> +</ol> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<ol> +<li> +<p> +In 27.7.1.2.2 [istream.formatted.arithmetic]/2 change the current as-if code fragment +</p> +<blockquote><pre>typedef num_get<charT,istreambuf_iterator<charT,traits> > numget; +iostate err = 0; +long lval; +use_facet<numget>(loc).get(*this, 0, *this, err, lval ); +if (err == 0) <ins>{</ins> + <del>&&</del> <ins>if</ins> (lval < numeric_limits<short>::min() || numeric_limits<short>::max() < lval)<del>)</del> + err = ios_base::failbit; + <ins>else + val = static_cast<short>(lval); +}</ins> +setstate(err); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Similarily in 27.7.1.2.2 [istream.formatted.arithmetic]/3 change the current as-if fragment +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>typedef num_get<charT,istreambuf_iterator<charT,traits> > numget; +iostate err = 0; +long lval; +use_facet<numget>(loc).get(*this, 0, *this, err, lval ); +if (err == 0) <ins>{</ins> + <del>&&</del> <ins>if</ins> (lval < numeric_limits<int>::min() || numeric_limits<int>::max() < lval)<del>)</del> + err = ios_base::failbit; + <ins>else + val = static_cast<int>(lval); +}</ins> +setstate(err); +</pre></blockquote> +</li> +<li> +--- +</li> +</ol> + + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007): Note to the editor: the name lval in the call to <tt>use_facet</tt> +is incorrectly italicized in the code fragments corresponding to +<tt>operator>>(short &)</tt> and <tt>operator >>(int &)</tt>. Also, val -- which appears +twice on the line with the <tt>static_cast</tt> in the proposed resolution -- +should be italicized. Also, in response to part two of the issue: this +is deliberate. +]</i></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="664"></a>664. <tt>do_unshift</tt> for <tt>codecvt<char, char, mbstate_t></tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.1.4.2 [locale.codecvt.virtuals] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Thomas Plum <b>Opened:</b> 2007-04-16 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#locale.codecvt.virtuals">issues</a> in [locale.codecvt.virtuals].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +22.4.1.4.2 [locale.codecvt.virtuals], para 7 says (regarding <tt>do_unshift</tt>): +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +<i>Effects:</i> Places characters starting at to that should be appended to +terminate a sequence when the current <tt>stateT</tt> is given by +<tt><i>state</i></tt>.<sup>237)</sup> Stores no more than <tt>(<i>to_limit</i> - +<i>to</i>)</tt> destination elements, and leaves the <tt><i>to_next</i></tt> +pointer pointing one beyond the last element successfully stored. +<em><tt>codecvt<char, char, mbstate_t></tt> stores no characters.</em> +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +The following objection has been raised: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +Since the C++ Standard permits a nontrivial conversion for the required +instantiations of <tt>codecvt</tt>, it is overly restrictive to say that +<tt>do_unshift</tt> must store no characters and return <tt>noconv</tt>. +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +[Plum ref _222152Y50] +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 22.4.1.4.2 [locale.codecvt.virtuals], p7: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Places characters starting at <i>to</i> that should be +appended to terminate a sequence when the current <tt>stateT</tt> is +given by state.<sup>237)</sup> Stores no more than (<i>to_limit -to</i>) +destination elements, and leaves the <i>to_next</i> pointer pointing one +beyond the last element successfully stored. <del><tt>codecvt<char, char, +mbstate_t></tt> stores no characters.</del> +</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="665"></a>665. <tt>do_unshift</tt> return value</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.1.4.2 [locale.codecvt.virtuals] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Thomas Plum <b>Opened:</b> 2007-04-16 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#locale.codecvt.virtuals">issues</a> in [locale.codecvt.virtuals].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +22.4.1.4.2 [locale.codecvt.virtuals], para 8 says: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +<tt>codecvt<char,char,mbstate_t></tt>, returns <tt>noconv</tt>. +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +The following objection has been raised: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +Despite what the C++ Standard +says, <tt>unshift</tt> can't always return <tt>noconv</tt> for the default facets, since +they can be nontrivial. At least one implementation does whatever the +C functions do. +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +[Plum ref _222152Y62] +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 22.4.1.4.2 [locale.codecvt.virtuals], p8: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p><i>Returns:</i> An enumeration value, as summarized in Table 76:</p> +<p>...</p> +<p> +<del><tt>codecvt<char,char,mbstate_t></tt>, returns <tt>noconv</tt>.</del> +</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="666"></a>666. <tt>moneypunct::do_curr_symbol()</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.6.3.2 [locale.moneypunct.virtuals] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Thomas Plum <b>Opened:</b> 2007-04-16 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#locale.moneypunct.virtuals">issues</a> in [locale.moneypunct.virtuals].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +22.4.6.3.2 [locale.moneypunct.virtuals], para 4 footnote 257 says +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +<sup>257)</sup> For international +specializations (second template parameter <tt>true</tt>) this is always four +characters long, usually three letters and a space. +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +The following objection has been raised: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +The international currency +symbol is whatever the underlying locale says it is, not necessarily +four characters long. +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +[Plum ref _222632Y41] +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change footnote 253 in 22.4.6.3.2 [locale.moneypunct.virtuals]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<sup>253)</sup> For international specializations (second template +parameter <tt>true</tt>) this is <del>always</del> <ins>typically</ins> +four characters long, usually three letters and a space. +</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="671"></a>671. precision of hexfloat</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.2.2.2 [facet.num.put.virtuals] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> John Salmon <b>Opened:</b> 2007-04-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#facet.num.put.virtuals">issues</a> in [facet.num.put.virtuals].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +I am trying to understand how TR1 supports hex float (%a) output. +</p> +<p> +As far as I can tell, it does so via the following: +</p> +<p> +8.15 Additions to header <locale> [tr.c99.locale] +</p> +<p> +In subclause 22.4.2.2.2 [facet.num.put.virtuals], Table 58 Floating-point conversions, after +the line: +floatfield == ios_base::scientific %E +</p> +<p> +add the two lines: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>floatfield == ios_base::fixed | ios_base::scientific && !uppercase %a +floatfield == ios_base::fixed | ios_base::scientific %A 2 +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +[Note: The additional requirements on print and scan functions, later +in this clause, ensure that the print functions generate hexadecimal +floating-point fields with a %a or %A conversion specifier, and that +the scan functions match hexadecimal floating-point fields with a %g +conversion specifier. end note] +</p> +<p> +Following the thread, in 22.4.2.2.2 [facet.num.put.virtuals], we find: +</p> +<p> +For conversion from a floating-point type, if (flags & fixed) != 0 or +if str.precision() > 0, then str.precision() is specified in the +conversion specification. +</p> +<p> +This would seem to imply that when floatfield == fixed|scientific, the +precision of the conversion specifier is to be taken from +str.precision(). Is this really what's intended? I sincerely hope +that I'm either missing something or this is an oversight. Please +tell me that the committee did not intend to mandate that hex floats +(and doubles) should by default be printed as if by %.6a. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Howard: I think the fundamental issue we overlooked was that with %f, +%e, %g, the default precision was always 6. With %a the default +precision is not 6, it is infinity. So for the first time, we need to +distinguish between the default value of precision, and the precision +value 6. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Leave this open for Robert and Daniel to work on. +</p> +<p> +Straw poll: Disposition? +</p> +<ul> +<li>Default is %.6a (i.e. NAD): 2</li> +<li>Always %a (no precision): 6</li> +<li>precision(-1) == %a: 3</li> +</ul> +<p> +Daniel and Robert have direction to write up wording for the "always %a" solution. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-15 Robert provided wording. +]</i></p> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 22.4.2.2.2 [facet.num.put.virtuals], Stage 1, under p5 (near the end +of Stage 1): +</p> + +<blockquote> +For conversion from a floating-point type, <tt>str.precision()</tt> is specified +<ins>as precision</ins> in the conversion specification +<ins>if <tt>floatfield != (ios_base::fixed | ios_base::scientific)</tt>, else no +precision is specified</ins>. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007): Robert volunteers to propose wording. +]</i></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="672"></a>672. Swappable requirements need updating</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.2.1 [utility.arg.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2007-05-04 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#utility.arg.requirements">issues</a> in [utility.arg.requirements].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The current <tt>Swappable</tt> is: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 37: <tt>Swappable</tt> requirements <b>[swappable]</b></caption> +<tbody><tr><th>expression</th><th>return type</th><th>post-condition</th></tr> +<tr><td><tt>swap(s,t)</tt></td><td><tt>void</tt></td><td><tt>t</tt> has the value originally held by <tt>u</tt>, and <tt>u</tt> has the value originally +held by <tt>t</tt></td></tr> +<tr><td colspan="3"> +<p> +The Swappable requirement is met by satisfying one or more of the following conditions: +</p> +<ul> +<li> +<tt>T</tt> is Swappable if <tt>T</tt> satisfies the <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> requirements (Table 34) +and the <tt>CopyAssignable</tt> requirements (Table 36); +</li> +<li> +<tt>T</tt> is Swappable if a namespace scope function named <tt>swap</tt> exists in the same +namespace as the definition of <tt>T</tt>, such that the expression <tt>swap(t,u)</tt> is valid +and has the semantics described in this table. +</li> +</ul> +</td></tr> +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + +<p> +With the passage of rvalue reference into the language, <tt>Swappable</tt> needs to be updated to +require only <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> and <tt>MoveAssignable</tt>. This is a minimum. +</p> + +<p> +Additionally we may want to support proxy references such that the following code is acceptable: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>namespace Mine { + +template <class T> +struct proxy {...}; + +template <class T> +struct proxied_iterator +{ + typedef T value_type; + typedef proxy<T> reference; + reference operator*() const; + ... +}; + +struct A +{ + // heavy type, has an optimized swap, maybe isn't even copyable or movable, just swappable + void swap(A&); + ... +}; + +void swap(A&, A&); +void swap(proxy<A>, A&); +void swap(A&, proxy<A>); +void swap(proxy<A>, proxy<A>); + +} // Mine + +... + +Mine::proxied_iterator<Mine::A> i(...) +Mine::A a; +swap(*i1, a); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +I.e. here is a call to <tt>swap</tt> which the user enables swapping between a proxy to a class and the class +itself. We do not need to anything in terms of implementation except not block their way with overly +constrained concepts. That is, the <tt>Swappable</tt> concept should be expanded to allow swapping +between two different types for the case that one is binding to a user-defined <tt>swap</tt>. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +Change 20.2.1 [utility.arg.requirements]: +</p> + +<blockquote> + +<p> +-1- The template definitions in the C++ Standard Library refer to various +named requirements whose details are set out in tables 31-38. In these +tables, <tt>T</tt> is a type to be supplied by a C++ program +instantiating a template; <tt>a</tt>, <tt>b</tt>, and <tt>c</tt> are +values of type <tt>const T</tt>; <tt>s</tt> and <tt>t</tt> are modifiable +lvalues of type <tt>T</tt>; <tt>u</tt> is a value of type (possibly +<tt>const</tt>) <tt>T</tt>; and <tt>rv</tt> is a non-<tt>const</tt> +rvalue of type <tt>T</tt>. +</p> + +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 37: <tt>Swappable</tt> requirements <b>[swappable]</b></caption> +<tbody><tr><th>expression</th><th>return type</th><th>post-condition</th></tr> +<tr><td><tt>swap(s,t)</tt></td><td><tt>void</tt></td> +<td><tt>t</tt> has the value originally +held by <tt>u</tt>, and +<tt>u</tt> has the value originally held +by <tt>t</tt></td></tr> +<tr><td colspan="3"> +<p> +The <tt>Swappable</tt> requirement is met by satisfying one or more of the following conditions: +</p> +<ul> +<li> +<tt>T</tt> is <tt>Swappable</tt> if <tt>T</tt> satisfies the +<del><tt>CopyConstructible</tt></del> <ins>MoveConstructible</ins> +requirements (Table <del>34</del> <ins>33</ins>) and the <del><tt>CopyAssignable</tt></del> <ins>MoveAssignable</ins> +requirements (Table <del>36</del> <ins>35</ins>); +</li> +<li> +<tt>T</tt> is <tt>Swappable</tt> if a namespace scope function named +<tt>swap</tt> exists in the same namespace as the definition of +<tt>T</tt>, such that the expression +<tt>swap(t,u)</tt> is valid and has the +semantics described in this table. +</li> +</ul> +</td></tr> +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007): We like the change to the <tt>Swappable</tt> requirements to use +move semantics. The issue relating to the support of proxies is +separable from the one relating to move semantics, and it's bigger than +just swap. We'd like to address only the move semantics changes under +this issue, and open a separated issue (<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#742">742</a>) to handle proxies. Also, there +may be a third issue, in that the current definition of <tt>Swappable</tt> does +not permit rvalues to be operands to a swap operation, and Howard's +proposed resolution would allow the right-most operand to be an rvalue, +but it would not allow the left-most operand to be an rvalue (some swap +functions in the library have been overloaded to permit left operands to +swap to be rvalues). +]</i></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="673"></a>673. <tt>unique_ptr</tt> update</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.9 [unique.ptr] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2007-05-04 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#unique.ptr">issues</a> in [unique.ptr].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Since the publication of +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2005/n1856.html">N1856</a> +there have been a few small but significant advances which should be included into +<tt>unique_ptr</tt>. There exists a +<a href="http://home.twcny.rr.com/hinnant/cpp_extensions/unique_ptr.html">example implmenation</a> +for all of these changes. +</p> + +<ul> + +<li> +<p> +Even though <tt>unique_ptr<void></tt> is not a valid use case (unlike for <tt>shared_ptr<void></tt>), +unexpected cases to crop up which require the instantiation of the interface of <tt>unique_ptr<void></tt> +even if it is never used. For example see +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#541">LWG 541</a> for how this accidently +happened to <tt>auto_ptr</tt>. I believe the most robust way to protect <tt>unique_ptr</tt> against this +type of failure is to augment the return type of <tt>unique_ptr<T>:operator*()</tt> with +<tt>add_lvalue_reference<T>::type</tt>. This means that given an instantiated <tt>unique_ptr<void></tt> +the act of dereferencing it will simply return <tt>void</tt> instead of causing a compile time failure. +This is simpler than creating a <tt>unique_ptr<void></tt> specialization which isn't robust in the +face of <tt><i>cv-</i></tt>qualified <tt>void</tt> types. +</p> + +<p> +This resolution also supports instantiations such as <tt>unique_ptr<void, free_deleter></tt> +which could be very useful to the client. +</p> + +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Efforts have been made to better support containers and smart pointers in shared +memory contexts. One of the key hurdles in such support is not assuming that a +pointer type is actually a <tt>T*</tt>. This can easily be accomplished +for <tt>unique_ptr</tt> by having the deleter define the pointer type: +<tt>D::pointer</tt>. Furthermore this type can easily be defaulted to +<tt>T*</tt> should the deleter <tt>D</tt> choose not to define a pointer +type (example implementation +<a href="http://home.twcny.rr.com/hinnant/cpp_extensions/unique_ptr.html">here</a>). +This change has no run time overhead. It has no interface overhead on +authors of custom delter types. It simply allows (but not requires) +authors of custom deleter types to define a smart pointer for the +storage type of <tt>unique_ptr</tt> if they find such functionality +useful. <tt>std::default_delete</tt> is an example of a deleter which +defaults <tt>pointer</tt> to <tt>T*</tt> by simply ignoring this issue +and not including a <tt>pointer typedef</tt>. +</p> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +When the deleter type is a function pointer then it is unsafe to construct +a <tt>unique_ptr</tt> without specifying the function pointer in the constructor. +This case is easy to check for with a <tt>static_assert</tt> assuring that the +deleter is not a pointer type in those constructors which do not accept deleters. +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>unique_ptr<A, void(*)(void*)> p(new A); // error, no function given to delete the pointer! +</pre></blockquote> + +</li> + +</ul> + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007): We don't like the solution given to the first bullet in +light of concepts. The second bullet solves the problem of supporting +fancy pointers for one library component only. The full LWG needs to +decide whether to solve the problem of supporting fancy pointers +piecemeal, or whether a paper addressing the whole library is needed. We +think that the third bullet is correct. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Post Kona: Howard adds example user code related to the first bullet: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<pre>void legacy_code(void*, std::size_t); + +void foo(std::size_t N) +{ + std::unique_ptr<void, void(*)(void*)> ptr(std::malloc(N), std::free); + legacy_code(ptr.get(), N); +} // unique_ptr used for exception safety purposes +</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p> +I.e. <tt>unique_ptr<void></tt> <i>is</i> a useful tool that we don't want +to disable with concepts. The only part of <tt>unique_ptr<void></tt> we +want to disable (with concepts or by other means) are the two member functions: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>T& operator*() const; +T* operator->() const; +</pre></blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p><i>[ +I am grateful for the generous aid of Peter Dimov and Ion Gaztańaga in helping formulate and review +the proposed resolutions below. +]</i></p> + + +<ul> +<li> + +<p> +Change 20.9.9.2 [unique.ptr.single]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T, class D = default_delete<T>> class unique_ptr { + ... + <del>T&</del> <ins>typename add_lvalue_reference<T>::type</ins> operator*() const; + ... +}; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Change 20.9.9.2.4 [unique.ptr.single.observers]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>T&</del> <ins>typename add_lvalue_reference<T>::type</ins> operator*() const; +</pre></blockquote> + +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.9.9.2 [unique.ptr.single]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T, class D = default_delete<T>> class unique_ptr { +public: + <ins>typedef <i>implementation (see description below)</i> pointer;</ins> + ... + explicit unique_ptr(<del>T*</del> <ins>pointer</ins> p); + ... + unique_ptr(<del>T*</del> <ins>pointer</ins> p, <i>implementation defined (see description below)</i> d); + unique_ptr(<del>T*</del> <ins>pointer</ins> p, <i>implementation defined (see description below)</i> d); + ... + <del>T*</del> <ins>pointer</ins> operator->() const; + <del>T*</del> <ins>pointer</ins> get() const; + ... + <del>T*</del> <ins>pointer</ins> release(); + void reset(<del>T*</del> <ins>pointer</ins> p = <del>0</del> <ins>pointer()</ins>); +}; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +<ins> +-3- If the type <tt>remove_reference<D>::type::pointer</tt> +exists, then <tt>unique_ptr<T, D>::pointer</tt> is a typedef to +<tt>remove_reference<D>::type::pointer</tt>. Otherwise +<tt>unique_ptr<T, D>::pointer</tt> is a typedef to <tt>T*</tt>. +The type <tt>unique_ptr<T, D>::pointer</tt> shall be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> +and <tt>CopyAssignable</tt>. +</ins> +</p> + +<p> +Change 20.9.9.2.1 [unique.ptr.single.ctor]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>unique_ptr(<del>T*</del> <ins>pointer</ins> p); +... +unique_ptr(<del>T*</del> <ins>pointer</ins> p, <i>implementation defined</i> d); +unique_ptr(<del>T*</del> <ins>pointer</ins> p, <i>implementation defined</i> d); +... +unique_ptr(<del>T*</del> <ins>pointer</ins> p, const A& d); +unique_ptr(<del>T*</del> <ins>pointer</ins> p, A&& d); +... +unique_ptr(<del>T*</del> <ins>pointer</ins> p, A& d); +unique_ptr(<del>T*</del> <ins>pointer</ins> p, A&& d); +... +unique_ptr(<del>T*</del> <ins>pointer</ins> p, const A& d); +unique_ptr(<del>T*</del> <ins>pointer</ins> p, const A&& d); +... +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +-23- <i>Requires:</i> If <tt>D</tt> is not a reference type, +construction of the deleter <tt>D</tt> from an rvalue of type <tt>E</tt> +<del>must</del> <ins>shall</ins> be well formed and not throw an exception. If <tt>D</tt> is a +reference type, then <tt>E</tt> <del>must</del> <ins>shall</ins> be the same type as <tt>D</tt> +(diagnostic required). <del><tt>U*</tt></del> <ins><tt>unique_ptr<U,E>::pointer</tt></ins> +<del>must</del> <ins>shall</ins> be implicitly convertible to <del><tt>T*</tt></del> +<ins>pointer</ins>. +</p> + +<p> +-25- <i>Postconditions:</i> <tt>get() == value u.get()</tt> had before +the construction, modulo any required offset adjustments resulting from +the cast from <del><tt>U*</tt></del> +<ins><tt>unique_ptr<U,E>::pointer</tt></ins> to <del><tt>T*</tt></del> +<ins>pointer</ins>. <tt>get_deleter()</tt> returns a reference to the +internally stored deleter which was constructed from +<tt>u.get_deleter()</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +Change 20.9.9.2.3 [unique.ptr.single.asgn]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-8- <i>Requires:</i> Assignment of the deleter <tt>D</tt> from an rvalue +<tt>D</tt> <del>must</del> <ins>shall</ins> not throw an exception. <del><tt>U*</tt></del> +<ins><tt>unique_ptr<U,E>::pointer</tt></ins> <del>must</del> <ins>shall</ins> be implicitly +convertible to <del><tt>T*</tt></del> <ins>pointer</ins>. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 20.9.9.2.4 [unique.ptr.single.observers]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre><del>T*</del> <ins>pointer</ins> operator->() const;</pre> +... +<pre><del>T*</del> <ins>pointer</ins> get() const;</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 20.9.9.2.5 [unique.ptr.single.modifiers]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre><del>T*</del> <ins>pointer</ins> release();</pre> +... +<pre>void reset(<del>T*</del> <ins>pointer</ins> p = <del>0</del> <ins>pointer()</ins>);</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 20.9.9.3 [unique.ptr.runtime]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T, class D> class unique_ptr<T[], D> { +public: + <ins>typedef <i>implementation</i> pointer;</ins> + ... + explicit unique_ptr(<del>T*</del> <ins>pointer</ins> p); + ... + unique_ptr(<del>T*</del> <ins>pointer</ins> p, <i>implementation defined</i> d); + unique_ptr(<del>T*</del> <ins>pointer</ins> p, <i>implementation defined</i> d); + ... + <del>T*</del> <ins>pointer</ins> get() const; + ... + <del>T*</del> <ins>pointer</ins> release(); + void reset(<del>T*</del> <ins>pointer</ins> p = <del>0</del> <ins>pointer()</ins>); +}; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Change 20.9.9.3.1 [unique.ptr.runtime.ctor]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>unique_ptr(<del>T*</del> <ins>pointer</ins> p); +unique_ptr(<del>T*</del> <ins>pointer</ins> p, <i>implementation defined</i> d); +unique_ptr(<del>T*</del> <ins>pointer</ins> p, <i>implementation defined</i> d); +</pre> + +<p> +These constructors behave the same as in the primary template except +that they do not accept pointer types which are convertible to +<del><tt>T*</tt></del> <ins><tt>pointer</tt></ins>. [<i>Note:</i> One +implementation technique is to create private templated overloads of +these members. <i>-- end note</i>] +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 20.9.9.3.3 [unique.ptr.runtime.modifiers]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>void reset(<del>T*</del> <ins>pointer</ins> p = <del>0</del> <ins>pointer()</ins>); +</pre> + +<p> +-1- <i>Requires:</i> Does not accept pointer types which are convertible +to <del><tt>T*</tt></del> <ins><tt>pointer</tt></ins> (diagnostic +required). [<i>Note:</i> One implementation technique is to create a private +templated overload. <i>-- end note</i>] +</p> +</blockquote> + +</li> + +<li> + +<p> +Change 20.9.9.2.1 [unique.ptr.single.ctor]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>unique_ptr();</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Requires:</i> <tt>D</tt> <del>must</del> <ins>shall</ins> be default constructible, and that +construction <del>must</del> <ins>shall</ins> not throw an exception. <tt>D</tt> <del>must</del> <ins>shall</ins> not be a +reference type <ins>or pointer type (diagnostic required)</ins>. +</p> +</blockquote> +<pre>unique_ptr(<del>T*</del> <ins>pointer</ins> p);</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Requires:</i> The expression <tt>D()(p)</tt> <del>must</del> <ins>shall</ins> be well formed. +The default constructor of <tt>D</tt> <del>must</del> <ins>shall</ins> not throw an exception. +<tt>D</tt> <del>must</del> <ins>shall</ins> not be a reference type <ins>or pointer type (diagnostic +required)</ins>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +</li> + +</ul> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="674"></a>674. <tt>shared_ptr</tt> interface changes for consistency with N1856</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.10.2 [util.smartptr.shared] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Peter Dimov <b>Opened:</b> 2007-05-05 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#util.smartptr.shared">issues</a> in [util.smartptr.shared].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2005/n1856.html">N1856</a> does not propose +any changes to <tt>shared_ptr</tt>. It needs to be updated to use a rvalue reference where appropriate +and to interoperate with <tt>unique_ptr</tt> as it does with <tt>auto_ptr</tt>. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +Change 20.9.10.2 [util.smartptr.shared] as follows: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template<class Y> explicit shared_ptr(auto_ptr<Y><del>&</del><ins>&&</ins> r); +<ins>template<class Y, class D> explicit shared_ptr(const unique_ptr<Y,D>& r) = delete; +template<class Y, class D> explicit shared_ptr(unique_ptr<Y,D>&& r);</ins> +... +template<class Y> shared_ptr& operator=(auto_ptr<Y><del>&</del><ins>&&</ins> r); +<ins>template<class Y, class D> shared_ptr& operator=(const unique_ptr<Y,D>& r) = delete; +template<class Y, class D> shared_ptr& operator=(unique_ptr<Y,D>&& r);</ins></pre> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 20.9.10.2.1 [util.smartptr.shared.const] as follows: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre><ins>template<class Y> shared_ptr(auto_ptr<Y><del>&</del><ins>&&</ins> r);</ins></pre> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Add to 20.9.10.2.1 [util.smartptr.shared.const]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre><ins>template<class Y, class D> shared_ptr(unique_ptr<Y, D>&& r);</ins></pre> +<blockquote> + +<p><ins> +<i>Effects:</i> Equivalent to <tt>shared_ptr( r.release(), r.get_deleter() )</tt> when <tt>D</tt> is + not a reference type, <tt>shared_ptr( r.release(), ref( r.get_deleter() ) )</tt> + otherwise. +</ins></p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Exception safety:</i> If an exception is thrown, the constructor has no effect. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 20.9.10.2.3 [util.smartptr.shared.assign] as follows: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template<class Y> shared_ptr& operator=(auto_ptr<Y><del>&</del><ins>&&</ins> r);</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Add to 20.9.10.2.3 [util.smartptr.shared.assign]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre><ins>template<class Y, class D> shared_ptr& operator=(unique_ptr<Y,D>&& r);</ins></pre> + +<blockquote> +<p><ins> +-4- <i>Effects:</i> Equivalent to <tt>shared_ptr(std::move(r)).swap(*this)</tt>. +</ins></p> +<p><ins> +-5- <i>Returns:</i> <tt>*this</tt>. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + + + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007): We may need to open an issue (<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#743">743</a>) to deal with the question of +whether <tt>shared_ptr</tt> needs an rvalue <tt>swap</tt>. +]</i></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="675"></a>675. Move assignment of containers</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2 [container.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2007-05-05 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#container.requirements">issues</a> in [container.requirements].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +James Hopkin pointed out to me that if <tt>vector<T></tt> move assignment is O(1) +(just a <tt>swap</tt>) then containers such as <tt>vector<shared_ptr<ostream>></tt> might have +the wrong semantics under move assignment when the source is not truly an rvalue, but a +moved-from lvalue (destructors could run late). +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><tt>vector<shared_ptr<ostream>></tt> v1; +<tt>vector<shared_ptr<ostream>></tt> v2; +... +v1 = v2; // #1 +v1 = std::move(v2); // #2 +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Move semantics means not caring what happens to the source (<tt>v2</tt> in this example). +It doesn't mean not caring what happens to the target (<tt>v1</tt>). In the above example +both assignments should have the same effect on <tt>v1</tt>. Any non-shared <tt>ostream</tt>'s +<tt>v1</tt> owns before the assignment should be closed, whether <tt>v1</tt> is undergoing +copy assignment or move assignment. +</p> + +<p> +This implies that the semantics of move assignment of a generic container should be +<tt>clear, swap</tt> instead of just swap. An alternative which could achieve the same +effect would be to move assign each element. In either case, the complexity of move +assignment needs to be relaxed to <tt>O(v1.size())</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +The performance hit of this change is not nearly as drastic as it sounds. +In practice, the target of a move assignment has always just been move constructed +or move assigned <i>from</i>. Therefore under <tt>clear, swap</tt> semantics (in +this common use case) we are still achieving O(1) complexity. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 23.2 [container.requirements]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 89: Container requirements</caption> +<tbody><tr> +<th>expression</th><th>return type</th><th>operational semantics</th> +<th>assertion/note pre/post-condition</th><th>complexity</th> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><tt>a = rv;</tt></td><td><tt>X&</tt></td> +<td>All existing elements of <tt>a</tt> are either move assigned or destructed</td> +<td><tt>a</tt> shall be equal to the +value that <tt>rv</tt> had +before this construction +</td> +<td><del>(Note C)</del> <ins>linear</ins></td> +</tr> +</tbody></table> + +<p> +Notes: the algorithms <tt>swap()</tt>, <tt>equal()</tt> and +<tt>lexicographical_compare()</tt> are defined in clause 25. Those +entries marked "(Note A)" should have constant complexity. Those entries +marked "(Note B)" have constant complexity unless +<tt>allocator_propagate_never<X::allocator_type>::value</tt> is +<tt>true</tt>, in which case they have linear complexity. +<del>Those entries +marked "(Note C)" have constant complexity if <tt>a.get_allocator() == +rv.get_allocator()</tt> or if either +<tt>allocator_propagate_on_move_assignment<X::allocator_type>::value</tt> +is <tt>true</tt> or +<tt>allocator_propagate_on_copy_assignment<X::allocator_type>::value</tt> +is <tt>true</tt> and linear complexity otherwise.</del> +</p> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><i>[ +post Bellevue Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +This issue was voted to WP in Bellevue, but accidently got stepped on by +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2525.pdf">N2525</a> +which was voted to WP simulataneously. Moving back to Open for the purpose of getting +the wording right. The intent of this issue and N2525 are not in conflict. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +post Sophia Antipolis Howard updated proposed wording: +]</i></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="676"></a>676. Moving the unordered containers</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.7 [unord] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2007-05-05 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#unord">issues</a> in [unord].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Move semantics are missing from the <tt>unordered</tt> containers. The proposed +resolution below adds move-support consistent with +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2005/n1858.html">N1858</a> +and the current working draft. +</p> + +<p> +The current proposed resolution simply lists the requirements for each function. +These might better be hoisted into the requirements table for unordered associative containers. +Futhermore a mild reorganization of the container requirements could well be in order. +This defect report is purposefully ignoring these larger issues and just focusing +on getting the unordered containers "moved". +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-28 Reopened by Alisdair. No longer solved by concepts. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-10-17 Removed rvalue-swaps from wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Review. Alisdair will review proposed wording. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10-29 Daniel updates wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-01-26 Alisdair updates wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-10 Howard updates wording to reference the unordered container +requirements table (modified by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#704">704</a>) as much as possible. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Voted to WP in Bellevue. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +post Bellevue, Pete notes: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Please remind people who are reviewing issues to check that the text +modifications match the current draft. Issue 676, for example, adds two +overloads for unordered_map::insert taking a hint. One takes a +const_iterator and returns a const_iterator, and the other takes an +iterator and returns an iterator. This was correct at the time the issue +was written, but was changed in Toronto so there is only one hint +overload, taking a const_iterator and returning an iterator. +</p> +<p> +This issue is not ready. In addition to the relatively minor signature +problem I mentioned earlier, it puts requirements in the wrong places. +Instead of duplicating requirements throughout the template +specifications, it should put them in the front matter that talks about +requirements for unordered containers in general. This presentation +problem is editorial, but I'm not willing to do the extensive rewrite +that it requires. Please put it back into Open status. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-11 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-24 Pete moved to Open: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +The descriptions of the semantics of the added <tt>insert</tt> functions belong +in the requirements table. That's where the rest of the <tt>insert</tt> +functions are. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010 Pittsburgh: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move issue 676 to Ready for Pittsburgh. Nico to send Howard an issue for +the broader problem. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p><i>[ +San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Solved by +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2776.pdf">N2776</a>. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Rationale is obsolete. +]</i></p> + + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p><b><tt>unordered_map</tt></b></p> + +<p> +Change 23.7.1 [unord.map]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>class unordered_map +{ + ... + unordered_map(const unordered_map&); + <ins>unordered_map(unordered_map&&);</ins> + unordered_map(const Allocator&); + unordered_map(const unordered_map&, const Allocator&); + unordered_map(unordered_map&&, const Allocator&); + ... + unordered_map& operator=(const unordered_map&); + <ins>unordered_map& operator=(unordered_map&&);</ins> + ... + // modifiers + ... + <del>std::</del>pair<iterator, bool> insert(const value_type& obj); + <ins>template <class P> pair<iterator, bool> insert(P&& obj);</ins> + iterator insert(const_iterator hint, const value_type& obj); + <ins>template <class P> iterator insert(const_iterator hint, P&& obj);</ins> + ... + mapped_type& operator[](const key_type& k); + <ins>mapped_type& operator[](key_type&& k);</ins> + ... +}; + +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Add to 23.7.1.2 [unord.map.elem]: +</p> + +<blockquote> + +<pre>mapped_type& operator[](const key_type& k);</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p>...</p> +<p><ins> +<i>Requires:</i> <tt>key_type</tt> shall be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> +and <tt>mapped_type</tt> shall be <tt>DefaultConstructible</tt>. +</ins></p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Complexity:</i> Average case <tt>O(1)</tt>, worst case <tt>O(size())</tt>. +</ins></p> + +</blockquote> + +<pre><ins>mapped_type& operator[](key_type&& k);</ins></pre> + +<blockquote> +<p><ins> +<i>Requires:</i> <tt>key_type</tt> shall be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> and +<tt>mapped_type</tt> shall be <tt>DefaultConstructible</tt>. +</ins></p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Effects:</i> If the <tt>unordered_map</tt> does not already contain an +element whose key is equivalent to <tt>k</tt> , inserts the value +<tt>value_type(std::move(k), mapped_type())</tt>. +</ins></p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Returns:</i> A reference to <tt>x.second</tt>, where <tt>x</tt> is the +(unique) element whose key is equivalent to <tt>k</tt>. +</ins></p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Complexity:</i> Average case <tt>O(1)</tt>, worst case <tt>O(size())</tt>. +</ins></p> + +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +Add new section [unord.map.modifiers]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre><ins>template <class P> + pair<iterator, bool> insert(P&& x);</ins> +</pre> + +<blockquote> + +<p><ins> +<i>Requires:</i> <tt>value_type</tt> is constructible from +<tt>std::forward<P>(x)</tt>. +</ins></p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Effects:</i> Inserts <tt>x</tt> converted to <tt>value_type</tt> if and only +if there is no element in the container with key equivalent to the key of +<tt>value_type(x)</tt>. +</ins></p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Returns:</i> The <tt>bool</tt> component of the returned +<tt>pair</tt> indicates whether the insertion takes place, and the iterator +component points to the element with key equivalent to the key of +<tt>value_type(x)</tt>. +</ins></p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Complexity:</i> Average case <tt>O(1)</tt>, worst case <tt>O(size())</tt>. +</ins></p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Remarks:</i> <tt>P</tt> shall be implicitly convertible to +<tt>value_type</tt>, else this signature shall not participate in overload +resolution. +</ins></p> + +</blockquote> + + +<pre><ins>template <class P> + iterator insert(const_iterator hint, P&& x);</ins> +</pre> + +<blockquote> + +<p><ins> +<i>Requires:</i> <tt>value_type</tt> is constructible from +<tt>std::forward<P>(x)</tt>. +</ins></p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Effects:</i> Inserts <tt>x</tt> converted to <tt>value_type</tt> if and only +if there is no element in the container with key equivalent to the key of +<tt>value_type(x)</tt>. The iterator <tt>hint</tt> is a hint pointing to where +the search should start. Implementations are permitted to ignore the hint. +</ins></p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Returns:</i> An iterator pointing to the element with key equivalent to the +key of <tt>value_type(x)</tt>. +</ins></p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Complexity:</i> Average case <tt>O(1)</tt>, worst case <tt>O(size())</tt>. +</ins></p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Remarks:</i> <tt>P</tt> shall be implicitly convertible to +<tt>value_type</tt>, else this signature shall not participate in overload +resolution. +</ins></p> + +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p><b><tt>unordered_multimap</tt></b></p> + +<p> +Change 23.7.2 [unord.multimap]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>class unordered_multimap +{ + ... + unordered_multimap(const unordered_multimap&); + <ins>unordered_multimap(unordered_multimap&&);</ins> + unordered_multimap(const Allocator&); + unordered_multimap(const unordered_multimap&, const Allocator&); + unordered_multimap(unordered_multimap&&, const Allocator&); + ... + unordered_multimap& operator=(const unordered_multimap&); + <ins>unordered_multimap& operator=(unordered_multimap&&);</ins> + ... + // modifiers + ... + iterator insert(const value_type& obj); + <ins>template <class P> iterator insert(P&& obj);</ins> + iterator insert(const_iterator hint, const value_type& obj); + <ins>template <class P> iterator insert(const_iterator hint, P&& obj);</ins> + ... +}; + +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Add new section [unord.multimap.modifiers]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre><ins>template <class P> + iterator insert(P&& x);</ins> +</pre> + +<blockquote> + +<p><ins> +<i>Requires:</i> <tt>value_type</tt> is constructible from +<tt>std::forward<P>(x)</tt>. +</ins></p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Effects:</i> Inserts <tt>x</tt> converted to <tt>value_type</tt>. +</ins></p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Returns:</i> An iterator pointing to the element with key equivalent to the +key of <tt>value_type(x)</tt>. +</ins></p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Complexity:</i> Average case <tt>O(1)</tt>, worst case <tt>O(size())</tt>. +</ins></p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Remarks:</i> <tt>P</tt> shall be implicitly convertible to +<tt>value_type</tt>, else this signature shall not participate in overload +resolution. +</ins></p> + +</blockquote> + +<pre><ins>template <class P> + iterator insert(const_iterator hint, P&& x);</ins> +</pre> + +<blockquote> + +<p><ins> +<i>Requires:</i> <tt>value_type</tt> is constructible from +<tt>std::forward<P>(x)</tt>. +</ins></p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Effects:</i> Inserts <tt>x</tt> converted to <tt>value_type</tt> if and only +if there is no element in the container with key equivalent to the key of +<tt>value_type(x)</tt>. The iterator <tt>hint</tt> is a hint pointing to where +the search should start. Implementations are permitted to ignore the hint. +</ins></p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Returns:</i> An iterator pointing to the element with key equivalent to the +key of <tt>value_type(x)</tt>. +</ins></p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Complexity:</i> Average case <tt>O(1)</tt>, worst case <tt>O(size())</tt>. +</ins></p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Remarks:</i> <tt>P</tt> shall be implicitly convertible to +<tt>value_type</tt>, else this signature shall not participate in overload +resolution. +</ins></p> + +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p><b><tt>unordered_set</tt></b></p> + +<p> +Change 23.7.3 [unord.set]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>class unordered_set +{ + ... + unordered_set(const unordered_set&); + <ins>unordered_set(unordered_set&&);</ins> + unordered_set(const Allocator&); + unordered_set(const unordered_set&, const Allocator&); + unordered_set(unordered_set&&, const Allocator&); + ... + unordered_set& operator=(const unordered_set&); + <ins>unordered_set& operator=(unordered_set&&);</ins> + ... + // modifiers + ... + <del>std::</del>pair<iterator, bool> insert(const value_type& obj); + <ins>pair<iterator, bool> insert(value_type&& obj);</ins> + iterator insert(const_iterator hint, const value_type& obj); + <ins>iterator insert(const_iterator hint, value_type&& obj);</ins> + ... +}; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p><b><tt>unordered_multiset</tt></b></p> + +<p> +Change 23.7.4 [unord.multiset]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>class unordered_multiset +{ + ... + unordered_multiset(const unordered_multiset&); + <ins>unordered_multiset(unordered_multiset&&);</ins> + unordered_multiset(const Allocator&); + unordered_multiset(const unordered_multiset&, const Allocator&); + unordered_multiset(unordered_multiset&&, const Allocator&); + ... + unordered_multiset& operator=(const unordered_multiset&); + <ins>unordered_multiset& operator=(unordered_multiset&&);</ins> + ... + // modifiers + ... + iterator insert(const value_type& obj); + <ins>iterator insert(value_type&& obj);</ins> + iterator insert(const_iterator hint, const value_type& obj); + <ins>iterator insert(const_iterator hint, value_type&& obj);</ins> + ... +}; + +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="677"></a>677. Weaknesses in seed_seq::randomize [rand.util.seedseq]</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.7.1 [rand.util.seedseq] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Charles Karney <b>Opened:</b> 2007-05-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#rand.util.seedseq">issues</a> in [rand.util.seedseq].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +<tt>seed_seq::randomize</tt> provides a mechanism for initializing random number +engines which ideally would yield "distant" states when given "close" +seeds. The algorithm for <tt>seed_seq::randomize</tt> given in the current +Working Draft for C++, +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2284.pdf">N2284</a> +(2007-05-08), has 3 weaknesses +</p> + +<ol> +<li> +<p> Collisions in state. Because of the way the state is initialized, + seeds of different lengths may result in the same state. The + current version of seed_seq has the following properties:</p> +<ul> +<li> For a given <tt>s <= n</tt>, each of the 2^(32s) seed vectors results in a + distinct state.</li> +</ul> +<p> + The proposed algorithm (below) has the considerably stronger + properties:</p> +<ul> +<li> All of the <tt>(2^(32n)-1)/(2^32-1)</tt> seed vectors of lengths <tt>s < n</tt> + result in distinct states. +</li> +<li> All of the <tt>2^(32n)</tt> seed vectors of length <tt>s == n</tt> result in + distinct states. +</li> +</ul> +</li> +<li> +<p> Poor mixing of <tt>v'</tt>s entropy into the state. Consider <tt>v.size() == n</tt> + and hold <tt>v[n/2]</tt> thru <tt>v[n-1]</tt> fixed while varying <tt>v[0]</tt> thru <tt>v[n/2-1]</tt>, + a total of <tt>2^(16n)</tt> possibilities. Because of the simple recursion + used in <tt>seed_seq</tt>, <tt>begin[n/2]</tt> thru <tt>begin[n-1]</tt> can take on only 2^64 + possible states.</p> + +<p> The proposed algorithm uses a more complex recursion which results + in much better mixing.</p> +</li> +<li> <tt>seed_seq::randomize</tt> is undefined for <tt>v.size() == 0</tt>. The proposed + algorithm remedies this. +</li> +</ol> +<p> +The current algorithm for <tt>seed_seq::randomize</tt> is adapted by me from the +initialization procedure for the Mersenne Twister by Makoto Matsumoto +and Takuji Nishimura. The weakness (2) given above was communicated to +me by Matsumoto last year. +</p> +<p> +The proposed replacement for <tt>seed_seq::randomize</tt> is due to Mutsuo Saito, +a student of Matsumoto, and is given in the implementation of the +SIMD-oriented Fast Mersenne Twister random number generator SFMT. +<a href="http://www.math.sci.hiroshima-u.ac.jp/~m-mat/MT/SFMT/index.html">http://www.math.sci.hiroshima-u.ac.jp/~m-mat/MT/SFMT/index.html</a> +<a href="http://www.math.sci.hiroshima-u.ac.jp/~m-mat/MT/SFMT/SFMT-src-1.2.tar.gz">http://www.math.sci.hiroshima-u.ac.jp/~m-mat/MT/SFMT/SFMT-src-1.2.tar.gz</a> +</p> +<p> +See +Mutsuo Saito, +An Application of Finite Field: Design and Implementation of 128-bit +Instruction-Based Fast Pseudorandom Number Generator, +Master's Thesis, Dept. of Math., Hiroshima University (Feb. 2007) +<a href="http://www.math.sci.hiroshima-u.ac.jp/~m-mat/MT/SFMT/M062821.pdf">http://www.math.sci.hiroshima-u.ac.jp/~m-mat/MT/SFMT/M062821.pdf</a> +</p> +<p> +One change has been made here, namely to treat the case of small <tt>n</tt> +(setting <tt>t = (n-1)/2</tt> for <tt>n < 7</tt>). +</p> +<p> +Since <tt>seed_seq</tt> was introduced relatively recently there is little cost +in making this incompatible improvement to it. +</p> + +<p> +See <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2391.pdf">N2391</a> and +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2423.pdf">N2423</a> +for some further discussion. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Adopt the proposed resolution in +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2423.pdf">N2423</a>. +</p> + + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007): The LWG adopted the proposed resolution of N2423 for this issue. +The LWG voted to accelerate this issue to Ready status to be voted into the WP at Kona. +]</i></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="678"></a>678. Changes for [rand.req.eng]</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.1.4 [rand.req.eng] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Charles Karney <b>Opened:</b> 2007-05-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#rand.req.eng">issues</a> in [rand.req.eng].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Section 26.5.1.4 [rand.req.eng] Random number engine requirements: +</p> + +<p> +This change follows naturally from the proposed change to +<tt>seed_seq::randomize</tt> in <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#677">677</a>. +</p> + +<p> +In table 104 the description of <tt>X(q)</tt> contains a special treatment of +the case <tt>q.size() == 0</tt>. This is undesirable for 4 reasons: +</p> + +<ol> +<li>It replicates the functionality provided by <tt>X()</tt>.</li> +<li>It leads to the possibility of a collision in the state provided + by some other <tt>X(q)</tt> with <tt>q.size() > 0</tt>.</li> +<li>It is inconsistent with the description of the <tt>X(q)</tt> in +paragraphs 26.5.3.1 [rand.eng.lcong] p5, 26.5.3.2 [rand.eng.mers] p8, and 26.5.3.3 [rand.eng.sub] p10 where +there is no special treatment of <tt>q.size() == 0</tt>.</li> +<li>The proposed replacement for <tt>seed_seq::randomize</tt> given above + allows for the case <tt>q.size() == 0</tt>.</li> +</ol> + +<p> +See <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2391.pdf">N2391</a> and +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2423.pdf">N2423</a> +for some further discussion. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Adopt the proposed resolution in +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2423.pdf">N2423</a>. +</p> + + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007): The LWG adopted the proposed resolution of N2423 for this issue. +The LWG voted to accelerate this issue to Ready status to be voted into the WP at Kona. +]</i></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="679"></a>679. resize parameter by value</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.3 [sequences] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2007-06-11 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#sequences">issues</a> in [sequences].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The C++98 standard specifies that one member function alone of the containers +passes its parameter (<tt>T</tt>) by value instead of by const reference: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void resize(size_type sz, T c = T()); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +This fact has been discussed / debated repeatedly over the years, the first time +being even before C++98 was ratified. The rationale for passing this parameter by +value has been: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +So that self referencing statements are guaranteed to work, for example: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>v.resize(v.size() + 1, v[0]); +</pre></blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +However this rationale is not convincing as the signature for <tt>push_back</tt> is: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void push_back(const T& x); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +And <tt>push_back</tt> has similar semantics to <tt>resize</tt> (append). +And <tt>push_back</tt> must also work in the self referencing case: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>v.push_back(v[0]); // must work +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +The problem with passing <tt>T</tt> by value is that it can be significantly more +expensive than passing by reference. The converse is also true, however when it is +true it is usually far less dramatic (e.g. for scalar types). +</p> + +<p> +Even with move semantics available, passing this parameter by value can be expensive. +Consider for example <tt>vector<vector<int>></tt>: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>std::vector<int> x(1000); +std::vector<std::vector<int>> v; +... +v.resize(v.size()+1, x); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +In the pass-by-value case, <tt>x</tt> is copied once to the parameter of +<tt>resize</tt>. And then internally, since the code can not know at compile +time by how much <tt>resize</tt> is growing the <tt>vector</tt>, <tt>x</tt> is +usually copied (not moved) a second time from <tt>resize</tt>'s parameter into its proper place +within the <tt>vector</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +With pass-by-const-reference, the <tt>x</tt> in the above example need be copied +only once. In this case, <tt>x</tt> has an expensive copy constructor and so any +copies that can be saved represents a significant savings. +</p> + +<p> +If we can be efficient for <tt>push_back</tt>, we should be efficient for <tt>resize</tt> +as well. The resize taking a reference parameter has been coded and shipped in the +CodeWarrior library with no reports of problems which I am aware of. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 23.3.2 [deque], p2: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>class deque { + ... + void resize(size_type sz, <ins>const </ins>T<ins>&</ins> c); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Change 23.3.2.2 [deque.capacity], p3: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void resize(size_type sz, <ins>const </ins>T<ins>&</ins> c); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Change 23.3.4 [list], p2: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>class list { + ... + void resize(size_type sz, <ins>const </ins>T<ins>&</ins> c); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Change 23.3.4.2 [list.capacity], p3: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void resize(size_type sz, <ins>const </ins>T<ins>&</ins> c); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Change 23.4.1 [vector], p2: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>class vector { + ... + void resize(size_type sz, <ins>const </ins>T<ins>&</ins> c); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Change 23.4.1.2 [vector.capacity], p11: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void resize(size_type sz, <ins>const </ins>T<ins>&</ins> c); +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="680"></a>680. move_iterator operator-> return</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 24.5.3.1 [move.iterator] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2007-06-11 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#move.iterator">issues</a> in [move.iterator].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +<tt>move_iterator</tt>'s <tt>operator-></tt> return type <tt>pointer</tt> +does not consistently match the type which is returned in the description +in 24.5.3.3.5 [move.iter.op.ref]. +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class Iterator> +class move_iterator { +public: + ... + typedef typename iterator_traits<Iterator>::pointer pointer; + ... + pointer operator->() const {return current;} + ... +private: + Iterator current; // exposition only +}; +</pre></blockquote> + + +<p> +There are two possible fixes. +</p> + +<ol> +<li><tt>pointer operator->() const {return &*current;}</tt></li> +<li><tt>typedef Iterator pointer;</tt></li> +</ol> + +<p> +The first solution is the one chosen by <tt>reverse_iterator</tt>. A potential +disadvantage of this is it may not work well with iterators which return a +proxy on dereference and that proxy has overloaded <tt>operator&()</tt>. Proxy +references often need to overloaad <tt>operator&()</tt> to return a proxy +pointer. That proxy pointer may or may not be the same type as the iterator's +<tt>pointer</tt> type. +</p> + +<p> +By simply returning the <tt>Iterator</tt> and taking advantage of the fact that +the language forwards calls to <tt>operator-></tt> automatically until it +finds a non-class type, the second solution avoids the issue of an overloaded +<tt>operator&()</tt> entirely. +</p> + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change the synopsis in 24.5.3.1 [move.iterator]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>typedef <del>typename iterator_traits<</del>Iterator<del>>::pointer</del> pointer; +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="681"></a>681. Operator functions impossible to compare are defined in [re.submatch.op]</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nozomu Katoo <b>Opened:</b> 2007-05-27 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#re.submatch.op">issues</a> in [re.submatch.op].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op] of N2284, +operator functions numbered 31-42 seem impossible to compare. E.g.: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template <class BiIter> + bool operator==(typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type const& lhs, + const sub_match<BiIter>& rhs); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +-31- <i>Returns:</i> <tt>lhs == rhs.str()</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +When <tt>char*</tt> is used as <tt>BiIter</tt>, <tt>iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type</tt> would be +<tt>char</tt>, so that <tt>lhs == rhs.str()</tt> ends up comparing a <tt>char</tt> value and an object +of <tt>std::basic_string<char></tt>. However, the behaviour of comparison between +these two types is not defined in 21.4.8 [string.nonmembers] of N2284. + This applies when <tt>wchar_t*</tt> is used as <tt>BiIter</tt>. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Adopt the proposed resolution in +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2409.pdf">N2409</a>. +</p> + + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007): The LWG adopted the proposed resolution of N2409 for this issue. +The LWG voted to accelerate this issue to Ready status to be voted into the WP at Kona. +]</i></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="682"></a>682. basic_regex ctor takes InputIterator or ForwardIterator?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 28.8.2 [re.regex.construct] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Eric Niebler <b>Opened:</b> 2007-06-03 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#re.regex.construct">issues</a> in [re.regex.construct].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Looking at N2284, 28.8 [re.regex], p3 <tt>basic_regex</tt> class template synopsis shows this +constructor: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>template <class InputIterator> + basic_regex(InputIterator first, InputIterator last, + flag_type f = regex_constants::ECMAScript); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +In 28.8.2 [re.regex.construct], p15, the constructor appears with this signature: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class ForwardIterator> + basic_regex(ForwardIterator first, ForwardIterator last, + flag_type f = regex_constants::ECMAScript); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +<tt>ForwardIterator</tt> is probably correct, so the synopsis is wrong. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +John adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I think either could be implemented? Although an input iterator would +probably require an internal copy of the string being made. +</p> +<p> +I have no strong feelings either way, although I think my original intent +was <tt>InputIterator</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Adopt the proposed resolution in +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2409.pdf">N2409</a>. +</p> + + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007): The LWG adopted the proposed resolution of N2409 for this issue. +The LWG voted to accelerate this issue to Ready status to be voted into the WP at Kona. +]</i></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="685"></a>685. reverse_iterator/move_iterator difference has invalid signatures</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 24.5.1.3.19 [reverse.iter.opdiff], 24.5.3.3.14 [move.iter.nonmember] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Bo Persson <b>Opened:</b> 2007-06-10 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In C++03 the difference between two <tt>reverse_iterators</tt> +</p> +<blockquote><pre>ri1 - ri2 +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +is possible to compute only if both iterators have the same base +iterator. The result type is the <tt>difference_type</tt> of the base iterator. +</p> +<p> +In the current draft, the operator is defined as 24.5.1.3.19 [reverse.iter.opdiff] +</p> +<blockquote><pre>template<class Iterator1, class Iterator2> +typename reverse_iterator<Iterator>::difference_type + operator-(const reverse_iterator<Iterator1>& x, + const reverse_iterator<Iterator2>& y); +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +The return type is the same as the C++03 one, based on the no longer +present <tt>Iterator</tt> template parameter. +</p> +<p> +Besides being slightly invalid, should this operator work only when +<tt>Iterator1</tt> and <tt>Iterator2</tt> has the same <tt>difference_type</tt>? Or should the +implementation choose one of them? Which one? +</p> +<p> +The same problem now also appears in <tt>operator-()</tt> for <tt>move_iterator</tt> +24.5.3.3.14 [move.iter.nonmember]. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change the synopsis in 24.5.1.1 [reverse.iterator]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template <class Iterator1, class Iterator2> + <del>typename reverse_iterator<Iterator>::difference_type</del> <ins>auto</ins> operator-( + const reverse_iterator<Iterator1>& x, + const reverse_iterator<Iterator2>& y)<ins> -> decltype(y.current - x.current)</ins>; +</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 24.5.1.3.19 [reverse.iter.opdiff]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template <class Iterator1, class Iterator2> + <del>typename reverse_iterator<Iterator>::difference_type</del> <ins>auto</ins> operator-( + const reverse_iterator<Iterator1>& x, + const reverse_iterator<Iterator2>& y)<ins> -> decltype(y.current - x.current)</ins>; +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt>y.current - x.current</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + +<p> +Change the synopsis in 24.5.3.1 [move.iterator]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template <class Iterator1, class Iterator2> + <del>typename move_iterator<Iterator>::difference_type</del> <ins>auto</ins> operator-( + const move_iterator<Iterator1>& x, + const move_iterator<Iterator2>& y)<ins> -> decltype(x.base() - y.base())</ins>; +</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 24.5.3.3.14 [move.iter.nonmember]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template <class Iterator1, class Iterator2> + <del>typename move_iterator<Iterator>::difference_type</del> <ins>auto</ins> operator-( + const move_iterator<Iterator1>& x, + const move_iterator<Iterator2>& y)<ins> -> decltype(x.base() - y.base())</ins>; +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt>x.base() - y.base()</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Pre Bellevue: This issue needs to wait until the <tt>auto -> return</tt> language feature +goes in. +]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="687"></a>687. shared_ptr conversion constructor not constrained</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.10.2.1 [util.smartptr.shared.const], 20.9.10.3.1 [util.smartptr.weak.const] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Peter Dimov <b>Opened:</b> 2007-05-10 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#util.smartptr.shared.const">issues</a> in [util.smartptr.shared.const].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Since all conversions from <tt>shared_ptr<T></tt> to <tt>shared_ptr<U></tt> have the same +rank regardless of the relationship between <tt>T</tt> and <tt>U</tt>, reasonable user +code that works with raw pointers fails with <tt>shared_ptr</tt>: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void f( shared_ptr<void> ); +void f( shared_ptr<int> ); + +int main() +{ + f( shared_ptr<double>() ); // ambiguous +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Now that we officially have <tt>enable_if</tt>, we can constrain the constructor +and the corresponding assignment operator to only participate in the +overload resolution when the pointer types are compatible. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 20.9.10.2.1 [util.smartptr.shared.const], change: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +-14- <i>Requires:</i> <del>For the second constructor</del> <ins>The +second constructor shall not participate in the overload resolution +unless</ins> <tt>Y*</tt> <del>shall be</del> <ins>is implicitly</ins> convertible +to <tt>T*</tt>. +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +In 20.9.10.3.1 [util.smartptr.weak.const], change: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre><del>template<class Y> weak_ptr(shared_ptr<Y> const& r);</del> +<del>weak_ptr(weak_ptr const& r);</del> +<del>template<class Y> weak_ptr(weak_ptr<Y> const& r);</del> +<ins>weak_ptr(weak_ptr const& r);</ins> +<ins>template<class Y> weak_ptr(weak_ptr<Y> const& r);</ins> +<ins>template<class Y> weak_ptr(shared_ptr<Y> const& r);</ins> +</pre> +<blockquote><p> +-4- <i>Requires:</i> <del>For</del> <del>t</del><ins>T</ins>he second and +third constructors<del>,</del> <ins>shall not participate in the +overload resolution unless</ins> <tt>Y*</tt> <del>shall be</del> +<ins>is implicitly</ins> convertible to <tt>T*</tt>. +</p></blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="688"></a>688. reference_wrapper, cref unsafe, allow binding to rvalues</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8.4.1 [refwrap.const] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Peter Dimov <b>Opened:</b> 2007-05-10 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#refwrap.const">issues</a> in [refwrap.const].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +A <tt>reference_wrapper</tt> can be constructed from an rvalue, either by using +the constructor, or via <tt>cref</tt> (and <tt>ref</tt> in some corner cases). This leads +to a dangling reference being stored into the <tt>reference_wrapper</tt> object. +Now that we have a mechanism to detect an rvalue, we can fix them to +disallow this source of undefined behavior. +</p> + +<p> +Also please see the thread starting at c++std-lib-17398 for some good discussion on this subject. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-09 Alisdair adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Now that <tt>ref/cref</tt> are constained that <tt>T</tt> must be an <tt>ObjectType</tt>, I do not +believe there is any risk of binding <tt>ref</tt> to a temporary (which would rely on +deducing <tt>T</tt> to be an rvalue reference type) +</p> +<p> +However, the problem for <tt>cref</tt> remains, so I recommend retaining that deleted +overload. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-10 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Without: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T> void ref(const T&& t) = delete; +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +I believe this program will compile: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>#include <functional> + +struct A {}; + +const A source() {return A();} + +int main() +{ + std::reference_wrapper<const A> r = std::ref(source()); +} +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +I.e. in: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>template <ObjectType T> reference_wrapper<T> ref(T& t); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +this: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>ref(source()) +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +deduces <tt>T</tt> as <tt>const A</tt>, and so: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>ref(const A& t) +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +will bind to a temporary (tested with a pre-concepts rvalue-ref enabled compiler). +</p> +<p> +Therefore I think we still need the ref-protection. I respectfully disagree with Alisdair's +comment and am in favor of the proposed wording as it stands. Also, CWG 606 +(noted below) has now been "favorably" resolved. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +We agree with the proposed resolution. +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 20.8 [function.objects], add the following two signatures to the synopsis: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T> void ref(const T&& t) = delete; +template <class T> void cref(const T&& t) = delete; +</pre></blockquote> + + + +<p><i>[ +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2292.html">N2292</a> +addresses the first part of the resolution but not the second. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Bellevue: Doug noticed problems with the current wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +post Bellevue: Howard and Peter provided revised wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +This resolution depends on a "favorable" resolution of CWG 606: that is, +the "special deduction rule" is disabled with the const T&& pattern. +]</i></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="689"></a>689. reference_wrapper constructor overly constrained</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8.4.1 [refwrap.const] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Peter Dimov <b>Opened:</b> 2007-05-10 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#refwrap.const">issues</a> in [refwrap.const].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The constructor of <tt>reference_wrapper</tt> is currently <tt>explicit</tt>. The primary +motivation behind this is the safety problem with respect to rvalues, +which is addressed by the proposed resolution of the previous issue. +Therefore we should consider relaxing the requirements on the +constructor since requests for the implicit conversion keep resurfacing. +</p> +<p> +Also please see the thread starting at c++std-lib-17398 for some good discussion on this subject. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Remove the <tt>explicit</tt> from the constructor of <tt>reference_wrapper</tt>. If the +proposed resolution of the previous issue is accepted, remove the +<tt>explicit</tt> from the <tt>T&&</tt> constructor as well to keep them in sync. +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="691"></a>691. const_local_iterator cbegin, cend missing from TR1</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.7 [unord], TR1 6.3 [tr.hash] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Joaquín M López Muńoz <b>Opened:</b> 2007-06-14 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#unord">issues</a> in [unord].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The last version of TR1 does not include the following member +functions +for unordered containers: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>const_local_iterator cbegin(size_type n) const; +const_local_iterator cend(size_type n) const; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +which looks like an oversight to me. I've checked th TR1 issues lists +and the latest working draft of the C++0x std (N2284) and haven't +found any mention to these menfuns or to their absence. +</p> +<p> +Is this really an oversight, or am I missing something? +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add the following two rows to table 93 (unordered associative container +requirements) in section 23.2.5 [unord.req]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Unordered associative container requirements (in addition to container)</caption> +<tbody><tr> +<th>expression</th> <th>return type</th> <th>assertion/note pre/post-condition</th> <th>complexity</th> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><ins><tt>b.cbegin(n)</tt></ins></td> <td><ins><tt>const_local_iterator</tt></ins></td> <td><ins><tt>n</tt> shall be in the range <tt>[0, bucket_count())</tt>. Note: <tt>[b.cbegin(n), b.cend(n))</tt> is a valid range containing all of the elements in the <tt>n</tt><sup><i>th</i></sup> bucket.</ins></td> <td><ins>Constant</ins></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><ins><tt>b.cend(n)</tt></ins></td> <td><ins><tt>const_local_iterator</tt></ins></td> <td><ins><tt>n</tt> shall be in the range <tt>[0, bucket_count())</tt>.</ins></td> <td><ins>Constant</ins></td> +</tr> +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Add to the synopsis in 23.7.1 [unord.map]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>const_local_iterator cbegin(size_type n) const; +const_local_iterator cend(size_type n) const;</ins> +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Add to the synopsis in 23.7.2 [unord.multimap]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>const_local_iterator cbegin(size_type n) const; +const_local_iterator cend(size_type n) const;</ins> +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Add to the synopsis in 23.7.3 [unord.set]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>const_local_iterator cbegin(size_type n) const; +const_local_iterator cend(size_type n) const;</ins> +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Add to the synopsis in 23.7.4 [unord.multiset]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>const_local_iterator cbegin(size_type n) const; +const_local_iterator cend(size_type n) const;</ins> +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="692"></a>692. <code>get_money</code> and <code>put_money</code> should be formatted I/O functions</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.4 [ext.manip] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2007-06-22 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#ext.manip">issues</a> in [ext.manip].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In a private email Bill Plauger notes: +</p> +<blockquote><p> +I believe that the function that implements <code>get_money</code> +[from <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2006/n2072.html">N2072</a>] +should behave as a formatted input function, and the function that +implements <code>put_money</code> should behave as a formatted output +function. This has implications regarding the skipping of whitespace +and the handling of errors, among other things. +</p> +<p> +The words don't say that right now and I'm far from convinced that +such a change is editorial. +</p></blockquote> +<p> +Martin's response: +</p> +<blockquote><p> +I agree that the manipulators should handle exceptions the same way as +formatted I/O functions do. The text in N2072 assumes so but the +<i>Returns</i> clause explicitly omits exception handling for the sake +of brevity. The spec should be clarified to that effect. +</p> +<p> +As for dealing with whitespace, I also agree it would make sense for +the extractors and inserters involving the new manipulators to treat +it the same way as formatted I/O. +</p></blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add a new paragraph immediately above p4 of 27.7.4 [ext.manip] with the +following text: +</p> +<blockquote><p> +<i>Effects</i>: The expression <code><i>in</i> >> get_money(mon, intl)</code> +described below behaves as a formatted input function (as +described in 27.7.1.2.1 [istream.formatted.reqmts]). +</p></blockquote> +<p> +Also change p4 of 27.7.4 [ext.manip] as follows: +</p> +<blockquote><p> +<i>Returns</i>: An object <code>s</code> of unspecified type such that +if <code>in</code> is an object of type <code>basic_istream<charT, +traits></code> then the expression <code><i>in</i> >> get_money(mon, intl)</code> behaves as <ins>a formatted input function +that calls </ins><code>f(in, mon, intl)</code><del> were +called</del>. The function <code>f</code> can be defined as... +</p></blockquote> + + +<p><i>[ +post Bellevue: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +We recommend moving immediately to Review. We've looked at the issue and +have a consensus that the proposed resolution is correct, but want an +iostream expert to sign off. Alisdair has taken the action item to putt +this up on the reflector for possible movement by Howard to Tenatively +Ready. +</blockquote> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="693"></a>693. <code>std::bitset::all()</code> missing</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.5 [template.bitset] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2007-06-22 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#template.bitset">issues</a> in [template.bitset].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The <code>bitset</code> class template provides the member function +<code>any()</code> to determine whether an object of the type has any +bits set, and the member function <code>none()</code> to determine +whether all of an object's bits are clear. However, the template does +not provide a corresponding function to discover whether a +<code>bitset</code> object has all its bits set. While it is +possible, even easy, to obtain this information by comparing the +result of <code>count()</code> with the result of <code>size()</code> +for equality (i.e., via <code>b.count() == b.size()</code>) the +operation is less efficient than a member function designed +specifically for that purpose could be. (<code>count()</code> must +count all non-zero bits in a <code>bitset</code> a word at a time +while <code>all()</code> could stop counting as soon as it encountered +the first word with a zero bit). +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add a declaration of the new member function <code>all()</code> to the +defintion of the <code>bitset</code> template in 20.5 [template.bitset], p1, +right above the declaration of <code>any()</code> as shown below: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>bool operator!=(const bitset<N>& rhs) const; +bool test(size_t pos) const; +<ins>bool all() const;</ins> +bool any() const; +bool none() const; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Add a description of the new member function to the end of 20.5.2 [bitset.members] with the following text: +</p> +<blockquote><p> +<code>bool all() const;</code> +</p> +<blockquote> +<i>Returns</i>: <code>count() == size()</code>. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +In addition, change the description of <code>any()</code> and +<code>none()</code> for consistency with <code>all()</code> as +follows: +</p> +<blockquote><p> +<code>bool any() const;</code> +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Returns</i>: <del><code>true</code> if any bit in <code>*this</code> +is one</del><ins><code>count() != 0</code></ins>. +</p> +</blockquote> +<p> +<code>bool none() const;</code> +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Returns</i>: <del><code>true</code> if no bit in <code>*this</code> +is one</del><ins><code>count() == 0</code></ins>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="694"></a>694. <code>std::bitset</code> and <code>long long</code></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.5 [template.bitset] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2007-06-22 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#template.bitset">issues</a> in [template.bitset].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Objects of the <code>bitset</code> class template specializations can +be constructed from and explicitly converted to values of the widest +C++ integer type, <code>unsigned long</code>. With the introduction +of <code>long long</code> into the language the template should be +enhanced to make it possible to interoperate with values of this type +as well, or perhaps <code>uintmax_t</code>. See c++std-lib-18274 for +a brief discussion in support of this change. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +For simplicity, instead of adding overloads for <code>unsigned long +long</code> and dealing with possible ambiguities in the spec, replace +the <code>bitset</code> ctor that takes an <code>unsigned long</code> +argument with one taking <code>unsigned long long</code> in the +definition of the template as shown below. (The standard permits +implementations to add overloads on other integer types or employ +template tricks to achieve the same effect provided they don't cause +ambiguities or changes in behavior.) +</p> +<blockquote> +<pre>// [bitset.cons] constructors: +bitset(); +bitset(unsigned <ins>long</ins> long val); +template<class charT, class traits, class Allocator> +explicit bitset( + const basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>& str, + typename basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>::size_type pos = 0, + typename basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>::size_type n = + basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>::npos); +</pre> +</blockquote> +<p> +Make a corresponding change in 20.5.1 [bitset.cons], p2: +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +<code>bitset(unsigned <ins>long</ins> long val);</code> +</p> +<blockquote> +<i>Effects</i>: Constructs an object of class bitset<N>, +initializing the first <code><i>M</i></code> bit positions to the +corresponding bit values in <code><i>val</i></code>. +<code><i>M</i></code> is the smaller of <code><i>N</i></code> and the +number of bits in the value representation (section [basic.types]) of +<code>unsigned <ins> long</ins> long</code>. If <code><i>M</i> < +<i>N</i></code> <ins>is <code>true</code></ins>, the remaining bit +positions are initialized to zero. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Additionally, introduce a new member function <code>to_ullong()</code> +to make it possible to convert <code>bitset</code> to values of the +new type. Add the following declaration to the definition of the +template, immediate after the declaration of <code>to_ulong()</code> +in 20.5 [template.bitset], p1, as shown below: +</p> +<blockquote> +<pre>// element access: +bool operator[](size_t pos) const; // for b[i]; +reference operator[](size_t pos); // for b[i]; +unsigned long to_ulong() const; +<ins>unsigned long long to_ullong() const;</ins> +template <class charT, class traits, class Allocator> +basic_string<charT, traits, Allocator> to_string() const; +</pre> +</blockquote> +<p> +And add a description of the new member function to 20.5.2 [bitset.members], +below the description of the existing <code>to_ulong()</code> (if +possible), with the following text: +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +<code>unsigned long long to_ullong() const;</code> +</p> +<blockquote> +<i>Throws</i>: <code>overflow_error</code> if the integral value +<code><i>x</i></code> corresponding to the bits in <code>*this</code> +cannot be represented as type <code>unsigned long long</code>. +</blockquote> +<blockquote> +<i>Returns:</i> <code><i>x</i></code>. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="695"></a>695. ctype<char>::classic_table() not accessible</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.1.3 [facet.ctype.special] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2007-06-22 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The <code>ctype<char>::classic_table()</code> static member +function returns a pointer to an array of const +<code>ctype_base::mask</code> objects (enums) that contains +<code>ctype<char>::table_size</code> elements. The table +describes the properties of the character set in the "C" locale (i.e., +whether a character at an index given by its value is alpha, digit, +punct, etc.), and is typically used to initialize the +<code>ctype<char></code> facet in the classic "C" locale (the +protected <code>ctype<char></code> member function +<code>table()</code> then returns the same value as +<code>classic_table()</code>). +</p> +<p> +However, while <code>ctype<char>::table_size</code> (the size of +the table) is a public static const member of the +<code>ctype<char></code> specialization, the +<code>classic_table()</code> static member function is protected. That +makes getting at the classic data less than convenient (i.e., one has +to create a whole derived class just to get at the masks array). It +makes little sense to expose the size of the table in the public +interface while making the table itself protected, especially when the +table is a constant object. +</p> +<p> +The same argument can be made for the non-static protected member +function <code>table()</code>. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Make the <code>ctype<char>::classic_table()</code> and +<code>ctype<char>::table()</code> member functions public by +moving their declarations into the public section of the definition of +specialization in 22.4.1.3 [facet.ctype.special] as shown below: +</p> +<blockquote> +<pre> static locale::id id; + static const size_t table_size = IMPLEMENTATION_DEFINED; +<del>protected:</del> + const mask* table() const throw(); + static const mask* classic_table() throw(); +<ins>protected:</ins> + +~ctype(); // virtual +virtual char do_toupper(char c) const; +</pre> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="696"></a>696. <code>istream::operator>>(int&)</code> broken</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.1.2.2 [istream.formatted.arithmetic] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2007-06-23 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#istream.formatted.arithmetic">issues</a> in [istream.formatted.arithmetic].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +From message c++std-lib-17897: +</p> +<p> +The code shown in 27.7.1.2.2 [istream.formatted.arithmetic] as the "as if" +implementation of the two arithmetic extractors that don't have a +corresponding <code>num_get</code> interface (i.e., the +<code>short</code> and <code>int</code> overloads) is subtly buggy in +how it deals with <code>EOF</code>, overflow, and other similar +conditions (in addition to containing a few typos). +</p> +<p> +One problem is that if <code>num_get::get()</code> reaches the EOF +after reading in an otherwise valid value that exceeds the limits of +the narrower type (but not <code>LONG_MIN</code> or +<code>LONG_MAX</code>), it will set <code><i>err</i></code> to +<code>eofbit</code>. Because of the if condition testing for +<code>(<i>err</i> == 0)</code>, the extractor won't set +<code>failbit</code> (and presumably, return a bogus value to the +caller). +</p> +<p> +Another problem with the code is that it never actually sets the +argument to the extracted value. It can't happen after the call to +<code>setstate()</code> since the function may throw, so we need to +show when and how it's done (we can't just punt as say: "it happens +afterwards"). However, it turns out that showing how it's done isn't +quite so easy since the argument is normally left unchanged by the +facet on error except when the error is due to a misplaced thousands +separator, which causes <code>failbit</code> to be set but doesn't +prevent the facet from storing the value. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +We believe this part of the Standard has been recently adjusted +and that this issue was addressed during that rewrite. +</p> +<p> +Move to NAD. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-28 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I've moved this issue from Tentatively NAD to Open. +</p> + +<p> +The current wording of +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2857.pdf">N2857</a> +in 22.4.2.1.2 [facet.num.get.virtuals] p3, stage 3 appears to indicate that +in parsing arithmetic types, the value is always set, but sometimes in addition +to setting <tt>failbit</tt>. +</p> + +<ul> +<li> +If there is a range error, the value is set to min or max, else +</li> +<li> +if there is a conversion error, the value is set to 0, else +</li> +<li> +if there is a grouping error, the value is set to whatever it would be if grouping were ignored, else +</li> +<li> +the value is set to its error-free result. +</li> +</ul> + +<p> +However there is a contradictory sentence in 22.4.2.1.2 [facet.num.get.virtuals] p1. +</p> + +<p> +27.7.1.2.2 [istream.formatted.arithmetic] should mimic the behavior of 22.4.2.1.2 [facet.num.get.virtuals] +(whatever we decide that behavior is) for +<tt>int</tt> and <tt>short</tt>, and currently does not. I believe that the +correct code fragment should look like: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>typedef num_get<charT,istreambuf_iterator<charT,traits> > numget; +iostate err = ios_base::goodbit; +long lval; +use_facet<numget>(loc).get(*this, 0, *this, err, lval); +if (lval < numeric_limits<int>::min()) +{ + err |= ios_base::failbit; + val = numeric_limits<int>::min(); +} +else if (lval > numeric_limits<int>::max()) +{ + err |= ios_base::failbit; + val = numeric_limits<int>::max(); +} +else + val = static_cast<int>(lval); +setstate(err); +</pre></blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 22.4.2.1.2 [facet.num.get.virtuals], p1: +</p> + +<blockquote> +-1- <i>Effects:</i> Reads characters from <tt>in</tt>, interpreting them +according to <tt>str.flags()</tt>, <tt>use_facet<ctype<charT> +>(loc)</tt>, and <tt>use_facet< numpunct<charT> +>(loc)</tt>, where <tt>loc</tt> is <tt>str.getloc()</tt>. <del>If an error +occurs, <tt>val</tt> is unchanged; otherwise it is set to the resulting value.</del> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 27.7.1.2.2 [istream.formatted.arithmetic], p2 and p3: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>operator>>(short& val); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +-2- The conversion occurs as if performed by the following code fragment (using the same notation as for +the preceding code fragment): +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>typedef num_get<charT,istreambuf_iterator<charT,traits> > numget; +iostate err = ios<del>tate</del><ins>_base</ins>::goodbit; +long lval; +use_facet<numget>(loc).get(*this, 0, *this, err, lval); +<del>if (err != 0) + ; +else if (lval < numeric_limits<short>::min() + || numeric_limits<short>::max() < lval) + err = ios_base::failbit;</del> +<ins>if (lval < numeric_limits<short>::min()) +{ + err |= ios_base::failbit; + val = numeric_limits<short>::min(); +} +else if (lval > numeric_limits<short>::max()) +{ + err |= ios_base::failbit; + val = numeric_limits<short>::max(); +}</ins> +else + val = static_cast<short>(lval); +setstate(err); +</pre></blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<pre>operator>>(int& val); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +-3- The conversion occurs as if performed by the following code fragment (using the same notation as for +the preceding code fragment): +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>typedef num_get<charT,istreambuf_iterator<charT,traits> > numget; +iostate err = ios<del>tate</del><ins>_base</ins>::goodbit; +long lval; +use_facet<numget>(loc).get(*this, 0, *this, err, lval); +<del>if (err != 0) + ; +else if (lval < numeric_limits<int>::min() + || numeric_limits<int>::max() < lval) + err = ios_base::failbit;</del> +<ins>if (lval < numeric_limits<int>::min()) +{ + err |= ios_base::failbit; + val = numeric_limits<int>::min(); +} +else if (lval > numeric_limits<int>::max()) +{ + err |= ios_base::failbit; + val = numeric_limits<int>::max(); +}</ins> +else + val = static_cast<int>(lval); +setstate(err); +</pre></blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="697"></a>697. New <tt><system_error></tt> header leads to name clashes</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 19.5 [syserr] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2007-06-24 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-19</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#syserr">issues</a> in [syserr].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The most recent state of +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2241.html">N2241</a> +as well as the current draft +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2284.pdf">N2284</a> +(section 19.5 [syserr], p.2) proposes a +new +enumeration type <tt>posix_errno</tt> immediatly in the namespace <tt>std</tt>. One of +the enumerators has the name <tt>invalid_argument</tt>, or fully qualified: +<tt>std::invalid_argument</tt>. This name clashes with the exception type +<tt>std::invalid_argument</tt>, see 19.2 [std.exceptions]/p.3. This clash makes +e.g. the following snippet invalid: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>#include <system_error> +#include <stdexcept> + +void foo() { throw std::invalid_argument("Don't call us - we call you!"); } +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +I propose that this enumeration type (and probably the remaining parts +of +<tt><system_error></tt> as well) should be moved into one additional inner +namespace, e.g. <tt>sys</tt> or <tt>system</tt> to reduce foreseeable future clashes +due +to the great number of members that <tt>std::posix_errno</tt> already contains +(Btw.: Why has the already proposed <tt>std::sys</tt> sub-namespace from +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2006/n2066.html">N2066</a> +been rejected?). A further clash <em>candidate</em> seems to be +<tt>std::protocol_error</tt> +(a reasonable name for an exception related to a std network library, +I guess). +</p> + +<p> +Another possible resolution would rely on the proposed strongly typed +enums, +as described in <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2213.pdf">N2213</a>. +But maybe the forbidden implicit conversion to integral types would +make +these enumerators less attractive in this special case? +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Fixed by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2422.htm#Issue7">issue 7 of N2422</a>. +</p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="698"></a>698. <tt>system_error</tt> needs <tt>const char*</tt> constructors</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 19.5.6.1 [syserr.syserr.overview] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2007-06-24 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In 19.5.6.1 [syserr.syserr.overview] we have the class definition of +<tt>std::system_error</tt>. In contrast to all exception classes, which +are constructible with a <tt>what_arg string</tt> (see 19.2 [std.exceptions], +or <tt>ios_base::failure</tt> in 27.5.2.1.1 [ios::failure]), only overloads with with +<tt>const string&</tt> are possible. For consistency with the re-designed +remaining exception classes this class should also provide +c'tors which accept a const <tt>char* what_arg</tt> string. +</p> +<p> +Please note that this proposed addition makes sense even +considering the given implementation hint for <tt>what()</tt>, because +<tt>what_arg</tt> is required to be set as <tt>what_arg</tt> of the base class +<tt>runtime_error</tt>, which now has the additional c'tor overload +accepting a <tt>const char*</tt>. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +This proposed wording assumes issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#832">832</a> has been accepted and applied to the working paper. +</p> + +<p> +Change 19.5.6.1 [syserr.syserr.overview] Class system_error overview, as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>public: + system_error(error_code ec, const string& what_arg); + <ins>system_error(error_code ec, const char* what_arg);</ins> + system_error(error_code ec); + system_error(int ev, const error_category* ecat, + const string& what_arg); + <ins>system_error(int ev, const error_category* ecat, + const char* what_arg);</ins> + system_error(int ev, const error_category* ecat); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +To 19.5.6.2 [syserr.syserr.members] Class system_error members add: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>system_error(error_code ec, const char* what_arg); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Constructs an object of class <tt>system_error</tt>. +</p> +<p> +<i>Postconditions:</i> <tt>code() == ec</tt> and <tt>strcmp(runtime_error::what(), what_arg) == 0</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<pre>system_error(int ev, const error_category* ecat, const char* what_arg); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Constructs an object of class <tt>system_error</tt>. +</p> +<p> +<i>Postconditions:</i> <tt>code() == error_code(ev, ecat)</tt> and <tt>strcmp(runtime_error::what(), what_arg) == 0</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="699"></a>699. N2111 changes min/max</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5 [rand] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> P.J. Plauger <b>Opened:</b> 2007-07-01 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#rand">issues</a> in [rand].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2006/n2111.pdf">N2111</a> +changes <tt>min/max</tt> in several places in random from member +functions to static data members. I believe this introduces +a needless backward compatibility problem between C++0X and +TR1. I'd like us to find new names for the static data members, +or perhaps change <tt>min/max</tt> to <tt>constexpr</tt>s in C++0X. +</p> + +<p> +See <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2391.pdf">N2391</a> and +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2423.pdf">N2423</a> +for some further discussion. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Adopt the proposed resolution in +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2423.pdf">N2423</a>. +</p> + + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007): The LWG adopted the proposed resolution of N2423 for this issue. +The LWG voted to accelerate this issue to Ready status to be voted into the WP at Kona. +]</i></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="700"></a>700. N1856 defines struct <tt>identity</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.3.3 [forward] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> P.J. Plauger <b>Opened:</b> 2007-07-01 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#forward">issues</a> in [forward].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2005/n1856.html">N1856</a> +defines struct <tt>identity</tt> in <tt><utility></tt> which clashes with +the traditional definition of struct <tt>identity</tt> in <tt><functional></tt> +(not standard, but a common extension from old STL). Be nice +if we could avoid this name clash for backward compatibility. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 20.3.3 [forward]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template <class T> struct identity +{ + typedef T type; + <ins>const T& operator()(const T& x) const;</ins> +}; +</pre> +<blockquote> +<pre><ins>const T& operator()(const T& x) const;</ins> +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins><i>Returns:</i> <tt>x</tt>.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="703"></a>703. <tt>map::at()</tt> need a complexity specification</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.6.1.2 [map.access] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Joe Gottman <b>Opened:</b> 2007-07-03 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#map.access">issues</a> in [map.access].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +<tt>map::at()</tt> need a complexity specification. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add the following to the specification of <tt>map::at()</tt>, 23.6.1.2 [map.access]: +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Complexity:</i> logarithmic. +</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="704"></a>704. MoveAssignable requirement for container value type overly strict</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2 [container.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2007-05-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#container.requirements">issues</a> in [container.requirements].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The move-related changes inadvertently overwrote the intent of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#276">276</a>. +Issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#276">276</a> removed the requirement of <tt>CopyAssignable</tt> from +most of the member functions of node-based containers. But the move-related changes +unnecessarily introduced the <tt>MoveAssignable</tt> requirement for those members which used to +require <tt>CopyAssignable</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +We also discussed (c++std-lib-18722) the possibility of dropping <tt>MoveAssignable</tt> +from some of the sequence requirements. Additionally the <i>in-place</i> construction +work may further reduce requirements. For purposes of an easy reference, here are the +minimum sequence requirements as I currently understand them. Those items in requirements +table in the working draft which do not appear below have been purposefully omitted for +brevity as they do not have any requirements of this nature. Some items which do not +have any requirements of this nature are included below just to confirm that they were +not omitted by mistake. +</p> + +<table border="1"> +<caption>Container Requirements</caption> +<tbody><tr><td><tt>X u(a)</tt></td><td><tt>value_type</tt> must be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt></td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>X u(rv)</tt></td><td><tt>array</tt> requires <tt>value_type</tt> to be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt></td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a = u</tt></td><td>Sequences require <tt>value_type</tt> to be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> and <tt>CopyAssignable</tt>. + Associative containers require <tt>value_type</tt> to be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>.</td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a = rv</tt></td><td><tt>array</tt> requires <tt>value_type</tt> to be <tt>CopyAssignable</tt>. + Sequences containers with <tt>propagate_on_container_move_assignment == false</tt> allocators require <tt>value_type</tt> to be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> and <tt>MoveAssignable</tt>. + Associative containers with <tt>propagate_on_container_move_assignment == false</tt> allocators require <tt>value_type</tt> to be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>.</td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>swap(a,u)</tt></td><td><tt>array</tt> requires <tt>value_type</tt> to be <tt>Swappable</tt>.</td></tr> +</tbody></table> + +<p> +</p> + +<table border="1"> +<caption>Sequence Requirements</caption> +<tbody><tr><td><tt>X(n)</tt></td><td><tt>value_type</tt> must be <tt>DefaultConstructible</tt></td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>X(n, t)</tt></td><td><tt>value_type</tt> must be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt></td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>X(i, j)</tt></td><td>Sequences require <tt>value_type</tt> to be constructible from <tt>*i</tt>. Additionally if input_iterators + are used, <tt>vector</tt> and <tt>deque</tt> require <tt>MoveContructible</tt> and <tt>MoveAssignable</tt>.</td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a.insert(p, t)</tt></td><td>The <tt>value_type</tt> must be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>. + The sequences <tt>vector</tt> and <tt>deque</tt> also require the <tt>value_type</tt> to be <tt>CopyAssignable</tt>.</td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a.insert(p, rv)</tt></td><td>The <tt>value_type</tt> must be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>. + The sequences <tt>vector</tt> and <tt>deque</tt> also require the <tt>value_type</tt> to be <tt>MoveAssignable</tt>.</td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a.insert(p, n, t)</tt></td><td>The <tt>value_type</tt> must be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>. + The sequences <tt>vector</tt> and <tt>deque</tt> also require the <tt>value_type</tt> to be <tt>CopyAssignable</tt>.</td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a.insert(p, i, j)</tt></td><td>If the iterators return an lvalue the <tt>value_type</tt> must be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>. + The sequences <tt>vector</tt> and <tt>deque</tt> also require the <tt>value_type</tt> to be <tt>CopyAssignable</tt> when the iterators return an lvalue. + If the iterators return an rvalue the <tt>value_type</tt> must be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>. + The sequences <tt>vector</tt> and <tt>deque</tt> also require the <tt>value_type</tt> to be <tt>MoveAssignable</tt> when the iterators return an rvalue.</td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a.erase(p)</tt></td><td>The sequences <tt>vector</tt> and <tt>deque</tt> require the <tt>value_type</tt> to be <tt>MoveAssignable</tt>.</td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a.erase(q1, q2)</tt></td><td>The sequences <tt>vector</tt> and <tt>deque</tt> require the <tt>value_type</tt> to be <tt>MoveAssignable</tt>.</td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a.clear()</tt></td><td></td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a.assign(i, j)</tt></td><td>If the iterators return an lvalue the <tt>value_type</tt> must be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> and <tt>CopyAssignable</tt>. + If the iterators return an rvalue the <tt>value_type</tt> must be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> and <tt>MoveAssignable</tt>.</td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a.assign(n, t)</tt></td><td>The <tt>value_type</tt> must be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> and <tt>CopyAssignable</tt>.</td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a.resize(n)</tt></td><td>The <tt>value_type</tt> must be <tt>DefaultConstructible</tt>. + The sequence <tt>vector</tt> also requires the <tt>value_type</tt> to be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>.</td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a.resize(n, t)</tt></td><td>The <tt>value_type</tt> must be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>.</td></tr> +</tbody></table> + +<p> +</p> + +<table border="1"> +<caption>Optional Sequence Requirements</caption> +<tbody><tr><td><tt>a.front()</tt></td><td></td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a.back()</tt></td><td></td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a.push_front(t)</tt></td><td>The <tt>value_type</tt> must be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>.</td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a.push_front(rv)</tt></td><td>The <tt>value_type</tt> must be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>.</td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a.push_back(t)</tt></td><td>The <tt>value_type</tt> must be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>.</td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a.push_back(rv)</tt></td><td>The <tt>value_type</tt> must be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>.</td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a.pop_front()</tt></td><td></td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a.pop_back()</tt></td><td></td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a[n]</tt></td><td></td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a.at[n]</tt></td><td></td></tr> +</tbody></table> + +<p> +</p> + +<table border="1"> +<caption>Associative Container Requirements</caption> +<tbody><tr><td><tt>X(i, j)</tt></td><td>If the iterators return an lvalue the <tt>value_type</tt> must be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>. + If the iterators return an rvalue the <tt>value_type</tt> must be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>.</td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a_uniq.insert(t)</tt></td><td>The <tt>value_type</tt> must be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>.</td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a_uniq.insert(rv)</tt></td><td>The <tt>key_type</tt> and the <tt>mapped_type</tt> (if it exists) must be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>.</td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a_eq.insert(t)</tt></td><td>The <tt>value_type</tt> must be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>.</td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a_eq.insert(rv)</tt></td><td>The <tt>key_type</tt> and the <tt>mapped_type</tt> (if it exists) must be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>.</td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a.insert(p, t)</tt></td><td>The <tt>value_type</tt> must be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>.</td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a.insert(p, rv)</tt></td><td>The <tt>key_type</tt> and the <tt>mapped_type</tt> (if it exists) must be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>.</td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a.insert(i, j)</tt></td><td>If the iterators return an lvalue the <tt>value_type</tt> must be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>. + If the iterators return an rvalue the <tt>key_type</tt> and the <tt>mapped_type</tt> (if it exists) must be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>..</td></tr> +</tbody></table> + +<p> +</p> + +<table border="1"> +<caption>Unordered Associative Container Requirements</caption> +<tbody><tr><td><tt>X(i, j, n, hf, eq)</tt></td><td>If the iterators return an lvalue the <tt>value_type</tt> must be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>. + If the iterators return an rvalue the <tt>value_type</tt> must be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>.</td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a_uniq.insert(t)</tt></td><td>The <tt>value_type</tt> must be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>.</td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a_uniq.insert(rv)</tt></td><td>The <tt>key_type</tt> and the <tt>mapped_type</tt> (if it exists) must be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>.</td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a_eq.insert(t)</tt></td><td>The <tt>value_type</tt> must be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>.</td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a_eq.insert(rv)</tt></td><td>The <tt>key_type</tt> and the <tt>mapped_type</tt> (if it exists) must be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>.</td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a.insert(p, t)</tt></td><td>The <tt>value_type</tt> must be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>.</td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a.insert(p, rv)</tt></td><td>The <tt>key_type</tt> and the <tt>mapped_type</tt> (if it exists) must be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>.</td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>a.insert(i, j)</tt></td><td>If the iterators return an lvalue the <tt>value_type</tt> must be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>. + If the iterators return an rvalue the <tt>key_type</tt> and the <tt>mapped_type</tt> (if it exists) must be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>..</td></tr> +</tbody></table> + +<p> +</p> + +<table border="1"> +<caption>Miscellaneous Requirements</caption> +<tbody><tr><td><tt>map[lvalue-key]</tt></td><td>The <tt>key_type</tt> must be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>. + The <tt>mapped_type</tt> must be <tt>DefaultConstructible</tt> and <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>.</td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>map[rvalue-key]</tt></td><td>The <tt>key_type</tt> must be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>. + The <tt>mapped_type</tt> must be <tt>DefaultConstructible</tt> and <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>.</td></tr> +</tbody></table> + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007): Howard and Alan to update requirements table in issue with emplace signatures. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Bellevue: This should be handled as part of the concepts work. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-20 Reopened by Howard: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +This is one of the issues that was "solved by concepts" and is now no longer solved. +</p> + +<p> +In a nutshell, concepts adopted the "minimum requirements" philosophy outlined +in the discussion of this issue, and enforced it. My strong suggestion is that +we translate the concepts specification into documentation for the containers. +</p> + +<p> +What this means for vendors is that they will have to implement container members +being careful to only use those characteristics of a type that the concepts specification +formally allowed. Note that I <em>am not</em> talking about <tt>enable_if</tt>'ing +everything. I am simply suggesting that (for example) we tell the vendor he can't call <tt>T's</tt> +copy constructor or move constructor within the <tt>emplace</tt> member function, etc. +</p> + +<p> +What this means for customers is that they will be able to use types within C++03 +containers which are sometimes not CopyConstructible, and sometimes not even +MoveConstructible, etc. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Leave open. Howard to provide wording. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-06 Howard provides wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-08 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-10 Howard opened. I neglected to reduce the requirements on value_type +for the insert function of the ordered and unordered associative containers when +the argument is an rvalue. Fixed it. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-11 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-03-08 Nico opens: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I took the task to see whether <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#868">868</a> is covered by 704 +already. +However, by doing that I have the impression that +704 is a big mistake. +</p> + +<p> +Take e.g. the second change of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#868">868</a>: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Change 23.3.2.1 [deque.cons] para 5: +</p> +<blockquote> +<i>Effects:</i> Constructs a <tt>deque</tt> with <tt>n</tt> default constructed +elements. +</blockquote> +<p> +where "default constructed" should be replaced by "value-initialized". +This is the constructor out of a number of elements: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>ContType c(num) +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +704 says: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Remove the entire section 23.3.2.1 [deque.cons]. +</p> +<blockquote> +[ This section is already specified by the requirements tables. ] +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +BUT, there is no requirement table that lists this constructor at all, +which means that we would lose the entire specification of this function +!!! +</p> + +<p> +In fact, I found with further investigation, if we follow +704 to remove 23.3.2.1 we +</p> +<ul> +<li> +have no semantics for + <tt>ContType c(num)</tt> +</li> +<li> +have no complexity and no allocator specification for + <tt>ContType c(num,val)</tt> +</li> +<li> +have no semantics for + <tt>ContType c(num,val,alloc)</tt> +</li> +<li> +- have no complexity and no allocator specification for + <tt>ContType c(beg,end)</tt> +</li> +<li> +- have no semantics for + <tt>ContType c(beg,end,alloc)</tt> +</li> +<li> +- have different wording (which might or might not give + the same guarantees) for the <tt>assign</tt> functions +</li> +</ul> + +<p> +because all these guarantees are given in the removed +section but nowhere else (as far as I saw). +</p> +<p> +Looks to me that 704 need a significant review before we +take that change, because chances are high that there +are similar flaws in other proposed changes there +(provided I am not missing anything). +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010 Pittsburgh: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Removed the parts from the proposed wording that removed existing sections, +and set to Ready for Pittsburgh. +</p> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p><i>[ +post San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Solved by +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2776.pdf">N2776</a>. +</blockquote> + +<p> +This rationale is obsolete. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + + + +<p> +Change 23.2.1 [container.requirements.general]/4: +</p> + +<blockquote> +4 In Tables 91 and 92, <tt>X</tt> denotes a container class containing objects +of type <tt>T</tt>, <tt>a</tt> and <tt>b</tt> denote values of type <tt>X</tt>, +<tt>u</tt> denotes an identifier, <tt>r</tt> denotes <del>an lvalue or a const +rvalue</del> <ins>a non-const value</ins> of type <tt>X</tt>, and <tt>rv</tt> +denotes a non-const rvalue of type <tt>X</tt>. +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change the following rows in Table 91 — Container requirements +23.2.1 [container.requirements.general]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 91 — Container requirements</caption> + +<tbody><tr> +<th>Expression</th> +<th>Return type</th> +<th>Assertion/note<br>pre-/post-condition</th> +<th>Complexity</th> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>X::value_type</tt></td> +<td><tt>T</tt></td> +<td><ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>T</tt> is <tt>Destructible</tt>.</ins></td> +<td>compile time</td> +</tr> + +</tbody></table> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 23.2.1 [container.requirements.general]/10: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Unless otherwise specified (see 23.2.4.1, 23.2.5.1, 23.3.2.3, and 23.3.6.4) all +container types defined in this Clause meet the following additional +requirements: +</p> + +<ul> +<li> +.. +</li> + +<li> +no <tt>erase()</tt>, <ins><tt>clear()</tt>,</ins> <tt>pop_back()</tt> or +<tt>pop_front()</tt> function throws an exception. +</li> + +<li> +... +</li> +</ul> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +Insert a new paragraph prior to 23.2.1 [container.requirements.general]/14: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p><ins> +The descriptions of the requirements of the type <tt>T</tt> in this section +use the terms <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>, <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>, <i>constructible +from <tt>*i</tt></i>, and <i>constructible from <tt>args</tt></i>. These terms +are equivalent to the following expression using the appropriate arguments: +</ins></p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins> +allocator_traits<allocator_type>::construct(x.get_allocator(), q, args...); +</ins></pre></blockquote> + +<p><ins> +where <tt>x</tt> is a non-const lvalue of some container type <tt>X</tt> and +<tt>q</tt> has type <tt>X::value_type*</tt>. +</ins></p> + +<p><ins> +[<i>Example:</i> The container is going to move construct a <tt>T</tt>, so will +call: +</ins></p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins> +allocator_traits<allocator_type>::construct(get_allocator(), q, std::move(t)); +</ins></pre></blockquote> + +<p><ins> +The default implementation of construct will call: +</ins></p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins> +::new (q) T(std::forward<T>(t)); // where forward is the same as move here, cast to rvalue +</ins></pre></blockquote> + +<p><ins> +But the allocator author may override the above definition of <tt>construct</tt> +and do the construction of <tt>T</tt> by some other means. — <i>end +example</i>] +</ins></p> + +<p> +14 ... +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Add to 23.2.1 [container.requirements.general]/14: +</p> + +<blockquote> +14 In Table 93, <tt>X</tt> denotes an allocator-aware container class with a +<tt>value_type</tt> of <tt>T</tt> using allocator of type <tt>A</tt>, <tt>u</tt> +denotes a variable, <ins><tt>a</tt> and <tt>b</tt> denote non-const lvalues of +type <tt>X</tt>,</ins> <tt>t</tt> denotes an lvalue or a const rvalue of type +<tt>X</tt>, <tt>rv</tt> denotes a non-const rvalue of type <tt>X</tt>, +<tt>m</tt> is a value of type <tt>A</tt>, and <tt>Q</tt> is an allocator type. +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change or add the following rows in Table 93 — Allocator-aware container +requirements in 23.2.1 [container.requirements.general]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 93 — Allocator-aware container requirements</caption> + +<tbody><tr> +<th>Expression</th> +<th>Return type</th> +<th>Assertion/note<br>pre-/post-condition</th> +<th>Complexity</th> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>X(t, m)<br>X u(t, m);</tt></td> +<td></td> +<td><ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>T</tt> is <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>.</ins><br> +post: <tt>u == t</tt>,<br> +<tt>get_allocator() == m</tt></td> +<td>linear</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>X(rv, m)<br>X u(rv, m);</tt></td> +<td></td> +<td><ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>T</tt> is <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>.</ins><br> +post: <tt>u</tt> shall have the same elements, or copies of the elements, that +<tt>rv</tt> had before this construction,<br> +<tt>get_allocator() == m</tt></td> +<td>constant if <tt>m == rv.get_allocator()</tt>, otherwise linear</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><ins><tt>a = t</tt></ins></td> +<td><ins><tt>X&</tt></ins></td> +<td><ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>T</tt> is <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> and +<tt>CopyAssignable</tt><br> +post: <tt>a == t</tt>.</ins></td> +<td><ins>linear</ins></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><ins><tt>a = rv</tt></ins></td> +<td><ins><tt>X&</tt></ins></td> +<td><ins><i>Requires:</i> If <tt>allocator_traits< allocator_type > +::propagate_on_container_move_assignment ::value</tt> is <tt>false</tt>, +<tt>T</tt> is <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> and <tt>MoveAssignable</tt>.<br> +All existing elements of <tt>a</tt> are either move assigned +<ins>to</ins> or destroyed.<br> +<tt>a</tt> shall be equal to the value that <tt>rv</tt> had before this +assignment</ins></td> +<td><ins>linear</ins></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><ins><tt>a.swap(b);</tt></ins></td> +<td><ins><tt>void</tt></ins></td> +<td><ins>exchanges the contents of <tt>a</tt> and <tt>b</tt></ins></td> +<td><ins>constant</ins></td> +</tr> + +</tbody></table> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change the following rows in Table 94 — Sequence container requirements +(in addition to container) in 23.2.3 [sequence.reqmts]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 94 — Sequence container requirements (in addition to +container)</caption> + +<tbody><tr> +<th>Expression</th> +<th>Return type</th> +<th>Assertion/note<br>pre-/post-condition</th> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>X(i, j)<br>X a(i, j)</tt></td> +<td></td> +<td><i>Requires:</i> <del>If the iterator's dereference operation returns an +lvalue or a const rvalue, <tt>T</tt> shall be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>.</del> +<ins><tt>T</tt> shall be constructible from <tt>*i</tt>.</ins><br> +<ins>If the iterator does not meet the forward iterator requirements (24.2.5 [forward.iterators]), then <tt>vector</tt> also requires <tt>T</tt> to +be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>.</ins><br> +Each iterator in the range <tt>[i,j)</tt> shall be dereferenced exactly +once.<br> +post: <tt>size() ==</tt> distance between <tt>i</tt> and <tt>j</tt><br> +Constructs a sequence container equal to the range <tt>[i, j)</tt></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>a = il;</tt></td> +<td><tt>X&</tt></td> +<td><ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>T</tt> is <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> and +<tt>CopyAssignable</tt>.</ins><br> +<del><tt>a = X(il);</tt></del><br> +<ins>Assigns the range <tt>[il.begin(), il.end())</tt> into <tt>a</tt>. All +existing elements of <tt>a</tt> are either assigned or destroyed.</ins><br> +<del>r</del><ins>R</ins>eturn<ins>s</ins> <tt>*this;</tt></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>a.emplace(p, args);</tt></td> +<td><tt>iterator</tt></td> +<td><i>Requires:</i> <del><tt>ConstructibleAsElement<A, T, +Args></tt>.</del> <ins><tt>T</tt> is constructible from <tt>args</tt>. +<tt>vector</tt> and <tt>deque</tt> also require <tt>T</tt> to be +<tt>MoveConstructible</tt> and <tt>MoveAssignable</tt>.</ins> Inserts an object +of type <tt>T</tt> constructed with +<tt>std::forward<Args>(args)...</tt> <ins>before <tt>p</tt></ins>.</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>a.insert(p, t);</tt></td> +<td><tt>iterator</tt></td> +<td><i>Requires:</i> <del><tt>ConstructibleAsElement<A, T, Args></tt> and +<tt>T</tt> shall be <tt>CopyAssignable</tt>.</del> <ins><tt>T</tt> shall be +<tt>CopyConstructible</tt>. <tt>vector</tt> and <tt>deque</tt> also require +<tt>T</tt> to be <tt>CopyAssignable</tt>.</ins> Inserts a copy <tt>t</tt> before +<tt>p</tt>.</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>a.insert(p, rv);</tt></td> +<td><tt>iterator</tt></td> +<td><i>Requires:</i> <del><tt>ConstructibleAsElement<A, T, +T&&></tt> and <tt>T</tt> shall be <tt>MoveAssignable</tt>.</del> +<ins><tt>T</tt> shall be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>. <tt>vector</tt> and +<tt>deque</tt> also require <tt>T</tt> to be <tt>MoveAssignable</tt>.</ins> +Inserts a copy <tt>rv</tt> before <tt>p</tt>.</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>a.insert(p, i, j)</tt></td> +<td><tt>iterator</tt></td> +<td><i>Requires:</i> <del>If the iterator's dereference operation returns an +lvalue or a const rvalue, <tt>T</tt> shall be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>.</del> +<ins><tt>T</tt> shall be constructible from <tt>*i</tt>.</ins><br> <ins>If the +iterator does not meet the forward iterator requirements (24.2.5 [forward.iterators]), then <tt>vector</tt> also requires <tt>T</tt> to +be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> and <tt>MoveAssignable</tt>.</ins><br> Each +iterator in the range <tt>[i,j)</tt> shall be dereferenced exactly once.<br> +pre: <tt>i</tt> and <tt>j</tt> are not iterators into <tt>a</tt>.<br> Inserts +copies of elements in <tt>[i, j)</tt> before <tt>p</tt></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>a.erase(q);</tt></td> +<td><tt>iterator</tt></td> +<td><i>Requires:</i> <del><tt>T</tt> and <tt>T</tt> shall be +<tt>MoveAssignable</tt>.</del> <ins><tt>vector</tt> and <tt>deque</tt> require +<tt>T</tt> to be <tt>MoveAssignable</tt>.</ins> Erases the element pointed to by +<tt>q</tt>.</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>a.erase(q1, q2);</tt></td> +<td><tt>iterator</tt></td> +<td><i>Requires:</i> <del><tt>T</tt> and <tt>T</tt> shall be +<tt>MoveAssignable</tt>.</del> <ins><tt>vector</tt> and <tt>deque</tt> require +<tt>T</tt> to be <tt>MoveAssignable</tt>.</ins> Erases the elements in the range +<tt>[q1, q2)</tt>.</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>a.clear();</tt></td> +<td><tt>void</tt></td> +<td><del><tt>erase(begin(), end())</tt></del><br> +<ins>Destroys all elements in <tt>a</tt>. <ins>Invalidates all references, +pointers, and iterators referring to the elements of <tt>a</tt> and may +invalidate the past-the-end iterator.</ins><br></ins> +post: <tt><del>size() == 0</del> <ins>a.empty() == true</ins></tt></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>a.assign(i, j)</tt></td> +<td><tt>void</tt></td> +<td><i>Requires:</i> <del>If the iterator's dereference operation returns an +lvalue or a const rvalue, <tt>T</tt> shall be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> and +<tt>CopyAssignable</tt>.</del> +<ins><tt>T</tt> shall be constructible and assignable from <tt>*i</tt>. If the +iterator does not meet the forward iterator requirements (24.2.5 [forward.iterators]), then <tt>vector</tt> also requires <tt>T</tt> to +be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>.</ins><br> +Each iterator in the range <tt>[i,j)</tt> shall be dereferenced exactly +once.<br> +pre: <tt>i</tt>, <tt>j</tt> are not iterators into <tt>a</tt>.<br> +Replaces elements in <tt>a</tt> with a copy of <tt>[i, j)</tt>.</td> +</tr> + +</tbody></table> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change the following rows in Table 95 — Optional sequence container operations +in 23.2.3 [sequence.reqmts]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 95 — Optional sequence container operations</caption> + +<tbody><tr> +<th>Expression</th> +<th>Return type</th> +<th>Operational semantics</th> +<th>Container</th> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>a.emplace_front(args)</tt></td> +<td><tt>void</tt></td> +<td><del><tt>a.emplace(a.begin(), std::forward<Args>(args)...)</tt></del><br> +<ins>Prepends an object of type <tt>T</tt> constructed with +<tt>std::forward<Args>(args)...</tt>.</ins><br> +<i>Requires:</i> <del><tt>ConstructibleAsElement<A, T, Args></tt></del> +<ins><tt>T</tt> shall be constructible from <tt>args</tt>.</ins></td> +<td><tt>list</tt>, <tt>deque</tt>, <tt>forward_list</tt></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>a.emplace_back(args)</tt></td> +<td><tt>void</tt></td> +<td><del><tt>a.emplace(a.end(), std::forward<Args>(args)...)</tt></del><br> +<ins>Appends an object of type <tt>T</tt> constructed with +<tt>std::forward<Args>(args)...</tt>.</ins><br> +<i>Requires:</i> <del><tt>ConstructibleAsElement<A, T, Args></tt></del> +<ins><tt>T</tt> shall be constructible from <tt>args</tt>. <tt>vector</tt> also +requires <tt>T</tt> to be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>.</ins></td> +<td><tt>list</tt>, <tt>deque</tt>, <tt>vector</tt></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>a.push_front(t)</tt></td> +<td><tt>void</tt></td> +<td><del><tt>a.insert(a.begin(), t)</tt></del><br> +<ins>Prepends a copy of <tt>t</tt>.</ins><br> +<i>Requires:</i> <del><tt>ConstructibleAsElement<A, T, T></tt> and +<tt>T</tt> shall be <tt>CopyAssignable</tt>.</del> +<ins><tt>T</tt> shall be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>.</ins></td> +<td><tt>list</tt>, <tt>deque</tt>, <tt>forward_list</tt></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>a.push_front(rv)</tt></td> +<td><tt>void</tt></td> +<td><del><tt>a.insert(a.begin(), t)</tt></del><br> +<ins>Prepends a copy of <tt>rv</tt>.</ins><br> +<i>Requires:</i> <del><tt>ConstructibleAsElement<A, T, T&&></tt> and +<tt>T</tt> shall be <tt>MoveAssignable</tt>.</del> +<ins><tt>T</tt> shall be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>.</ins></td> +<td><tt>list</tt>, <tt>deque</tt>, <tt>forward_list</tt></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>a.push_back(t)</tt></td> +<td><tt>void</tt></td> +<td><del><tt>a.insert(a.end(), t)</tt></del><br> +<ins>Appends a copy of <tt>t</tt>.</ins><br> +<i>Requires:</i> <del><tt>ConstructibleAsElement<A, T, T></tt> and +<tt>T</tt> shall be <tt>CopyAssignable</tt>.</del> +<ins><tt>T</tt> shall be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>.</ins></td> +<td><tt>vector</tt>, <tt>list</tt>, <tt>deque</tt>, <tt>basic_string</tt></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>a.push_back(rv)</tt></td> +<td><tt>void</tt></td> +<td><del><tt>a.insert(a.end(), t)</tt></del><br> +<ins>Appends a copy of <tt>rv</tt>.</ins><br> +<i>Requires:</i> <del><tt>ConstructibleAsElement<A, T, T&&></tt> and +<tt>T</tt> shall be <tt>MoveAssignable</tt>.</del> +<ins><tt>T</tt> shall be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>.</ins></td> +<td><tt>vector</tt>, <tt>list</tt>, <tt>deque</tt>, <tt>basic_string</tt></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>a.pop_front()</tt></td> +<td><tt>void</tt></td> +<td><del><tt>a.erase(a.begin())</tt></del><br> +<ins>Destroys the first element.</ins><br> +<ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>a.empty()</tt> shall be <tt>false</tt>.</ins></td> +<td><tt>list</tt>, <tt>deque</tt>, <tt>forward_list</tt></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>a.pop_back()</tt></td> +<td><tt>void</tt></td> +<td><del><tt>{ iterator tmp = a.end();<br>--tmp;<br>a.erase(tmp); }</tt></del><br> +<ins>Destroys the last element.</ins><br> +<ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>a.empty()</tt> shall be <tt>false</tt>.</ins></td> +<td><tt>vector</tt>, <tt>list</tt>, <tt>deque</tt>, <tt>basic_string</tt></td> +</tr> + +</tbody></table> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +Insert a new paragraph prior to 23.2.4 [associative.reqmts]/7, and +edit paragraph 7: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p><ins> +The associative containers meet all of the requirements of Allocator-aware +containers (23.2.1 [container.requirements.general]), except for the +containers <tt>map</tt> and <tt>multimap</tt>, the requirements placed on +<tt>value_type</tt> in Table 93 apply instead directly to <tt>key_type</tt> and +<tt>mapped_type</tt>. [<i>Note:</i> For example <tt>key_type</tt> and +<tt>mapped_type</tt> are sometimes required to be <tt>CopyAssignable</tt> even +though the <tt>value_type</tt> (<tt>pair<const key_type, +mapped_type></tt>) is not <tt>CopyAssignable</tt>. — <i>end note</i>] +</ins></p> + +<p> +7 In Table 96, <tt>X</tt> denotes an associative container class, a denotes a +value of <tt>X</tt>, <tt>a_uniq</tt> denotes a value of <tt>X</tt> when +<tt>X</tt> supports unique keys, <tt>a_eq</tt> denotes a value of <tt>X</tt> +when <tt>X</tt> supports multiple keys, <tt>u</tt> denotes an identifier, +<del><tt>r</tt> denotes an lvalue or a const rvalue of type <tt>X</tt>, +<tt>rv</tt> denotes a non-const rvalue of type <tt>X</tt>,</del> <tt>i</tt> and +<tt>j</tt> satisfy input iterator requirements and refer to elements implicitly +convertible to <tt>value_type</tt>, <tt>[i,j)</tt> denotes a valid range, +<tt>p</tt> denotes a valid const iterator to <tt>a</tt>, <tt>q</tt> denotes a +valid dereferenceable const iterator to <tt>a</tt>, <tt>[q1, q2)</tt> denotes a +valid range of const iterators in <tt>a</tt>, <tt>il</tt> designates an object +of type <tt>initializer_list<value_type></tt>, <tt>t</tt> denotes a value +of <tt>X::value_type</tt>, <tt>k</tt> denotes a value of <tt>X::key_type</tt> +and <tt>c</tt> denotes a value of type <tt>X::key_compare</tt>. <tt>A</tt> +denotes the storage allocator used by <tt>X</tt>, if any, or +<tt>std::allocator<X::value_type></tt> otherwise, and <tt>m</tt> denotes +an allocator of a type convertible to <tt>A</tt>. </p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change or add the following rows in Table 96 — Associative container +requirements (in addition to container) in 23.2.4 [associative.reqmts]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 96 — Associative container requirements (in addition to +container)</caption> + +<tbody><tr> +<th>Expression</th> +<th>Return type</th> +<th>Assertion/note<br>pre-/post-condition</th> +<th>Complexity</th> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>X::key_type</tt></td> +<td><tt>Key</tt></td> +<td><ins><i>Requires:</i></ins> <tt>Key</tt> is <del><tt>CopyConstructible</tt> and +<tt>CopyAssignable</tt></del> <ins><tt>Destructible</tt></ins></td> +<td>compile time</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><ins><tt>X::mapped_type</tt> (<tt>map</tt> and <tt>multimap</tt> only)</ins></td> +<td><ins><tt>T</tt></ins></td> +<td><ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>T</tt> is <tt>Destructible</tt></ins></td> +<td><ins>compile time</ins></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>X(c)<br>X a(c);</tt></td> +<td></td> +<td><i>Requires:</i> <del><tt>ConstructibleAsElement<A, key_compare, +key_compare></tt></del>.<br> +<ins><tt>key_compare</tt> is <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>.</ins><br> +Constructs an empty container.<br> +Uses a copy of <tt>c</tt> as a comparison object.</td> +<td>constant</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>X()<br>X a;</tt></td> +<td></td> +<td><i>Requires:</i> <del><tt>ConstructibleAsElement<A, key_compare, +key_compare></tt></del>.<br> +<ins><tt>key_compare</tt> is <tt>DefaultConstructible</tt>.</ins><br> +Constructs an empty container.<br> +Uses <tt>Compare()</tt> as a comparison object.</td> +<td>constant</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>X(i, j, c)<br>X a(i, j, c);</tt></td> +<td></td> +<td><i>Requires:</i> <del><tt>ConstructibleAsElement<A, key_compare, +key_compare></tt></del>.<br> +<ins><tt>key_compare</tt> is <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>. <tt>value_type</tt> +shall be constructible from <tt>*i</tt>.</ins><br> +Constructs an empty container ans inserts elements from the range <tt>[i, +j)</tt> into it; uses <tt>c</tt> as a comparison object.</td> +<td><tt>N</tt> log <tt>N</tt> in general (<tt>N</tt> is the distance from +<tt>i</tt> to <tt>j</tt>); linear if <tt>[i, j)</tt> is sorted with +<tt>value_comp()</tt></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>X(i, j)<br>X a(i, j);</tt></td> +<td></td> +<td><i>Requires:</i> <del><tt>ConstructibleAsElement<A, key_compare, +key_compare></tt></del>.<br> <ins><tt>value_type</tt> shall be constructible +from <tt>*i</tt>. <tt>key_compare</tt> is +<tt>DefaultConstructible</tt>.</ins><br> Same as above, but uses +<tt>Compare()</tt> as a comparison object.</td> +<td>same as above</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>a = il</tt></td> +<td><tt>X&</tt></td> +<td><del><tt>a = X(il);<br> +return *this;</tt></del><br> +<ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>T</tt> is <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> and +<tt>CopyAssignable</tt>.</ins><br> +<ins>Assigns the range <tt>[il.begin(), il.end())</tt> into <tt>a</tt>. All +existing elements of <tt>a</tt> are either assigned or destroyed.</ins></td> +<td><del>Same as <tt><tt>a = X(il)</tt></tt>.</del> +<ins><tt>N</tt> log <tt>N</tt> in general (<tt>N</tt> is +<tt>il.size()</tt> added to the existing size of <tt>a</tt>); linear if +<tt>[il.begin(), il.end())</tt> is sorted with <tt>value_comp()</tt></ins></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>a_uniq.emplace(args)</tt></td> +<td><tt>pair<iterator, bool></tt></td> +<td><ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>T</tt> shall be constructible from +<tt>args</tt></ins><br> +inserts a <tt>T</tt> object <tt>t</tt> constructed with +<tt>std::forward<Args>(args)...</tt> if and only if there is no element in +the container with key equivalent to the key of <tt>t</tt>. The <tt>bool</tt> +component of the returned pair is true if and only if the insertion takes place, +and the iterator component of the pair points to the element with key equivalent +to the key of <tt>t</tt>.</td> +<td>logarithmic</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>a_eq.emplace(args)</tt></td> +<td><tt>iterator</tt></td> +<td><ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>T</tt> shall be constructible from +<tt>args</tt></ins><br> +inserts a <tt>T</tt> object <tt>t</tt> constructed with +<tt>std::forward<Args>(args)...</tt> and returns the iterator pointing to +the newly inserted element.</td> +<td>logarithmic</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>a_uniq.insert(t)</tt></td> +<td><tt>pair<iterator, bool></tt></td> +<td><ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>T</tt> shall be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> if +<tt>t</tt> is a non-const rvalue expression, else <tt>T</tt> shall be +<tt>CopyConstructible</tt>.</ins><br> +inserts <tt>t</tt> if and only if there is no element in the container with key +equivalent to the key of <tt>t</tt>. The <tt>bool</tt> component of the returned +pair is true if and only if the insertion takes place, and the iterator +component of the pair points to the element with key equivalent to the key of +<tt>t</tt>.</td> +<td>logarithmic</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>a_eq.insert(t)</tt></td> +<td><tt>iterator</tt></td> +<td><ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>T</tt> shall be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> if +<tt>t</tt> is a non-const rvalue expression, else <tt>T</tt> shall be +<tt>CopyConstructible</tt>.</ins><br> +inserts <tt>t</tt> and returns the iterator pointing to the newly inserted +element. If a range containing elements equivalent to <tt>t</tt> exists in +<tt>a_eq</tt>, <tt>t</tt> is inserted at the end of that range.</td> +<td>logarithmic</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>a.insert(p, t)</tt></td> +<td><tt>iterator</tt></td> +<td><ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>T</tt> shall be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> if +<tt>t</tt> is a non-const rvalue expression, else <tt>T</tt> shall be +<tt>CopyConstructible</tt>.</ins><br> +inserts <tt>t</tt> if and only if there is no element with key equivalent to the +key of <tt>t</tt> in containers with unique keys; always inserts <tt>t</tt> in +containers with equivalent keys; always returns the iterator pointing to the +element with key equivalent to the key of <tt>t</tt>. <tt>t</tt> is inserted as +close as possible to the position just prior to <tt>p</tt>.</td> +<td>logarithmic in general, but amortized constant if <tt>t</tt> is inserted +right before <tt>p</tt>.</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>a.insert(i, j)</tt></td> +<td><tt>void</tt></td> +<td><ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>T</tt> shall be +constructible from <tt>*i</tt>.</ins><br> +pre: <tt>i</tt>, <tt>j</tt> are not iterators into <tt>a</tt>. inserts each +element from the range <tt>[i,j)</tt> if and only if there is no element with +key equivalent to the key of that element in containers with unique keys; always +inserts that element in containers with equivalent keys.</td> +<td>N log(size() + N ) (N is the distance from i to j)</td> +</tr> + +</tbody></table> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +Insert a new paragraph prior to 23.2.5 [unord.req]/9: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p><ins> +The unordered associative containers meet all of the requirements of +Allocator-aware containers (23.2.1 [container.requirements.general]), +except for the containers <tt>unordered_map</tt> and <tt>unordered_multimap</tt>, +the requirements placed on <tt>value_type</tt> in Table 93 apply instead +directly to <tt>key_type</tt> and <tt>mapped_type</tt>. [<i>Note:</i> For +example <tt>key_type</tt> and <tt>mapped_type</tt> are sometimes required to be +<tt>CopyAssignable</tt> even though the <tt>value_type</tt> (<tt>pair<const +key_type, mapped_type></tt>) is not <tt>CopyAssignable</tt>. — <i>end +note</i>] +</ins></p> + +<p> +9 ... +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change or add the following rows in Table 98 — Unordered associative +container requirements (in addition to container) in 23.2.5 [unord.req]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 98 — Unordered associative +container requirements (in addition to container)</caption> + +<tbody><tr> +<th>Expression</th> +<th>Return type</th> +<th>Assertion/note<br>pre-/post-condition</th> +<th>Complexity</th> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>X::key_type</tt></td> +<td><tt>Key</tt></td> +<td><ins><i>Requires:</i></ins> <tt>Key</tt> shall be <del><tt>CopyAssignable</tt> and +<tt>CopyConstructible</tt></del> <ins><tt>Destructible</tt></ins></td> +<td>compile time</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><ins><tt>X::mapped_type</tt> (<tt>unordered_map</tt> and +<tt>unordered_multimap</tt> only)</ins></td> +<td><ins><tt>T</tt></ins></td> +<td><ins><i>Requires:</i><tt>T</tt> is <tt>Destructible</tt></ins></td> +<td><ins>compile time</ins></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>X(n, hf, eq)<br>X a(n, hf, eq)</tt></td> +<td><tt>X</tt></td> +<td><ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>hasher</tt> and <tt>key_equal</tt> are +<tt>CopyConstructible</tt>.</ins> Constructs an empty container with at least +<tt>n</tt> buckets, using <tt>hf</tt> as the hash function and <tt>eq</tt> as +the key equality predicate. </td> +<td><tt>O(N)</tt></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>X(n, hf)<br>X a(n, hf)</tt></td> +<td><tt>X</tt></td> +<td><ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>hasher</tt> is <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> and +<tt>key_equal</tt> is <tt>DefaultConstructible</tt>.</ins> Constructs an empty +container with at least <tt>n</tt> buckets, using <tt>hf</tt> as the hash +function and <tt>key_equal()</tt> as the key equality predicate.</td> +<td><tt>O(N)</tt></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>X(n)<br>X a(n)</tt></td> +<td><tt>X</tt></td> +<td><ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>hasher</tt> and <tt>key_equal</tt> are +<tt>DefaultConstructible</tt>.</ins> Constructs an empty container with at least +<tt>n</tt> buckets, using <tt>hasher()</tt> as the hash function and <tt>key_equal()</tt> as +the key equality predicate. </td> +<td><tt>O(N)</tt></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>X()<br>X a</tt></td> +<td><tt>X</tt></td> +<td><ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>hasher</tt> and <tt>key_equal</tt> are +<tt>DefaultConstructible</tt>.</ins> Constructs an empty container an unspecified number of buckets, +using <tt>hasher()</tt> as the hash function and <tt>key_equal()</tt> as +the key equality predicate. </td> +<td>constant</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>X(i, j, n, hf, eq)<br>X a(i, j, n, hf, eq)</tt></td> +<td><tt>X</tt></td> +<td><ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>value_type</tt> is constructible from +<tt>*i</tt>. <tt>hasher</tt> and <tt>key_equal</tt> are +<tt>CopyConstructible</tt>.</ins><br> +Constructs an empty container with at least <tt>n</tt> buckets, using +<tt>hf</tt> as the hash function and <tt>eq</tt> as the key equality predicate, +and inserts elements from <tt>[i, j)</tt> into it.</td> +<td>Average case <tt>O(N)</tt> (<tt>N</tt> is <tt>distance(i, j)</tt>), worst +case <tt>O(N<sup>2</sup>)</tt></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>X(i, j, n, hf)<br>X a(i, j, n, hf)</tt></td> +<td><tt>X</tt></td> +<td><ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>value_type</tt> is constructible from <tt>*i</tt>. +<tt>hasher</tt> is <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> and <tt>key_equal</tt> is +<tt>DefaultConstructible</tt>.</ins><br> Constructs an empty container with at +least <tt>n</tt> buckets, using <tt>hf</tt> as the hash function and +<tt>key_equal()</tt> as the key equality predicate, and inserts elements from +<tt>[i, j)</tt> into it.</td> +<td>Average case <tt>O(N)</tt> (<tt>N</tt> is <tt>distance(i, j)</tt>), worst +case <tt>O(N<sup>2</sup>)</tt></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>X(i, j, n)<br>X a(i, j, n)</tt></td> +<td><tt>X</tt></td> +<td><ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>value_type</tt> is constructible from <tt>*i</tt>. +<tt>hasher</tt> and <tt>key_equal</tt> are +<tt>DefaultConstructible</tt>.</ins><br> Constructs an empty container with at +least <tt>n</tt> buckets, using <tt>hasher()</tt> as the hash function and +<tt>key_equal()</tt> as the key equality predicate, and inserts elements from +<tt>[i, j)</tt> into it.</td> +<td>Average case <tt>O(N)</tt> (<tt>N</tt> is <tt>distance(i, j)</tt>), worst +case <tt>O(N<sup>2</sup>)</tt></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>X(i, j)<br>X a(i, j)</tt></td> +<td><tt>X</tt></td> +<td><ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>value_type</tt> is constructible from <tt>*i</tt>. +<tt>hasher</tt> and <tt>key_equal</tt> are +<tt>DefaultConstructible</tt>.</ins><br> Constructs an empty container with an +unspecified number of buckets, using <tt>hasher()</tt> as the hash function and +<tt>key_equal()</tt> as the key equality predicate, and inserts elements from +<tt>[i, j)</tt> into it.</td> +<td>Average case <tt>O(N)</tt> (<tt>N</tt> is <tt>distance(i, j)</tt>), worst +case <tt>O(N<sup>2</sup>)</tt></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>X(b)<br>X a(b)</tt></td> +<td><tt>X</tt></td> +<td>Copy constructor. In addition to the <del>contained elements</del> +<ins>requirements of Table 93 (23.2.1 [container.requirements.general])</ins>, copies the hash function, +predicate, and maximum load factor.</td> +<td>Average case linear in <tt>b.size()</tt>, worst case quadratic.</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>a = b</tt></td> +<td><tt>X&</tt></td> +<td>Copy assignment operator. In addition to the <del>contained elements</del> +<ins>requirements of Table 93 (23.2.1 [container.requirements.general])</ins>, copies the hash function, +predicate, and maximum load factor.</td> +<td>Average case linear in <tt>b.size()</tt>, worst case quadratic.</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>a = il</tt></td> +<td><tt>X&</tt></td> +<td><del><tt>a = X(il); return *this;</tt></del><br> +<ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>T</tt> is <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> and +<tt>CopyAssignable</tt>.</ins><br> +<ins>Assigns the range <tt>[il.begin(), il.end())</tt> into <tt>a</tt>. All +existing elements of <tt>a</tt> are either assigned or destroyed.</ins></td> +<td>Average case linear in <tt>il.size()</tt>, worst case quadratic.</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>a_uniq.emplace(args)</tt></td> +<td><tt>pair<iterator, bool></tt></td> +<td><ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>T</tt> shall be constructible from +<tt>args</tt></ins><br> +inserts a <tt>T</tt> object <tt>t</tt> constructed with +<tt>std::forward<Args>(args)...</tt> if and only if there is no element in +the container with key equivalent to the key of <tt>t</tt>. The <tt>bool</tt> +component of the returned pair is true if and only if the insertion takes place, +and the iterator component of the pair points to the element with key equivalent +to the key of <tt>t</tt>.</td> +<td>Average case O(1), worst case O(<tt>a_uniq.size()</tt>).</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>a_eq.emplace(args)</tt></td> +<td><tt>iterator</tt></td> +<td><ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>T</tt> shall be constructible from +<tt>args</tt></ins><br> +inserts a <tt>T</tt> object <tt>t</tt> constructed with +<tt>std::forward<Args>(args)...</tt> and returns the iterator pointing to +the newly inserted element.</td> +<td>Average case O(1), worst case O(<tt>a_eq.size()</tt>).</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>a.emplace_hint(p, args)</tt></td> +<td><tt>iterator</tt></td> +<td><ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>T</tt> shall be constructible from +<tt>args</tt></ins><br> +equivalent to <tt>a.emplace( std::forward<Args>(args)...)</tt>. Return +value is an iterator pointing to the element with the key equivalent to the +newly inserted element. The <tt>const_iterator p</tt> is a hint pointing to +where the search should start. Implementations are permitted to ignore the +hint.</td> +<td>Average case O(1), worst case O(<tt>a.size()</tt>).</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>a_uniq.insert(t)</tt></td> +<td><tt>pair<iterator, bool></tt></td> +<td><ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>T</tt> shall be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> if +<tt>t</tt> is a non-const rvalue expression, else <tt>T</tt> shall be +<tt>CopyConstructible</tt>.</ins><br> +Inserts <tt>t</tt> if and only if there is no element in the container with key +equivalent to the key of <tt>t</tt>. The <tt>bool</tt> component of the returned +pair indicates whether the insertion takes place, and the iterator component +points to the element with key equivalent to the key of <tt>t</tt>.</td> +<td>Average case O(1), worst case O(<tt>a_uniq.size()</tt>).</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>a_eq.insert(t)</tt></td> +<td><tt>iterator</tt></td> +<td><ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>T</tt> shall be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> if +<tt>t</tt> is a non-const rvalue expression, else <tt>T</tt> shall be +<tt>CopyConstructible</tt>.</ins><br> +Inserts <tt>t</tt>, and returns an iterator pointing to the newly inserted +element.</td> +<td>Average case O(1), worst case O(<tt>a_uniq.size()</tt>).</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>a.insert(q, t)</tt></td> +<td><tt>iterator</tt></td> +<td><ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>T</tt> shall be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> if +<tt>t</tt> is a non-const rvalue expression, else <tt>T</tt> shall be +<tt>CopyConstructible</tt>.</ins><br> +Equivalent to <tt>a.insert(t)</tt>. Return value is an iterator pointing to the +element with the key equivalent to that of <tt>t</tt>. The iterator <tt>q</tt> +is a hint pointing to where the search should start. Implementations are +permitted to ignore the hint.</td> +<td>Average case O(1), worst case O(<tt>a_uniq.size()</tt>).</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>a.insert(i, j)</tt></td> +<td><tt>void</tt></td> +<td><ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>T</tt> shall be +constructible from <tt>*i</tt>.</ins><br> +Pre: <tt>i</tt> and <tt>j</tt> are not iterators in <tt>a</tt>. Equivalent to +<tt>a.insert(t)</tt> for each element in <tt>[i,j)</tt>.</td> +<td>Average case O(<tt>N</tt>), where <tt>N</tt> is <tt>distance(i, j)</tt>. +Worst case O(<tt>N * a.size()</tt>).</td> +</tr> + +</tbody></table> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 23.3.3 [forwardlist]/2: +</p> + +<blockquote> +2 A <tt>forward_list</tt> satisfies all of the requirements of a container +(table 91), except that the <tt>size()</tt> member function is not provided. +<ins>A <tt>forward_list</tt> also satisfies all of the requirements of an +allocator-aware container (table 93). And <tt>forward_list</tt> provides the +<tt>assign</tt> member functions as specified in Table 94, Sequence container +requirements, and several of the optional sequence container requirements (Table +95).</ins> +Descriptions are provided here only for operations on <tt>forward_list</tt> that +are not described in that table or for operations where there is additional +semantic information. +</blockquote> + +<p> +Add a new paragraph after 23.3.3.4 [forwardlist.modifiers]/23: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void clear(); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +23 <i>Effects:</i> Erases all elements in the range <tt>[begin(),end())</tt>. +</p> +<p><ins> +<i>Remarks:</i> Does not invalidate past-the-end iterators. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 23.4.1.2 [vector.capacity]/13: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void resize(size_type sz, const T& c); +</pre> +<blockquote> +13 <i>Requires:</i> <ins><tt>T</tt> shall be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>.</ins> +If <tt>value_type</tt> has a move constructor, that constructor shall not throw +any exceptions. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +In 23.7.3 [unord.set] and 23.7.4 [unord.multiset] substitute +"<tt>Key</tt>" for "<tt>Value</tt>". +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p><i>[ +The above substitution is normative as it ties into the requirements table. +]</i></p> + +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="705"></a>705. type-trait <tt>decay</tt> incompletely specified</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.7.7.6 [meta.trans.other] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Thorsten Ottosen <b>Opened:</b> 2007-07-08 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#meta.trans.other">issues</a> in [meta.trans.other].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The current working draft has a type-trait <tt>decay</tt> in 20.7.7.6 [meta.trans.other]. +</p> + +<p> +Its use is to turn C++03 pass-by-value parameters into efficient C++0x +pass-by-rvalue-reference parameters. However, the current definition +introduces an incompatible change where the cv-qualification of the +parameter type is retained. The deduced type should loose such +cv-qualification, as pass-by-value does. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 20.7.7.6 [meta.trans.other] change the last sentence: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +Otherwise the member typedef <tt>type</tt> equals <tt><ins>remove_cv<</ins>U<ins>>::type</ins></tt>. +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +In 20.4.2.4 [tuple.creation]/1 change: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +<del>where each <tt>Vi</tt> in <tt>VTypes</tt> is <tt>X&</tt> if, for the +corresponding type <tt>Ti</tt> in <tt>Types</tt>, +<tt>remove_cv<remove_reference<Ti>::type>::type</tt> equals +<tt>reference_wrapper<X></tt>, otherwise <tt>Vi</tt> is +<tt>decay<Ti>::type</tt>.</del> +<ins>Let <tt>Ui</tt> be <tt>decay<Ti>::type</tt> for each +<tt>Ti</tt> in <tt>Types</tt>. Then each <tt>Vi</tt> in <tt>VTypes</tt> +is <tt>X&</tt> if <tt>Ui</tt> equals +<tt>reference_wrapper<X></tt>, otherwise <tt>Vi</tt> is +<tt>Ui</tt>.</ins> +</p></blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="706"></a>706. <tt>make_pair()</tt> should behave as <tt>make_tuple()</tt> wrt. <tt>reference_wrapper()</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.3.5 [pairs] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Thorsten Ottosen <b>Opened:</b> 2007-07-08 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#pairs">issues</a> in [pairs].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The current draft has <tt>make_pair()</tt> in 20.3.5 [pairs]/16 +and <tt>make_tuple()</tt> in 20.4.2.4 [tuple.creation]. +<tt>make_tuple()</tt> detects the presence of +<tt>reference_wrapper<X></tt> arguments and "unwraps" the reference in +such cases. <tt>make_pair()</tt> would OTOH create a +<tt>reference_wrapper<X></tt> member. I suggest that the two +functions are made to behave similar in this respect to minimize +confusion. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 20.3 [utility] change the synopsis for make_pair() to read +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T1, class T2> + pair<<del>typename decay<T1>::type</del> <ins>V1</ins>, <del>typename decay<T2>::type</del> <ins>V2</ins>> make_pair(T1&&, T2&&); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +In 20.3.5 [pairs]/16 change the declaration to match the above synopsis. +Then change the 20.3.5 [pairs]/17 to: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt>pair<<del>typename decay<T1>::type</del> <ins>V1</ins>,<del>typename decay<T2>::type</del> <ins>V2</ins>>(forward<T1>(x),forward<T2>(y))</tt> <ins>where <tt>V1</tt> and +<tt>V2</tt> are determined as follows: Let <tt>Ui</tt> be +<tt>decay<Ti>::type</tt> for each <tt>Ti</tt>. Then each +<tt>Vi</tt> is <tt>X&</tt> if <tt>Ui</tt> equals +<tt>reference_wrapper<X></tt>, otherwise <tt>Vi</tt> is +<tt>Ui</tt>.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="709"></a>709. <tt>char_traits::not_eof</tt> has wrong signature</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.2.3 [char.traits.specializations] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Bo Persson <b>Opened:</b> 2007-08-13 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#char.traits.specializations">issues</a> in [char.traits.specializations].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The changes made for <tt>constexpr</tt> in 21.2.3 [char.traits.specializations] have +not only changed the <tt>not_eof</tt> function from pass by const reference to +pass by value, it has also changed the parameter type from <tt>int_type</tt> to +<tt>char_type</tt>. +</p> +<p> +This doesn't work for type <tt>char</tt>, and is inconsistent with the +requirements in Table 56, Traits requirements, 21.2.1 [char.traits.require]. +</p> + +<p> +Pete adds: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +For what it's worth, that may not have been an intentional change. +N2349, which detailed the changes for adding constant expressions to +the library, has strikeout bars through the <tt>const</tt> and the <tt>&</tt> that +surround the <tt>char_type</tt> argument, but none through <tt>char_type</tt> itself. +So the intention may have been just to change to pass by value, with +text incorrectly copied from the standard. +</p></blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change the signature in 21.2.3.1 [char.traits.specializations.char], +21.2.3.2 [char.traits.specializations.char16_t], 21.2.3.3 [char.traits.specializations.char32_t], +and 21.2.3.4 [char.traits.specializations.wchar.t] to +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>static constexpr int_type not_eof(<del>char_type</del> <ins>int_type</ins> c); +</pre></blockquote> + + + +<p><i>[ +Bellevue: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Resolution: NAD editorial - up to Pete's judgment +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Post Sophia Antipolis +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved from Pending NAD Editorial to Review. The proposed wording appears to be correct but non-editorial. +</blockquote> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="710"></a>710. Missing postconditions</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.10.2 [util.smartptr.shared] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Peter Dimov <b>Opened:</b> 2007-08-24 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#util.smartptr.shared">issues</a> in [util.smartptr.shared].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +A discussion on +<a href="http://groups.google.com/group/comp.std.c++/browse_frm/thread/8e89dceb35cd7971">comp.std.c++</a> +has identified a contradiction in the <tt>shared_ptr</tt> specification. +The <tt>shared_ptr</tt> move constructor and the cast functions are +missing postconditions for the <tt>get()</tt> accessor. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Bellevue: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Move to "ready", adopting the first (Peter's) proposed resolution. +</p> +<p> +Note to the project editor: there is an editorial issue here. The +wording for the postconditions of the casts is slightly awkward, and the +editor should consider rewording "If w is the return value...", e. g. as +"For a return value w...". +</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add to 20.9.10.2.1 [util.smartptr.shared.const]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>shared_ptr(shared_ptr&& r); +template<class Y> shared_ptr(shared_ptr<Y>&& r); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Postconditions:</i> <tt>*this</tt> shall contain the old value of <tt>r</tt>. <tt>r</tt> +shall be empty. <ins><tt>r.get() == 0</tt>.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Add to 20.9.10.2.10 [util.smartptr.shared.cast]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template<class T, class U> shared_ptr<T> static_pointer_cast(shared_ptr<U> const& r); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins><i>Postconditions:</i> If <tt>w</tt> is the return value, +<tt>w.get() == static_cast<T*>(r.get()) && w.use_count() == r.use_count()</tt>.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template<class T, class U> shared_ptr<T> dynamic_pointer_cast(shared_ptr<U> const& r); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins><i>Postconditions:</i> If <tt>w</tt> is the return value, <tt>w.get() == dynamic_cast<T*>(r.get())</tt>.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template<class T, class U> shared_ptr<T> const_pointer_cast(shared_ptr<U> const& r); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins><i>Postconditions:</i> If <tt>w</tt> is the return value, +<tt>w.get() == const_cast<T*>(r.get()) && w.use_count() == r.use_count()</tt>.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Alberto Ganesh Barbati has written an +<a href="http://barbati.net/c++/shared_ptr.pdf">alternative proposal</a> +where he suggests (among other things) that the casts be respecified in terms of +the aliasing constructor as follows: +</p> + +<p> +Change 20.9.10.2.10 [util.smartptr.shared.cast]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-2- <i>Returns:</i> <del>If <tt>r</tt> is empty, an <tt>empty +shared_ptr<T>;</tt> otherwise, a <tt>shared_ptr<T></tt> +object that stores <tt>static_cast<T*>(r.get())</tt> and shares ownership with +<tt>r</tt>.</del> <ins><tt>shared_ptr<T>(r, static_cast<T*>(r.get())</tt>.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-6- <i>Returns:</i> +</p> +<ul> +<li><del>When <tt>dynamic_cast<T*>(r.get())</tt> returns a nonzero value, +a <tt>shared_ptr<T></tt> object that stores a copy +of it and <i>shares ownership</i> with <tt>r</tt>;</del></li> +<li><del>Otherwise, an <i>empty</i> <tt>shared_ptr<T></tt> object.</del></li> +<li><ins>If <tt>p = dynamic_cast<T*>(r.get())</tt> is a non-null pointer, <tt>shared_ptr<T>(r, p);</tt></ins></li> +<li><ins>Otherwise, <tt>shared_ptr<T>()</tt>.</ins></li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-10- <i>Returns:</i> <del>If <tt>r</tt> is empty, an <tt>empty +shared_ptr<T>;</tt> otherwise, a <tt>shared_ptr<T></tt> +object that stores <tt>const_cast<T*>(r.get())</tt> and shares ownership with +<tt>r</tt>.</del> <ins><tt>shared_ptr<T>(r, const_cast<T*>(r.get())</tt>.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +This takes care of the missing postconditions for the casts by bringing +in the aliasing constructor postcondition "by reference". +</p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="711"></a>711. Contradiction in empty <tt>shared_ptr</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.10.2.5 [util.smartptr.shared.obs] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Peter Dimov <b>Opened:</b> 2007-08-24 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#util.smartptr.shared.obs">issues</a> in [util.smartptr.shared.obs].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +A discussion on +<a href="http://groups.google.com/group/comp.std.c++/browse_frm/thread/8e89dceb35cd7971">comp.std.c++</a> +has identified a contradiction in the <tt>shared_ptr</tt> specification. +The note: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +[ <i>Note:</i> this constructor allows creation of an empty shared_ptr instance with a non-NULL stored pointer. +-end note ] +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +after the aliasing constructor +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class Y> shared_ptr(shared_ptr<Y> const& r, T *p); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +reflects the intent of +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2351.htm">N2351</a> +to, well, allow the creation of an empty <tt>shared_ptr</tt> +with a non-NULL stored pointer. +</p> + +<p> +This is contradicted by the second sentence in the Returns clause of 20.9.10.2.5 [util.smartptr.shared.obs]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>T* get() const; +</pre> +<blockquote><p> +<i>Returns:</i> the stored pointer. Returns a null pointer if <tt>*this</tt> is empty. +</p></blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Bellevue: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Adopt option 1 and move to review, not ready. +</p> +<p> +There was a lot of confusion about what an empty <tt>shared_ptr</tt> is (the term +isn't defined anywhere), and whether we have a good mental model for how +one behaves. We think it might be possible to deduce what the definition +should be, but the words just aren't there. We need to open an issue on +the use of this undefined term. (The resolution of that issue might +affect the resolution of issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#711">711</a>.) +</p> +<p> +The LWG is getting more uncomfortable with the aliasing proposal (N2351) +now that we realize some of its implications, and we need to keep an eye +on it, but there isn't support for removing this feature at this time. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Sophia Antipolis: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +We heard from Peter Dimov, who explained his reason for preferring solution 1. +</p> +<p> +Because it doesn't seem to add anything. It simply makes the behavior +for p = 0 undefined. For programmers who don't create empty pointers +with p = 0, there is no difference. Those who do insist on creating them +presumably have a good reason, and it costs nothing for us to define the +behavior in this case. +</p> +<p> +The aliasing constructor is sharp enough as it is, so "protecting" users +doesn't make much sense in this particular case. +</p> +<p> +> Do you have a use case for r being empty and r being non-null? +</p> +<p> +I have received a few requests for it from "performance-conscious" +people (you should be familiar with this mindset) who don't like the +overhead of allocating and maintaining a control block when a null +deleter is used to approximate a raw pointer. It is obviously an "at +your own risk", low-level feature; essentially a raw pointer behind a +shared_ptr facade. +</p> +<p> +We could not agree upon a resolution to the issue; some of us thought +that Peter's description above is supporting an undesirable behavior. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +We favor option 1, move to Ready. +</p> +<p><i>[ +Howard: Option 2 commented out for clarity, and can be brought back. +]</i></p> + +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In keeping the N2351 spirit and obviously my preference, change 20.9.10.2.5 [util.smartptr.shared.obs]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>T* get() const; +</pre> +<blockquote><p> +<i>Returns:</i> the stored pointer. <del>Returns a null pointer if <tt>*this</tt> is empty.</del> +</p></blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="712"></a>712. <tt>seed_seq::size</tt> no longer useful</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.7.1 [rand.util.seedseq] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Marc Paterno <b>Opened:</b> 2007-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#rand.util.seedseq">issues</a> in [rand.util.seedseq].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +One of the motivations for incorporating <tt>seed_seq::size()</tt> +was to simplify the wording +in other parts of 26.5 [rand]. +As a side effect of resolving related issues, +all such references +to <tt>seed_seq::size()</tt> will have been excised. +More importantly, +the present specification is contradictory, +as "The number of 32-bit units the object can deliver" +is not the same as "the result of <tt>v.size()</tt>." +</p> + +<p> +See <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2391.pdf">N2391</a> and +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2423.pdf">N2423</a> +for some further discussion. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Adopt the proposed resolution in +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2423.pdf">N2423</a>. +</p> + + +<p><i>[ +Kona (2007): The LWG adopted the proposed resolution of N2423 for this issue. +The LWG voted to accelerate this issue to Ready status to be voted into the WP at Kona. +]</i></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="713"></a>713. <tt>sort()</tt> complexity is too lax</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.4.1.1 [sort] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 2007-08-30 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The complexity of <tt>sort()</tt> is specified as "Approximately <tt>N +log(N)</tt> (where <tt>N == last - first</tt> ) comparisons on the +average", with no worst case complicity specified. The intention was to +allow a median-of-three quicksort implementation, which is usually <tt>O(N +log N)</tt> but can be quadratic for pathological inputs. However, there is +no longer any reason to allow implementers the freedom to have a +worst-cast-quadratic sort algorithm. Implementers who want to use +quicksort can use a variant like David Musser's "Introsort" (Software +Practice and Experience 27:983-993, 1997), which is guaranteed to be <tt>O(N +log N)</tt> in the worst case without incurring additional overhead in the +average case. Most C++ library implementers already do this, and there +is no reason not to guarantee it in the standard. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 25.4.1.1 [sort], change the complexity to "O(N log N)", and remove footnote 266: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Complexity:</i> <del>Approximately</del> <ins>O(</ins><i>N</i> log(<i>N</i>)<ins>)</ins> (where <i>N</i> == <i>last</i> - <i>first</i> ) +comparisons<del> on the average</del>.<del><sup>266)</sup></del> +</p> +<p> +<del><sup>266)</sup> +If the worst case behavior is important <tt>stable_sort()</tt> (25.3.1.2) or <tt>partial_sort()</tt> +(25.3.1.3) should be used.</del> +</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="714"></a>714. <tt>search_n</tt> complexity is too lax</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.2.13 [alg.search] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 2007-08-30 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#alg.search">issues</a> in [alg.search].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The complexity for <tt>search_n</tt> (25.2.13 [alg.search] par 7) is specified as "At most +(last - first ) * count applications of the corresponding predicate if +count is positive, or 0 otherwise." This is unnecessarily pessimistic. +Regardless of the value of count, there is no reason to examine any +element in the range more than once. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change the complexity to "At most (last - first) applications of the corresponding predicate". +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template<class ForwardIterator, class Size, class T> + ForwardIterator + search_n(ForwardIterator first , ForwardIterator last , Size count , + const T& value ); + +template<class ForwardIterator, class Size, class T, + class BinaryPredicate> + ForwardIterator + search_n(ForwardIterator first , ForwardIterator last , Size count , + const T& value , BinaryPredicate pred ); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Complexity:</i> At most <tt>(last - first ) <del>* count</del></tt> applications of the corresponding predicate +<del>if <tt>count</tt> is positive, or 0 otherwise</del>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="715"></a>715. <tt>minmax_element</tt> complexity is too lax</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.4.7 [alg.min.max] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 2007-08-30 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#alg.min.max">issues</a> in [alg.min.max].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The complexity for <tt>minmax_element</tt> (25.4.7 [alg.min.max] par 16) says "At most <tt>max(2 * +(last - first ) - 2, 0)</tt> applications of the corresponding comparisons", +i.e. the worst case complexity is no better than calling <tt>min_element</tt> and +<tt>max_element</tt> separately. This is gratuitously inefficient. There is a +well known technique that does better: see section 9.1 of CLRS +(Introduction to Algorithms, by Cormen, Leiserson, Rivest, and Stein). +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 25.4.7 [alg.min.max] to: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template<class ForwardIterator> + pair<ForwardIterator, ForwardIterator> + minmax_element(ForwardIterator first , ForwardIterator last); +template<class ForwardIterator, class Compare> + pair<ForwardIterator, ForwardIterator> + minmax_element(ForwardIterator first , ForwardIterator last , Compare comp); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt>make_pair(m, M)</tt>, where <tt>m</tt> is +<del><tt>min_element(first, last)</tt> or <tt>min_element(first, last, +comp)</tt></del> <ins>the first iterator in <tt>[first, +last)</tt> such that no iterator in the range refers to a smaller element,</ins> and +<ins>where</ins> <tt>M</tt> is <del><tt>max_element(first, last)</tt> or +<tt>max_element(first, last, comp)</tt></del> <ins>the last iterator +in <tt>[first, last)</tt> such that no iterator in the range refers to a larger element</ins>. +</p> +<p> +<i>Complexity:</i> At most <del><tt>max(2 * (last - first ) - 2, 0)</tt></del> +<ins><tt>max(⌊(3/2) (N-1)⌋, 0)</tt></ins> applications of the +corresponding <del>comparisons</del> <ins>predicate, where <tt>N</tt> is <tt>distance(first, last)</tt></ins>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="716"></a>716. Production in [re.grammar] not actually modified</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 28.13 [re.grammar] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Stephan T. Lavavej <b>Opened:</b> 2007-08-31 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +TR1 7.13 [tr.re.grammar]/3 and C++0x WP 28.13 [re.grammar]/3 say: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +The following productions within the ECMAScript grammar are modified as follows: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>CharacterClass :: +[ [lookahead ∉ {^}] ClassRanges ] +[ ^ ClassRanges ] +</pre></blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +This definition for <tt>CharacterClass</tt> appears to be exactly identical to that in ECMA-262. +</p> + +<p> +Was an actual modification intended here and accidentally omitted, or was this production accidentally included? +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +We agree that what is specified is identical to what ECMA-262 specifies. +Pete would like to take a bit of time to assess whether we had intended, +but failed, to make a change. +It would also be useful to hear from John Maddock on the issue. +</p> +<p> +Move to Open. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Remove this mention of the CharacterClass production. +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>CharacterClass :: +[ [lookahead ∉ {^}] ClassRanges ] +[ ^ ClassRanges ]</del> +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="719"></a>719. <tt>std::is_literal</tt> type traits should be provided</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.7 [meta] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2007-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-20</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#meta">issues</a> in [meta].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#750">750</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Since the inclusion of <tt>constexpr</tt> in the standard draft N2369 we have +a new type category "literal", which is defined in 3.9 [basic.types]/p.11: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-11- A type is a <i>literal</i> type if it is: +</p> +<ul> +<li>a scalar type; or</li> +<li><p>a class type (clause 9) with</p> +<ul> +<li>a trivial copy constructor,</li> +<li>a trivial destructor,</li> +<li>at least one constexpr constructor other than the copy constructor,</li> +<li>no virtual base classes, and</li> +<li>all non-static data members and base classes of literal types; or</li> +</ul> +</li> +<li>an array of literal type.</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + +<p> +I strongly suggest that the standard provides a type traits for +literal types in 20.7.4.3 [meta.unary.prop] for several reasons: +</p> + +<ol type="a"> +<li>To keep the traits in sync with existing types.</li> +<li>I see many reasons for programmers to use this trait in template + code to provide optimized template definitions for these types, + see below.</li> +<li>A user-provided definition of this trait is practically impossible +to write portably.</li> +</ol> + +<p> +The special problem of reason (c) is that I don't see currently a +way to portably test the condition for literal class types: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<ul> +<li>at least one constexpr constructor other than the copy constructor,</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Alisdair is considering preparing a paper listing a number of missing +type traits, and feels that it might be useful to handle them all +together rather than piecemeal. This would affect issue 719 and 750. +These two issues should move to OPEN pending AM paper on type traits. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Beman, Daniel, and Alisdair will work on a paper proposing new type traits. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Addressed in <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2947.html">N2947</a>. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<del>NAD Editorial</del><ins>Resolved</ins>. Solved by +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2984.htm">N2984</a>. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 20.7.2 [meta.type.synop] in the group "type properties", +just below the line +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T> struct is_pod; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +add a new one: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T> struct is_literal; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +In 20.7.4.3 [meta.unary.prop], table Type Property Predicates, just +below the line for the <tt>is_pod</tt> property add a new line: +</p> + +<table border="1"> +<tbody><tr> +<th>Template</th><th>Condition</th><th>Preconditions</th> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><tt>template <class T> struct is_literal;</tt></td> +<td><tt>T</tt> is a literal type (3.9)</td> +<td><tt>T</tt> shall be a complete type, an +array of unknown bound, or +(possibly cv-qualified) <tt>void</tt>.</td> +</tr> +</tbody></table> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="720"></a>720. Omissions in constexpr usages</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.3.1 [array], 20.5 [template.bitset] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2007-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#array">issues</a> in [array].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<ol> +<li> +The member function <tt>bool array<T,N>::empty() const</tt> should be a +<tt>constexpr</tt> because this is easily to proof and to implement following it's operational +semantics defined by Table 87 (Container requirements) which says: <tt>a.size() == 0</tt>. +</li> +<li> +The member function <tt>bool bitset<N>::test() const</tt> must be a +<tt>constexpr</tt> (otherwise it would violate the specification of <tt>constexpr +bitset<N>::operator[](size_t) const</tt>, because it's return clause delegates to <tt>test()</tt>). +</li> +<li> +I wonder how the constructor <tt>bitset<N>::bitset(unsigned long)</tt> can +be declared as a <tt>constexpr</tt>. Current implementations usually have no such <tt>bitset</tt> +c'tor which would fulfill the requirements of a <tt>constexpr</tt> c'tor because they have a +non-empty c'tor body that typically contains for-loops or <tt>memcpy</tt> to compute the +initialisation. What have I overlooked here? +</li> +</ol> + +<p><i>[ +Sophia Antipolis: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +We handle this as two parts +</p> +<ol> +<li> +The proposed resolution is correct; move to ready. +</li> +<li> +The issue points out a real problem, but the issue is larger than just +this solution. We believe a paper is needed, applying the full new +features of C++ (including extensible literals) to update <tt>std::bitset</tt>. +We note that we do not consider this new work, and that is should be +handled by the Library Working Group. +</li> +</ol> +<p> +In order to have a consistent working paper, Alisdair and Daniel produced a new wording for the resolution. +</p> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<ol> +<li> +<p>In the class template definition of 23.3.1 [array]/p. 3 change</p> +<blockquote><pre><ins>constexpr</ins> bool empty() const; +</pre></blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p>In the class template definition of 20.5 [template.bitset]/p. 1 change</p> +<blockquote><pre><ins>constexpr</ins> bool test(size_t pos ) const; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +and in 20.5.2 [bitset.members] change +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>constexpr</ins> bool test(size_t pos ) const; +</pre></blockquote> + +</li> +</ol> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="722"></a>722. Missing [c.math] functions <tt>nanf</tt> and <tt>nanl</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.8 [c.math] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2007-08-27 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#c.math">issues</a> in [c.math].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In the listing of 26.8 [c.math], table 108: Header <tt><cmath></tt> synopsis I miss +the following C99 functions (from 7.12.11.2): +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>float nanf(const char *tagp); +long double nanl(const char *tagp); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +(Note: These functions cannot be overloaded and they are also not +listed anywhere else) +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 26.8 [c.math], table 108, section "Functions", add <tt>nanf</tt> and <tt>nanl</tt> +just after the existing entry <tt>nan</tt>. +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="723"></a>723. <tt>basic_regex</tt> should be moveable</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 28.8 [re.regex] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2007-08-29 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#re.regex">issues</a> in [re.regex].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p><b>Addresses UK 316</b></p> + +<p> +According to the current state of the standard draft, the class +template <tt>basic_regex</tt>, as described in 28.8 [re.regex]/3, is +neither <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> nor <tt>MoveAssignable</tt>. +IMO it should be, because typical regex state machines tend +to have a rather large data quantum and I have seen several +use cases, where a factory function returns regex values, +which would take advantage of moveabilities. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Sophia Antipolis: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Needs wording for the semantics, the idea is agreed upon. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit Daniel updated wording to reflect new "swap rules". +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In the class definition of <tt>basic_regex</tt>, just below 28.8 [re.regex]/3, +perform the following changes: +</p> + +<ol type="a"> +<li> +<p> +Just after <tt>basic_regex(const basic_regex&);</tt> insert: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>basic_regex(basic_regex&&); +</pre></blockquote> +</li> +<li> +<p> +Just after <tt>basic_regex& operator=(const basic_regex&);</tt> insert: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>basic_regex& operator=(basic_regex&&); +</pre></blockquote> +</li> +<li> +<p> +Just after <tt>basic_regex& assign(const basic_regex& that);</tt> insert: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>basic_regex& assign(basic_regex&& that); +</pre></blockquote> +</li> +<li> +<p> +In 28.8.2 [re.regex.construct], just after p.11 add the following +new member definition: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>basic_regex(basic_regex&& e); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Move-constructs a <tt>basic_regex</tt> instance from <tt>e</tt>. +</p> +<p> +<i>Postconditions:</i> <tt>flags()</tt> and <tt>mark_count()</tt> return <tt>e.flags()</tt> and +<tt>e.mark_count()</tt>, respectively, +that <tt>e</tt> had before construction, leaving +<tt>e</tt> in a valid state with an unspecified value. +</p> +<p> +<i>Throws:</i> nothing. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> +<li> +<p> +Also in 28.8.2 [re.regex.construct], just after p.18 add the +following new member definition: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>basic_regex& operator=(basic_regex&& e); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<i>Effects:</i> Returns the result of <tt>assign(std::move(e))</tt>. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> +<li> +<p> +In 28.8.3 [re.regex.assign], just after p. 2 add the following new +member definition: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>basic_regex& assign(basic_regex&& rhs); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Move-assigns a <tt>basic_regex</tt> instance from <tt>rhs</tt> and returns <tt>*this</tt>. +</p> +<p> +<i>Postconditions:</i> <tt>flags()</tt> and <tt>mark_count()</tt> return <tt>rhs.flags()</tt> +and <tt>rhs.mark_count()</tt>, respectively, that +<tt>rhs</tt> had before assignment, leaving <tt>rhs</tt> +in a valid state with an unspecified value. +</p> +<p> +<i>Throws:</i> nothing. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="724"></a>724. <tt>DefaultConstructible</tt> is not defined</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.2.1 [utility.arg.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Pablo Halpern <b>Opened:</b> 2007-09-12 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#utility.arg.requirements">issues</a> in [utility.arg.requirements].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The <tt>DefaultConstructible</tt> requirement is referenced in +several places in the August 2007 working draft +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2369.pdf">N2369</a>, +but is not defined anywhere. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Bellevue: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Walking into the default/value-initialization mess... +</p> +<p> +Why two lines? Because we need both expressions to be valid. +</p> +<p> +AJM not sure what the phrase "default constructed" means. This is +unfortunate, as the phrase is already used 24 times in the library! +</p> +<p> +Example: const int would not accept first line, but will accept the second. +</p> +<p> +This is an issue that must be solved by concepts, but we might need to solve it independantly first. +</p> +<p> +It seems that the requirements are the syntax in the proposed first +column is valid, but not clear what semantics we need. +</p> +<p> +A table where there is no post-condition seems odd, but appears to sum up our position best. +</p> +<p> +At a minimum an object is declared and is destuctible. +</p> +<p> +Move to open, as no-one happy to produce wording on the fly. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-28 Reopened by Alisdair. No longer solved by concepts. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-08-17 Daniel adds "[defaultconstructible]" to table title. <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#408">408</a> +depends upon this issue. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-08-18 Alisdair adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Looking at the proposed table in this issue, it really needs two rows: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 33: <tt>DefaultConstructible</tt> requirements [defaultconstructible]</caption> +<tbody><tr> +<th>expression</th><th>post-condition</th> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>T t;</tt></td><td><tt>t</tt> is default-initialized.</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>T{}</tt></td><td>Object of type <tt>T</tt> is value-initialized.</td> +</tr> +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Note I am using the new brace-initialization syntax that is unambiguous +in all use cases (no most vexing parse.) +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10-03 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +The suggested definition <tt>T{}</tt> describing it as +value-initialization is wrong, because it belongs to list-initialization +which would - as the current rules are - always prefer a +initializer-list constructor over a default-constructor. I don't +consider this as an appropriate definition of +<tt>DefaultConstructible</tt>. My primary suggestion is to ask core, +whether the special case <tt>T{}</tt> (which also easily leads to +ambiguity situations for more than one initializer-list in a class) +would always prefer a default-constructor - if any - before considering +an initializer-list constructor or to provide another syntax form to +prefer value-initialization over list-initialization. If that fails I +would fall back to suggest to use the expression <tt>T()</tt> instead of +<tt>T{}</tt> with all it's disadvantages for the meaning of the +expression +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>T t(); +</pre></blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Leave Open. Core is looking to make Alisdair's proposed +resolution correct. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-01-24 At Alisdiar's request, moved his proposal into the proposed wording +seciton. The old wording is preserved here: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +In section 20.2.1 [utility.arg.requirements], before table 33, add the +following table: +</p> + +<p align="center" style="text-align:center">Table 33: <tt>DefaultConstructible</tt> requirements [defaultconstructible]</p> + +<div align="center"> + +<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" style="border-collapse:collapse"> + <tbody><tr> + <td width="114" valign="top" style="width:85.5pt;border-top:solid navy 1.0pt; + border-left:solid navy 1.0pt;border-bottom:double navy 1.5pt;border-right: + none;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt"> + <p align="center" style="margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:center">expression</p> + </td> + <td width="324" valign="top" style="width:243.0pt;border-top:solid navy 1.0pt; + border-left:none;border-bottom:double navy 1.5pt;border-right:solid navy 1.0pt; + padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt"> + <p align="center" style="margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:center">post-condition</p> + </td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td width="114" valign="top" style="width:85.5pt;border-top:none;border-left: + solid navy 1.0pt;border-bottom:solid navy 1.0pt;border-right:none;padding: + 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt"> + <p style="margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><tt>T + t;</tt><br> + <tt>T()</tt></p> + </td> + <td width="324" valign="top" style="width:243.0pt;border-top:none;border-left: + none;border-bottom:solid navy 1.0pt;border-right:solid navy 1.0pt;padding: + 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt"> + <p style="margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><tt>T</tt> + is <i>default constructed.</i></p> + </td> + </tr> +</tbody></table> + +</div> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-04: Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p><i>[ +San Francisco: +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +We believe concepts will solve this problem +(<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2774.pdf">N2774</a>). +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Rationale is obsolete. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In section 20.2.1 [utility.arg.requirements], before table 33, add the +following table: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 33: <tt>DefaultConstructible</tt> requirements [defaultconstructible]</caption> +<tbody><tr> +<th>expression</th><th>post-condition</th> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>T t;</tt></td><td>Object <tt>t</tt> is default-initialized.</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>T u{};</tt></td><td>Object <tt>u</tt> is value-initialized.</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>T()<br>T{}</tt></td><td>A temporary object of type <tt>T</tt> is value-initialized.</td> +</tr> + +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="727"></a>727. <tt>regex_replace()</tt> doesn't accept <tt>basic_string</tt>s with custom traits and allocators</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 28.11.4 [re.alg.replace] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Stephan T. Lavavej <b>Opened:</b> 2007-09-22 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#re.alg.replace">issues</a> in [re.alg.replace].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +<tt>regex_match()</tt> and <tt>regex_search()</tt> take <tt>const basic_string<charT, ST, +SA>&</tt>. <tt>regex_replace()</tt> takes <tt>const basic_string<charT>&</tt>. This prevents +<tt>regex_replace()</tt> from accepting <tt>basic_string</tt>s with custom traits and +allocators. +</p> + +<p> +Overloads of <tt>regex_replace()</tt> taking <tt>basic_string</tt> should be additionally +templated on <tt>class ST, class SA</tt> and take <tt>const basic_string<charT, ST, +SA>&</tt>. Consistency with <tt>regex_match()</tt> and <tt>regex_search()</tt> would place +<tt>class ST, class SA</tt> as the first template arguments; compatibility with +existing code using TR1 and giving explicit template arguments to +<tt>regex_replace()</tt> would place <tt>class ST, class SA</tt> as the last template +arguments. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Bill comments, "We need to look at the depth of this change." +</p> +<p> +Pete remarks that we are here dealing with a convenience function +that saves a user from calling the iterato-based overload. +</p> +<p> +Move to Open. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Howard to ask Stephan Lavavej to provide wording. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-17 Stephan provided wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-25 Daniel tweaks both this issue and <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#726">726</a>. +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +One relevant part of the proposed resolution below suggests +to add a new overload of the format member function in the +<tt>match_results</tt> class template that accepts two character pointers +defining the <tt>begin</tt> and <tt>end</tt> of a format range. A more general +approach could have proposed a pair of iterators instead, but +the used pair of char pointers reflects existing practice. If the +committee strongly favors an iterator-based signature, this +could be simply changed. I think that the minimum requirement +should be a <tt>BidirectionalIterator</tt>, but current implementations +take advantage (at least partially) of the <tt>RandomAccessIterator</tt> +sub interface of the char pointers. +</p> + +<p><b>Suggested Resolution:</b></p> + +<p><i>[Moved into the proposed resloution]</i></p> + + + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-30 Stephan agrees with Daniel's wording. Howard places Daniel's wording +in the Proposed Resolution. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Review. Chair is anxious to move this to Ready in Pittsburgh. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-01-27 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<ol> +<li> +<p> +Change 28.4 [re.syn] as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>// 28.11.4, function template regex_replace: +template <class OutputIterator, class BidirectionalIterator, + class traits, class charT<ins>, class ST, class SA</ins>> + OutputIterator + regex_replace(OutputIterator out, + BidirectionalIterator first, BidirectionalIterator last, + const basic_regex<charT, traits>& e, + const basic_string<charT<ins>, ST, SA</ins>>& fmt, + regex_constants::match_flag_type flags = + regex_constants::match_default); + +<ins> +template <class OutputIterator, class BidirectionalIterator, + class traits, class charT> + OutputIterator + regex_replace(OutputIterator out, + BidirectionalIterator first, BidirectionalIterator last, + const basic_regex<charT, traits>& e, + const charT* fmt, + regex_constants::match_flag_type flags = + regex_constants::match_default); +</ins> + +template <class traits, class charT<ins>, class ST, class SA, + class FST, class FSA</ins>> + basic_string<charT<ins>, ST, SA</ins>> + regex_replace(const basic_string<charT<ins>, ST, SA</ins>>& s, + const basic_regex<charT, traits>& e, + const basic_string<charT<ins>, FST, FSA</ins>>& fmt, + regex_constants::match_flag_type flags = + regex_constants::match_default); + +<ins> +template <class traits, class charT, class ST, class SA> + basic_string<charT, ST, SA> + regex_replace(const basic_string<charT, ST, SA>& s, + const basic_regex<charT, traits>& e, + const charT* fmt, + regex_constants::match_flag_type flags = + regex_constants::match_default); +</ins> + +<ins> +template <class traits, class charT, class ST, class SA> + basic_string<charT> + regex_replace(const charT* s, + const basic_regex<charT, traits>& e, + const basic_string<charT, ST, SA>& fmt, + regex_constants::match_flag_type flags = + regex_constants::match_default); +</ins> + +<ins> +template <class traits, class charT> + basic_string<charT> + regex_replace(const charT* s, + const basic_regex<charT, traits>& e, + const charT* fmt, + regex_constants::match_flag_type flags = + regex_constants::match_default); +</ins> +</pre></blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 28.10 [re.results]/3, class template <tt>match_results</tt> as +indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins> +template <class OutputIter> + OutputIter + format(OutputIter out, + const char_type* fmt_first, const char_type* fmt_last, + regex_constants::match_flag_type flags = + regex_constants::format_default) const; +</ins> + +template <class OutputIter<ins>, class ST, class SA</ins>> + OutputIter + format(OutputIter out, + const <del>string_type</del><ins>basic_string<char_type, ST, SA></ins>& fmt, + regex_constants::match_flag_type flags = + regex_constants::format_default) const; + +<ins>template <class ST, class SA></ins> + <del>string_type</del><ins>basic_string<char_type, ST, SA></ins> + format(const <del>string_type</del><ins>basic_string<char_type, ST, SA></ins>& fmt, + regex_constants::match_flag_type flags = + regex_constants::format_default) const; + +<ins> +string_type +format(const char_type* fmt, + regex_constants::match_flag_type flags = + regex_constants::format_default) const; +</ins> +</pre></blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Insert at the very beginning of 28.10.5 [re.results.form] the following: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins> +template <class OutputIter> + OutputIter + format(OutputIter out, + const char_type* fmt_first, const char_type* fmt_last, + regex_constants::match_flag_type flags = + regex_constants::format_default) const; +</ins> +</pre> +<blockquote> + +<p><ins> +1 <i>Requires:</i> The type <tt>OutputIter</tt> shall satisfy the requirements for an +Output Iterator (24.2.4 [output.iterators]). +</ins></p> + +<p><ins> +2 <i>Effects:</i> Copies the character sequence <tt>[fmt_first,fmt_last)</tt> to +<tt>OutputIter out</tt>. Replaces each format specifier or escape sequence in +the copied range with either the character(s) it represents or the sequence of +characters within <tt>*this</tt> to which it refers. The bitmasks specified in +<tt>flags</tt> determine which format specifiers and escape sequences are +recognized. +</ins></p> + +<p><ins> +3 <i>Returns:</i> <tt>out</tt>. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 28.10.5 [re.results.form], before p. 1 until p. 3 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class OutputIter<ins>, class ST, class SA</ins>> + OutputIter + format(OutputIter out, + const <del>string_type</del><ins>basic_string<char_type, ST, SA></ins>& fmt, + regex_constants::match_flag_type flags = + regex_constants::format_default) const; +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<del>1 <i>Requires:</i> The type <tt>OutputIter</tt> shall satisfy the requirements for +an Output Iterator (24.2.3).</del> +</p> + +<p> +2 <i>Effects:</i> <del>Copies the character sequence +<tt>[fmt.begin(),fmt.end())</tt> to <tt>OutputIter out</tt>. Replaces each +format specifier or escape sequence in <tt>fmt</tt> with either the character(s) +it represents or the sequence of characters within <tt>*this</tt> to which it +refers. The bitmasks specified in <tt>flags</tt> determines what format +specifiers and escape sequences are recognized</del> <ins>Equivalent to +<tt>return format(out, fmt.data(), fmt.data() + fmt.size(), flags)</tt></ins>. +</p> + +<p> +<del>3 <i>Returns:</i> <tt>out</tt>.</del> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 28.10.5 [re.results.form], before p. 4 until p. 4 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>template <class ST, class SA></ins> + <del>string_type</del><ins>basic_string<char_type, ST, SA></ins> + format(const <del>string_type</del><ins>basic_string<char_type, ST, SA></ins>& fmt, + regex_constants::match_flag_type flags = + regex_constants::format_default) const; +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> <del>Returns a copy of the string <tt>fmt</tt>. Replaces each format +specifier or escape sequence +in <tt>fmt</tt> with either the character(s) it represents or the sequence of +characters within <tt>*this</tt> to which +it refers. The bitmasks specified in flags determines what format +specifiers and escape sequences are +recognized.</del> <ins>Constructs an empty string <tt>result</tt> of type +<tt>basic_string<char_type, ST, SA></tt>, +and calls <tt>format(back_inserter(result), fmt, flags)</tt>.</ins> +</p> + +<p> +<ins><i>Returns:</i> <tt>result</tt></ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +At the end of 28.10.5 [re.results.form] insert as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins> +string_type + format(const char_type* fmt, + regex_constants::match_flag_type flags = + regex_constants::format_default) const; +</ins></pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins><i>Effects:</i> Constructs an empty string <tt>result</tt> of type <tt>string_type</tt>, and calls +<tt>format(back_inserter(result), fmt, fmt + +char_traits<char_type>::length(fmt), flags)</tt>.</ins> +</p> +<p> +<ins><i>Returns:</i> <tt>result</tt></ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 28.11.4 [re.alg.replace] before p. 1 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class OutputIterator, class BidirectionalIterator, + class traits, class charT<ins>, class ST, class SA</ins>> + OutputIterator + regex_replace(OutputIterator out, + BidirectionalIterator first, BidirectionalIterator last, + const basic_regex<charT, traits>& e, + const basic_string<charT<ins>, ST, SA</ins>>& fmt, + regex_constants::match_flag_type flags = + regex_constants::match_default); + +<ins> +template <class OutputIterator, class BidirectionalIterator, + class traits, class charT> + OutputIterator + regex_replace(OutputIterator out, + BidirectionalIterator first, BidirectionalIterator last, + const basic_regex<charT, traits>& e, + const charT* fmt, + regex_constants::match_flag_type flags = + regex_constants::match_default); +</ins></pre> + +<blockquote> +<i>Effects:</i> [..]. If any matches are found then, for each such match, if <tt>!(flags & + regex_constants::format_no_copy)</tt> calls <tt>std::copy(m.prefix().first, +m.prefix().second, + out)</tt>, and then calls <tt>m.format(out, fmt, flags)</tt> <ins>for the first +form of the function + and <tt>m.format(out, fmt, fmt + char_traits<charT>::length(fmt), flags)</tt> +for the second + form</ins>. [..]. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 28.11.4 [re.alg.replace] before p. 3 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class traits, class charT<ins>, class ST, class SA, + class FST, class FSA</ins>> + basic_string<charT<ins>, ST, SA</ins>> + regex_replace(const basic_string<charT<ins>, ST, SA</ins>>& s, + const basic_regex<charT, traits>& e, + const basic_string<charT<ins>, FST, FSA</ins>>& fmt, + regex_constants::match_flag_type flags = + regex_constants::match_default); + +<ins> +template <class traits, class charT, class ST, class SA> + basic_string<charT, ST, SA> + regex_replace(const basic_string<charT, ST, SA>& s, + const basic_regex<charT, traits>& e, + const charT* fmt, + regex_constants::match_flag_type flags = + regex_constants::match_default); +</ins></pre> + +<blockquote> +<i>Effects:</i> Constructs an empty string <tt>result</tt> of type <tt>basic_string<charT<ins>, +ST, SA</ins>></tt>, calls <tt>regex_replace(back_inserter(result), s.begin(), s.end(), +e, fmt, flags)</tt>, and then returns <tt>result</tt>. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +At the end of 28.11.4 [re.alg.replace] add the following new prototype description: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins> +template <class traits, class charT, class ST, class SA> + basic_string<charT> + regex_replace(const charT* s, + const basic_regex<charT, traits>& e, + const basic_string<charT, ST, SA>& fmt, + regex_constants::match_flag_type flags = + regex_constants::match_default); +</ins> + +<ins> +template <class traits, class charT> + basic_string<charT> + regex_replace(const charT* s, + const basic_regex<charT, traits>& e, + const charT* fmt, + regex_constants::match_flag_type flags = + regex_constants::match_default); +</ins></pre> + +<blockquote> +<ins> +<i>Effects:</i> Constructs an empty string <tt>result</tt> of type <tt>basic_string<charT></tt>, +calls <tt>regex_replace(back_inserter(result), s, s + +char_traits<charT>::length(s), +e, fmt, flags)</tt>, and then returns <tt>result</tt>. +</ins> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +</ol> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="728"></a>728. Problem in [rand.eng.mers]/6</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.3.2 [rand.eng.mers] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Stephan Tolksdorf <b>Opened:</b> 2007-09-21 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#rand.eng.mers">issues</a> in [rand.eng.mers].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The <tt>mersenne_twister_engine</tt> is required to use a seeding method that is given +as an algorithm parameterized over the number of bits <tt>W</tt>. I doubt whether the given generalization +of an algorithm that was originally developed only for unsigned 32-bit integers is appropriate +for other bit widths. For instance, <tt>W</tt> could be theoretically 16 and <tt>UIntType</tt> a 16-bit integer, in +which case the given multiplier would not fit into the <tt>UIntType</tt>. Moreover, T. Nishimura and M. +Matsumoto have chosen a dif ferent multiplier for their 64 bit Mersenne Twister +[<a href="http://www.math.sci.hiroshima-u.ac.jp/~m-mat/MT/VERSIONS/C-LANG/mt19937-64.c">reference</a>]. +</p> + +<p> +I see two possible resolutions: +</p> + +<ol type="a"> +<li>Restrict the parameter <tt>W</tt> of the <tt>mersenne_twister_template</tt> to values of 32 or 64 and use the +multiplier from [the above reference] for the 64-bit case (my preference)</li> +<li>Interpret the state array for any <tt>W</tt> as a 32-bit array of appropriate length (and a specified byte +order) and always employ the 32-bit algorithm for seeding +</li> +</ol> + +<p> +See <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2424.pdf">N2424</a> +for further discussion. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Bellevue: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Stephan Tolksdorf has additional comments on N2424. He comments: "there +is a typo in the required behaviour for mt19937_64: It should be the +10000th (not 100000th) invocation whose value is given, and the value +should be 9981545732273789042 (not 14002232017267485025)." These values +need checking. +</p> +<p> +Take the proposed recommendation in N2424 and move to REVIEW. +</p> +</blockquote> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +See <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2424.pdf">N2424</a> +for the proposed resolution. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Stephan Tolksdorf adds pre-Bellevue: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +I support the proposed resolution in +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2424.pdf">N2424</a>, +but there is a typo in the +required behaviour for <tt>mt19937_64</tt>: It should be the 10000<sup>th</sup> (not +100000<sup>th</sup>) invocation whose value is given, and the value should be +9981545732273789042 (not 14002232017267485025). The change to para. 8 +proposed by Charles Karney should also be included in the proposed +wording. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Sophia Antipolis: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Note the main part of the issue is resolved by +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2424.pdf">N2424</a>. +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="734"></a>734. Unnecessary restriction in [rand.dist.norm.chisq]</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.8.4.3 [rand.dist.norm.chisq] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Stephan Tolksdorf <b>Opened:</b> 2007-09-21 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +<tt>chi_squared_distribution</tt>, <tt>fisher_f_distribution</tt> and <tt>student_t_distribution</tt> +have parameters for the "degrees of freedom" <tt>n</tt> and <tt>m</tt> that are specified as integers. For the +following two reasons this is an unnecessary restriction: First, in many applications such as +Bayesian inference or Monte Carlo simulations it is more convenient to treat the respective param- +eters as continuous variables. Second, the standard non-naive algorithms (i.e. +O(1) algorithms) +for simulating from these distributions work with floating-point parameters anyway (all three +distributions could be easily implemented using the Gamma distribution, for instance). +</p> + +<p> +Similar arguments could in principle be made for the parameters <tt>t</tt> and <tt>k</tt> of the discrete +<tt>binomial_distribution</tt> and <tt>negative_binomial_distribution</tt>, though in both cases continuous +parameters are less frequently used in practice and in case of the <tt>binomial_distribution</tt> +the implementation would be significantly complicated by a non-discrete parameter (in most +implementations one would need an approximation of the log-gamma function instead of just the +log-factorial function). +</p> + +<p> +<b>Possible resolution:</b> For these reasons, I propose to change the type of the respective parameters +to double. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Bellevue: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +In N2424. Not wildly enthusiastic, not really felt necessary. Less +frequently used in practice. Not terribly bad either. Move to OPEN. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Sophia Antipolis: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Marc Paterno: The generalizations were explicitly left out when designing the facility. It's harder to test. +</p> +<p> +Marc Paterno: Ask implementers whether floating-point is a significant burden. +</p> +<p> +Alisdair: It's neater to do it now, do ask Bill Plauger. +</p> +<p> +Disposition: move to review with the option for "NAD" if it's not straightforward to implement; unanimous consent. +</p> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +See <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2424.pdf">N2424</a> +for the proposed resolution. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Stephan Tolksdorf adds pre-Bellevue: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +In 26.5.8.4.3 [rand.dist.norm.chisq]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Delete ", where <tt>n</tt> is a positive integer" in the first paragraph. +</p> + +<p> +Replace both occurrences of "<tt>explicit chi_squared_distribution(int n = 1);</tt>" +with "<tt>explicit chi_squared_distribution(RealType n = 1);</tt>". +</p> + +<p> +Replace both occurrences of "<tt>int n() const;</tt>" with "<tt>RealType n() const;</tt>". +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +In 26.5.8.4.5 [rand.dist.norm.f]: +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +Delete ", where <tt>m</tt> and <tt>n</tt> are positive integers" in the first paragraph. +</p> + +<p> +Replace both occurrences of +</p> +<blockquote><pre>explicit fisher_f_distribution(int m = 1, int n = 1); +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +with +</p> +<blockquote><pre>explicit fisher_f_distribution(RealType m = 1, RealType n = 1); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Replace both occurrences of "<tt>int m() const;" with "RealType m() const;</tt>". +</p> + +<p> +Replace both occurrences of "<tt>int n() const;" with "RealType n() const;</tt>". +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +In 26.5.8.4.6 [rand.dist.norm.t]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Delete ", where <tt>n</tt> is a positive integer" in the first paragraph. +</p> + +<p> +Replace both occurrences of "<tt>explicit student_t_distribution(int n = 1);</tt>" +with "<tt>explicit student_t_distribution(RealType n = 1);</tt>". +</p> + +<p> +Replace both occurrences of "<tt>int n() const;</tt>" with "<tt>RealType n() const;</tt>". +</p> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="740"></a>740. Please remove <tt>*_ptr<T[N]></tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> X [unique.ptr.compiletime] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Herb Sutter <b>Opened:</b> 2007-10-04 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Please don't provide <tt>*_ptr<T[N]></tt>. It doesn't enable any useful +bounds-checking (e.g., you could imagine that doing <tt>op++</tt> on a +<tt>shared_ptr<T[N]></tt> yields a <tt>shared_ptr<T[N-1]></tt>, but that promising path +immediately falters on <tt>op--</tt> which can't reliably dereference because we +don't know the lower bound). Also, most buffers you'd want to point to +don't have a compile-time known size. +</p> + +<p> +To enable any bounds-checking would require run-time information, with +the usual triplet: base (lower bound), current offset, and max offset +(upper bound). And I can sympathize with the point of view that you +wouldn't want to require this on <tt>*_ptr</tt> itself. But please let's not +follow the <tt><T[N]></tt> path, especially not with additional functions to +query the bounds etc., because this sets wrong user expectations by +embarking on a path that doesn't go all the way to bounds checking as it +seems to imply. +</p> + +<p> +If bounds checking is desired, consider a <tt>checked_*_ptr</tt> instead (e.g., +<tt>checked_shared_ptr</tt>). And make the interfaces otherwise identical so that +user code could easily <tt>#define/typedef</tt> between prepending <tt>checked_</tt> on +debug builds and not doing so on release builds (for example). +</p> + +<p> +Note that some may object that <tt>checked_*_ptr</tt> may seem to make the smart +pointer more like <tt>vector</tt>, and we don't want two ways to spell <tt>vector</tt>. I +don't agree, but if that were true that would be another reason to +remove <tt>*_ptr<T[N]></tt> which equally makes the smart pointer more like +<tt>std::array.</tt> :-) +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Bellevue: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Suggestion that fixed-size array instantiations are going to fail at compile time anyway (if we remove specialization) due to pointer decay, at least that appears to be result from available compilers. +</p> +<p> +So concerns about about requiring static_assert seem unfounded. +</p> +<p> +After a little more experimentation with compiler, it appears that fixed size arrays would only work at all if we supply these explicit specialization. So removing them appears less breaking than originally thought. +</p> +<p> +straw poll unanimous move to Ready. +</p> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change the synopsis under 20.9.9 [unique.ptr] p2: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>... +template<class T> struct default_delete; +template<class T> struct default_delete<T[]>; +<del>template<class T, size_t N> struct default_delete<T[N]>;</del> + +template<class T, class D = default_delete<T>> class unique_ptr; +template<class T, class D> class unique_ptr<T[], D>; +<del>template<class T, class D, size_t N> class unique_ptr<T[N], D>;</del> +... +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Remove the entire section [unique.ptr.dltr.dflt2] <b><tt>default_delete<T[N]></tt></b>. +</p> + +<p> +Remove the entire section X [unique.ptr.compiletime] <b><tt>unique_ptr</tt> for array objects with a compile time length</b> +and its subsections: [unique.ptr.compiletime.dtor], [unique.ptr.compiletime.observers], + [unique.ptr.compiletime.modifiers]. +</p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="742"></a>742. Enabling <tt>swap</tt> for proxy iterators</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.2.1 [utility.arg.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2007-10-10 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-20</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#utility.arg.requirements">issues</a> in [utility.arg.requirements].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +This issue was split from <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#672">672</a>. <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#672">672</a> now just +deals with changing the requirements of <tt>T</tt> in the <tt>Swappable</tt> +requirement from <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> and <tt>CopyAssignable</tt> to +<tt>MoveConstructible</tt> and <tt>MoveAssignable</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +This issue seeks to widen the <tt>Swappable</tt> requirement to support proxy iterators. Here +is example code: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>namespace Mine { + +template <class T> +struct proxy {...}; + +template <class T> +struct proxied_iterator +{ + typedef T value_type; + typedef proxy<T> reference; + reference operator*() const; + ... +}; + +struct A +{ + // heavy type, has an optimized swap, maybe isn't even copyable or movable, just swappable + void swap(A&); + ... +}; + +void swap(A&, A&); +void swap(proxy<A>, A&); +void swap(A&, proxy<A>); +void swap(proxy<A>, proxy<A>); + +} // Mine + +... + +Mine::proxied_iterator<Mine::A> i(...) +Mine::A a; +<b>swap(*i1, a);</b> +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +The key point to note in the above code is that in the call to <tt>swap</tt>, <tt>*i1</tt> +and <tt>a</tt> are different types (currently types can only be <tt>Swappable</tt> with the +same type). A secondary point is that to support proxies, one must be able to pass rvalues +to <tt>swap</tt>. But note that I am not stating that the general purpose <tt>std::swap</tt> +should accept rvalues! Only that overloaded <tt>swap</tt>s, as in the example above, be allowed +to take rvalues. +</p> + +<p> +That is, no standard library code needs to change. We simply need to have a more flexible +definition of <tt>Swappable</tt>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Bellevue: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +While we believe Concepts work will define a swappable concept, we +should still resolve this issue if possible to give guidance to the +Concepts work. +</p> +<p> +Would an ambiguous swap function in two namespaces found by ADL break +this wording? Suggest that the phrase "valid expression" means such a +pair of types would still not be swappable. +</p> +<p> +Motivation is proxy-iterators, but facility is considerably more +general. Are we happy going so far? +</p> +<p> +We think this wording is probably correct and probably an improvement on +what's there in the WP. On the other hand, what's already there in the +WP is awfully complicated. Why do we need the two bullet points? They're +too implementation-centric. They don't add anything to the semantics of +what swap() means, which is there in the post-condition. What's wrong +with saying that types are swappable if you can call swap() and it +satisfies the semantics of swapping? +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-28 Reopened by Alisdair. No longer solved by concepts. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Leave as Open. Dave to provide wording. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-08 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Updated wording to sync with +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n3000.pdf">N3000</a>. +Also this issue is very closely related to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#594">594</a>. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010 Pittsburgh: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to <del>NAD Editorial</del><ins>Resolved</ins>. Rationale added. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +Solved by N3048. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 20.2.1 [utility.arg.requirements]: +</p> + +<blockquote> + +<p> +-1- The template definitions in the C++ Standard Library refer to various +named requirements whose details are set out in tables 31-38. In these +tables, <tt>T</tt> <ins>and <tt>V</tt> are</ins> <del>is a</del> type<ins>s</ins> to be supplied by a C++ program +instantiating a template; <tt>a</tt>, <tt>b</tt>, and <tt>c</tt> are +values of type <tt>const T</tt>; <tt>s</tt> and <tt>t</tt> are modifiable +lvalues of type <tt>T</tt>; <tt>u</tt> is a value of type (possibly +<tt>const</tt>) <tt>T</tt>; <del>and</del> <tt>rv</tt> is a non-<tt>const</tt> +rvalue of type <tt>T</tt><ins>; <tt>w</tt> is a value of type <tt>T</tt>; and <tt>v</tt> is a value of type <tt>V</tt></ins>. +</p> + +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 37: <tt>Swappable</tt> requirements <b>[swappable]</b></caption> +<tbody><tr><th>expression</th><th>Return type</th><th>Post-condition</th></tr> +<tr><td><tt>swap(<del>s</del><ins>w</ins>,<del>t</del><ins>v</ins>)</tt></td><td><tt>void</tt></td> +<td><del><tt>t</tt></del><ins><tt>w</tt></ins> has the value originally +held by <del><tt>u</tt></del><ins><tt>v</tt></ins>, and +<del><tt>u</tt></del><ins><tt>v</tt></ins> has the value originally held +by <del><tt>t</tt></del><ins><tt>w</tt></ins></td></tr> +<tr><td colspan="3"> +<p> +The <tt>Swappable</tt> requirement is met by satisfying one or more of the following conditions: +</p> +<ul> +<li> +<tt>T</tt> is <tt>Swappable</tt> if <ins><tt>T</tt> and <tt>V</tt> are +the same type and </ins> <tt>T</tt> satisfies the +<tt>MoveConstructible</tt> requirements (Table +33) and the +<tt>MoveAssignable</tt> requirements (Table +35); +</li> +<li> +<tt>T</tt> is <tt>Swappable</tt> <ins>with <tt>V</tt></ins> if a namespace scope function named +<tt>swap</tt> exists in the same namespace as the definition of +<tt>T</tt> <ins>or <tt>V</tt></ins>, such that the expression +<tt>swap(<del>s</del><ins>w</ins>,<del>t</del> <ins>v</ins>)</tt> is valid and has the +semantics described in this table. +</li> +<li> +<tt>T</tt> is <tt>Swappable</tt> if <tt>T</tt> is an array type whose +element type is <tt>Swappable</tt>. +</li> +</ul> +</td></tr> +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p><i>[ +post San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Solved by +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2758.pdf">N2758</a>. +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="743"></a>743. rvalue <tt>swap</tt> for <tt>shared_ptr</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.10.2.9 [util.smartptr.shared.spec] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2007-10-10 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +When the LWG looked at <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#674">674</a> in Kona the following note was made: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +We may need to open an issue to deal with the question of +whether <tt>shared_ptr</tt> needs an rvalue <tt>swap</tt>. +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +This issue was opened in response to that note. +</p> + +<p> +I believe allowing rvalue <tt>shared_ptr</tt>s to <tt>swap</tt> is both +appropriate, and consistent with how other library components are currently specified. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Bellevue: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Concern that the three signatures for swap is needlessly complicated, +but this issue merely brings shared_ptr into equal complexity with the +rest of the library. Will open a new issue for concern about triplicate +signatures. +</p> +<p> +Adopt issue as written. +</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change the synopsis in 20.9.10.2 [util.smartptr.shared]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void swap(shared_ptr&<ins>&</ins> r); +... +template<class T> void swap(shared_ptr<T>& a, shared_ptr<T>& b); +<ins>template<class T> void swap(shared_ptr<T>&& a, shared_ptr<T>& b); +template<class T> void swap(shared_ptr<T>& a, shared_ptr<T>&& b);</ins> +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Change 20.9.10.2.4 [util.smartptr.shared.mod]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void swap(shared_ptr&<ins>&</ins> r); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Change 20.9.10.2.9 [util.smartptr.shared.spec]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class T> void swap(shared_ptr<T>& a, shared_ptr<T>& b); +<ins>template<class T> void swap(shared_ptr<T>&& a, shared_ptr<T>& b); +template<class T> void swap(shared_ptr<T>& a, shared_ptr<T>&& b);</ins> +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="744"></a>744. What is the lifetime of an exception pointed to by an exception_ptr?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.8.5 [propagation] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2007-10-10 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index-open.html#propagation">active issues</a> in [propagation].</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#propagation">issues</a> in [propagation].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Without some lifetime guarantee, it is hard to know how this type can be +used. Very specifically, I don't see how the current wording would +guarantee and exception_ptr caught at the end of one thread could be safely +stored and rethrown in another thread - the original motivation for this +API. +</p> +<p> +(Peter Dimov agreed it should be clearer, maybe a non-normative note to +explain?) +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Bellevue: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Agree the issue is real. +</p> +<p> +Intent is lifetime is similar to a shared_ptr (and we might even want to +consider explicitly saying that it is a shared_ptr< unspecified type >). +</p> +<p> +We expect that most implementations will use shared_ptr, and the +standard should be clear that the exception_ptr type is intended to be +something whose semantics are smart-pointer-like so that the user does +not need to worry about lifetime management. We still need someone to +draught those words - suggest emailing Peter Dimov. +</p> +<p> +Move to Open. +</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 18.8.5 [propagation]/7: +</p> + +<blockquote> +-7- Returns: An <tt>exception_ptr</tt> object that refers to the currently +handled exception or a copy of the currently handled exception, or a +null <tt>exception_ptr</tt> object if no exception is being handled. +<ins>The referenced object remains valid at least as long as there is an +<tt>exception_ptr</tt> that refers to it.</ins> +If the function needs to allocate memory and the attempt +fails, it returns an <tt>exception_ptr</tt> object that refers to an instance of +<tt>bad_alloc</tt>. It is unspecified whether the return values of two successive +calls to <tt>current_exception</tt> refer to the same exception object. [<i>Note:</i> +that is, it is unspecified whether <tt>current_exception</tt> creates a new copy +each time it is called. <i>--end note</i>] +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="746"></a>746. current_exception may fail with bad_alloc</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.8.5 [propagation] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2007-10-10 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index-open.html#propagation">active issues</a> in [propagation].</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#propagation">issues</a> in [propagation].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +I understand that the attempt to copy an exception may run out of memory, +but I believe this is the only part of the standard that mandates failure +with specifically <tt>bad_alloc</tt>, as opposed to allowing an +implementation-defined type derived from <tt>bad_alloc</tt>. For instance, the Core +language for a failed new expression is: +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +Any other allocation function that fails to allocate storage shall indicate +failure only by throwing an exception of a type that would match a handler +(15.3) of type <tt>std::bad_alloc</tt> (18.5.2.1). +</p> +</blockquote> +<p> +I think we should allow similar freedom here (or add a blanket +compatible-exception freedom paragraph in 17) +</p> +<p> +I prefer the clause 17 approach myself, and maybe clean up any outstanding +wording that could also rely on it. +</p> +<p> +Although filed against a specific case, this issue is a problem throughout +the library. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Bellevue: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Is issue bigger than library? +</p> +<p> +No - Core are already very clear about their wording, which is inspiration for the issue. +</p> +<p> +While not sold on the original 18.7.5 use case, the generalised 17.4.4.8 wording is the real issue. +</p> +<p> +Accept the broad view and move to ready +</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add the following exemption clause to 17.6.4.12 [res.on.exception.handling]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +A function may throw a type not listed in its <i>Throws</i> clause so long as it is +derived from a class named in the <i>Throws</i> clause, and would be caught by an +exception handler for the base type. +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="749"></a>749. Currently <tt>has_nothrow_copy_constructor<T>::value</tt> is true if T has 'a' nothrow copy constructor.</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.7.4.3 [meta.unary.prop] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2007-10-10 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#meta.unary.prop">issues</a> in [meta.unary.prop].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Unfortunately a class can have multiple copy constructors, and I believe to +be useful this trait should only return true is ALL copy constructors are +no-throw. +</p> +<p> +For instance: +</p> +<blockquote> +<pre>struct awkward { + awkward( const awkward & ) throw() {} + awkward( awkward & ) { throw "oops"; } }; +</pre> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 20.7.4.3 [meta.unary.prop]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>has_trivial_copy_constructor</pre> +<blockquote> +<tt>T</tt> is a trivial type (3.9) or a reference type or a class type <del>with a trivial copy constructor</del> +<ins>where all copy constructors are trivial</ins> (12.8). +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<blockquote> +<pre>has_trivial_assign</pre> +<blockquote> +<tt>T</tt> is neither <tt>const</tt> nor a reference type, and <tt>T</tt> is a trivial type (3.9) +or a class type <del>with a trivial copy assignment operator</del> <ins>where all copy assignment operators are trivial</ins> (12.8). +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<blockquote> +<pre>has_nothrow_copy_constructor</pre> +<blockquote> +<tt>has_trivial_copy_constructor<T>::value</tt> is <tt>true</tt> or <tt>T</tt> is a class type <del>with +a</del> <ins>where all</ins> copy constructor<ins>s</ins> <del>that is</del> <ins>are</ins> +known not to throw any exceptions or <tt>T</tt> is an +array of such a class type +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<blockquote> +<pre>has_nothrow_assign</pre> +<blockquote> +<tt>T</tt> is neither <tt>const</tt> nor a reference type, and +<tt>has_trivial_assign<T>::value</tt> is <tt>true</tt> or <tt>T</tt> is a class type <del>with a</del> +<ins>where all</ins> copy +assignment operator<ins>s</ins> tak<ins>e</ins><del>ing</del> an lvalue of type <tt>T</tt> that is known not to +throw any exceptions or <tt>T</tt> is an array of such a class type. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="752"></a>752. Allocator complexity requirement</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.2.5 [allocator.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Hans Boehm <b>Opened:</b> 2007-10-11 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#allocator.requirements">issues</a> in [allocator.requirements].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Did LWG recently discuss 20.2.5 [allocator.requirements]-2, which states that "All the operations +on the allocators are expected to be amortized constant time."? +</p> +<p> +As I think I pointed out earlier, this is currently fiction for +<tt>allocate()</tt> if it has to obtain memory from the OS, and it's unclear to +me how to interpret this for <tt>construct()</tt> and <tt>destroy()</tt> if they deal with +large objects. Would it be controversial to officially let these take +time linear in the size of the object, as they already do in real life? +</p> +<p> +<tt>Allocate()</tt> more blatantly takes time proportional to the size of the +object if you mix in GC. But it's not really a new problem, and I think +we'd be confusing things by leaving the bogus requirements there. The +current requirement on <tt>allocate()</tt> is generally not important anyway, +since it takes O(size) to construct objects in the resulting space. +There are real performance issues here, but they're all concerned with +the constants, not the asymptotic complexity. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 20.2.5 [allocator.requirements]/2: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-2- Table 39 describes the requirements on types manipulated through +allocators. <del>All the operations on the allocators are expected to be +amortized constant time.</del> Table 40 describes the +requirements on allocator types. +</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="753"></a>753. Move constructor in draft</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.2.1 [utility.arg.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Yechezkel Mett <b>Opened:</b> 2007-10-14 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#utility.arg.requirements">issues</a> in [utility.arg.requirements].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The draft standard n2369 uses the term <i>move constructor</i> in a few +places, but doesn't seem to define it. +</p> + +<p> +<tt>MoveConstructible</tt> requirements are defined in Table 33 in 20.2.1 [utility.arg.requirements] as +follows: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption><tt>MoveConstructible</tt> requirements</caption> +<tbody><tr> +<th>expression</th> <th>post-condition</th> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><tt>T t = rv</tt></td> <td><tt>t</tt> is equivalent to the value of <tt>rv</tt> before the construction</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td colspan="2">[<i>Note:</i> There is no requirement on the value of <tt>rv</tt> after the +construction. <i>-- end note</i>]</td> +</tr> +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + +<p> +(where <tt>rv</tt> is a non-const rvalue of type <tt>T</tt>). +</p> + +<p> +So I assume the move constructor is the constructor that would be used +in filling the above requirement. +</p> + +<p> +For <tt>vector::reserve</tt>, <tt>vector::resize</tt> and the <tt>vector</tt> modifiers given in +23.4.1.4 [vector.modifiers] we have +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Requires:</i> If <tt>value_type</tt> has a move constructor, that constructor shall +not throw any exceptions. +</blockquote> + +<p> +Firstly "If <tt>value_type</tt> has a move constructor" is superfluous; every +type which can be put into a <tt>vector</tt> has a move constructor (a copy +constructor is also a move constructor). Secondly it means that for +any <tt>value_type</tt> which has a throwing copy constructor and no other move +constructor these functions cannot be used -- which I think will come +as a shock to people who have been using such types in <tt>vector</tt> until +now! +</p> + +<p> +I can see two ways to correct this. The simpler, which is presumably +what was intended, is to say "If <tt>value_type</tt> has a move constructor and +no copy constructor, the move constructor shall not throw any +exceptions" or "If <tt>value_type</tt> has a move constructor which changes the +value of its parameter,". +</p> + +<p> +The other alternative is add to <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> the requirement that +the expression does not throw. This would mean that not every type +that satisfies the <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> requirements also satisfies the +<tt>MoveConstructible</tt> requirements. It would mean changing requirements in +various places in the draft to allow either <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> or +<tt>CopyConstructible</tt>, but I think the result would be clearer and +possibly more concise too. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add new defintions to 17.3 [definitions]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<b>move constructor</b> +</p> +<p> +a constructor which accepts only rvalue arguments of that type, and modifies the rvalue as a +side effect during the construction. +</p> +<p> +<b>move assignment operator</b> +</p> +<p> +an assignment operator which accepts only rvalue arguments of that type, and modifies the rvalue as a +side effect during the assignment. +</p> +<p> +<b>move assignment</b> +</p> +<p> +use of the move assignment operator. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Howard adds post-Bellevue: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Unfortunately I believe the wording recommended by the LWG in Bellevue is incorrect. <tt>reserve</tt> et. al. will use a move constructor +if one is available, else it will use a copy constructor. A type may have both. If the move constructor is +used, it must not throw. If the copy constructor is used, it can throw. The sentence in the proposed wording +is correct without the recommended insertion. The Bellevue LWG recommended moving this issue to Ready. I am +unfortunately pulling it back to Open. But I'm drafting wording to atone for this egregious action. :-) +</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="755"></a>755. <tt>std::vector</tt> and <tt>std:string</tt> lack explicit shrink-to-fit operations</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.4.1.2 [vector.capacity], 21.4.4 [string.capacity] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Beman Dawes <b>Opened:</b> 2007-10-31 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#vector.capacity">issues</a> in [vector.capacity].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +A <tt>std::vector</tt> can be shrunk-to-fit via the swap idiom: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>vector<int> v; +... +v.swap(vector<int>(v)); // shrink to fit +</pre> +<blockquote><p> +or: +</p></blockquote> +<pre>vector<int>(v).swap(v); // shrink to fit +</pre> +<blockquote><p> +or: +</p></blockquote> +<pre>swap(v, vector<int>(v)); // shrink to fit +</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p> +A non-binding request for shrink-to-fit can be made to a <tt>std::string</tt> via: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>string s; +... +s.reserve(0); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Neither of these is at all obvious to beginners, and even some +experienced C++ programmers are not aware that shrink-to-fit is +trivially available. +</p> +<p> +Lack of explicit functions to perform these commonly requested +operations makes vector and string less usable for non-experts. Because +the idioms are somewhat obscure, code readability is impaired. It is +also unfortunate that two similar vector-like containers use different +syntax for the same operation. +</p> +<p> +The proposed resolution addresses these concerns. The proposed function +takes no arguments to keep the solution simple and focused. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +To Class template basic_string 21.4 [basic.string] synopsis, +Class template vector 23.4.1 [vector] synopsis, and Class +vector<bool> 23.4.2 [vector.bool] synopsis, add: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre> +void shrink_to_fit(); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +To basic_string capacity 21.4.4 [string.capacity] and vector +capacity 23.4.1.2 [vector.capacity], add: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>void shrink_to_fit(); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<i>Remarks:</i> <tt>shrink_to_fit</tt> is a non-binding request to reduce +<tt>capacity()</tt> to <tt>size()</tt>. [<i>Note:</i> The request is non-binding to +allow latitude for implementation-specific optimizations. +<i>-- end note</i>] +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#850">850</a> has been added to deal with this issue with respect to <tt>deque</tt>. +]</i></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="758"></a>758. <tt>shared_ptr</tt> and <tt>nullptr</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.10.2 [util.smartptr.shared] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Joe Gottman <b>Opened:</b> 2007-10-31 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#util.smartptr.shared">issues</a> in [util.smartptr.shared].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Consider the following program: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>int main() { + shared_ptr<int> p(nullptr); + return 0; +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +This program will fail to compile because <tt>shared_ptr</tt> uses the following +template constructor to construct itself from pointers: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class Y> shared_ptr(Y *); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +According +to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2431.pdf">N2431</a>, +the conversion from <tt>nullptr_t</tt> to <tt>Y *</tt> is not +deducible, so the above constructor will not be found. There are similar problems with the +constructors that take a pointer and a <tt>deleter</tt> or a +pointer, a <tt>deleter</tt> and an allocator, as well as the +corresponding forms of <tt>reset()</tt>. Note that <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2435.htm">N2435</a> +will solve this problem for constructing from just <tt>nullptr</tt>, but not for constructors that use +<tt>deleters</tt> or allocators or for <tt>reset()</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +In the case of the functions that take deleters, there is the additional +question of what argument should be passed to the deleter when it is +eventually called. There are two reasonable possibilities: <tt>nullptr</tt> or +<tt>static_cast<T *>(0)</tt>, where <tt>T</tt> is the template argument of the +<tt>shared_ptr</tt>. It is not immediately clear which of these is better. If +<tt>D::operator()</tt> is a template function similar to <tt>shared_ptr</tt>'s +constructor, then <tt>d(static_cast<T*>(0))</tt> will compile and <tt>d(nullptr)</tt> +will not. On the other hand, if <tt>D::operator()()</tt> takes a parameter that +is a pointer to some type other that <tt>T</tt> (for instance <tt>U*</tt> where <tt>U</tt> derives +from <tt>T</tt>) then <tt>d(nullptr)</tt> will compile and <tt>d(static_cast<T *>(0))</tt> may not. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Bellevue: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +The general idea is right, we need to be able to pass a nullptr to a +shared_ptr, but there are a few borderline editorial issues here. (For +example, the single-argument nullptr_t constructor in the class synopsis +isn't marked explicit, but it is marked explicit in the proposed wording +for 20.6.6.2.1. There is a missing empty parenthesis in the form that +takes a nullptr_t, a deleter, and an allocator.) +</p> +<p> +More seriously: this issue says that a shared_ptr constructed from a +nullptr is empty. Since "empty" is undefined, it's hard to know whether +that's right. This issue is pending on handling that term better. +</p> +<p> +Peter suggests definition of empty should be "does not own anything" +</p> +<p> +Is there an editorial issue that post-conditions should refer to get() = +nullptr, rather than get() = 0? +</p> +<p> +No strong feeling towards accept or NAD, but prefer to make a decision than leave it open. +</p> +<p> +Seems there are no technical merits between NAD and Ready, comes down to +"Do we intentially want to allow/disallow null pointers with these +functions". Staw Poll - support null pointers 5 - No null pointers 0 +</p> +<p> +Move to Ready, modulo editorial comments +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +post Bellevue Peter adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +The following wording changes are less intrusive: +</p> + +<p> +In 20.9.10.2.1 [util.smartptr.shared.const], add: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>shared_ptr(nullptr_t); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +after: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>shared_ptr(); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +(Absence of explicit intentional.) +</p> + +<p> +<tt>px.reset( nullptr )</tt> seems a somewhat contrived way to write <tt>px.reset()</tt>, so +I'm not convinced of its utility. +</p> +<p> +It's similarly not clear to me whether the deleter constructors need to be +extended to take <tt>nullptr</tt>, but if they need to: +</p> +<p> +Add +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class D> shared_ptr(nullptr_t p, D d); +template<class D, class A> shared_ptr(nullptr_t p, D d, A a); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +after +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class Y, class D> shared_ptr(Y* p, D d); +template<class Y, class D, class A> shared_ptr(Y* p, D d, A a); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Note that this changes the semantics of the new constructors such that they +consistently call <tt>d(p)</tt> instead of <tt>d((T*)0)</tt> when <tt>p</tt> is <tt>nullptr</tt>. +</p> +<p> +The ability to be able to pass <tt>0/NULL</tt> to a function that takes a <tt>shared_ptr</tt> +has repeatedly been requested by users, but the other additions that the +proposed resolution makes are not supported by real world demand or +motivating examples. +</p> +<p> +It might be useful to split the obvious and non-controversial <tt>nullptr_t</tt> +constructor into a separate issue. Waiting for "empty" to be clarified is +unnecessary; this is effectively an alias for the default constructor. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Sophia Antipolis: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +We want to remove the reset functions from the proposed resolution. +</p> +<p> +The remaining proposed resolution text (addressing the constructors) are wanted. +</p> +<p> +Disposition: move to review. The review should check the wording in the then-current working draft. +</p> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 20.9.10.2 [util.smartptr.shared] p4, add to the definition/synopsis +of <tt>shared_ptr</tt>: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class D> shared_ptr(nullptr_t p, D d); +template<class D, class A> shared_ptr(nullptr_t p, D d, A a); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +after +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class Y, class D> shared_ptr(Y* p, D d); +template<class Y, class D, class A> shared_ptr(Y* p, D d, A a); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +In 20.9.10.2.1 [util.smartptr.shared.const] add: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class D> shared_ptr(nullptr_t p, D d); +template<class D, class A> shared_ptr(nullptr_t p, D d, A a); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +after +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class Y, class D> shared_ptr(Y* p, D d); +template<class Y, class D, class A> shared_ptr(Y* p, D d, A a); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +(reusing the following paragraphs 20.9.10.2.1 [util.smartptr.shared.const]/9-13 that speak of p.) +</p> + +<p> +In 20.9.10.2.1 [util.smartptr.shared.const]/10, change +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Effects:</i> Constructs a <tt>shared_ptr</tt> object that <i>owns</i> the +<del>pointer</del> <ins>object</ins> <tt>p</tt> and the deleter <tt>d</tt>. The second +constructor shall use a copy of <tt>a</tt> to allocate memory for internal use. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p><i>[ +San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +"pointer" is changed to "object" to handle the fact that nullptr_t isn't a pointer. +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="759"></a>759. A reference is not an object</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2 [container.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Jens Maurer <b>Opened:</b> 2007-11-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#container.requirements">issues</a> in [container.requirements].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +23.2 [container.requirements] says: +</p> + +<blockquote> +-12- Objects passed to member functions of a container as rvalue references shall not be elements of that container. No +diagnostic required. +</blockquote> + +<p> +A reference is not an object, but this sentence appears to claim so. +</p> + +<p> +What is probably meant here: +</p> +<blockquote> +An object bound to an rvalue +reference parameter of a member function of a container shall not be +an element of that container; no diagnostic required. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 23.2 [container.requirements]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +-12- <del>Objects passed to member functions of a container as rvalue references shall not be elements</del> +<ins>An object bound to an rvalue +reference parameter of a member function of a container shall not be +an element</ins> +of that container<del>.</del><ins>;</ins> <del>N</del><ins>n</ins>o +diagnostic required. +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="761"></a>761. <tt>unordered_map</tt> needs an <tt>at()</tt> member function</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.7.1.2 [unord.map.elem] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Joe Gottman <b>Opened:</b> 2007-11-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The new member function <tt>at()</tt> was recently added to <tt>std::map()</tt>. It acts +like <tt>operator[]()</tt>, except it throws an exception when the input key is +not found. It is useful when the <tt>map</tt> is <tt>const</tt>, the <tt>value_type</tt> of the +key doesn't have a default constructor, it is an error if the key is +not found, or the user wants to avoid accidentally adding an element to +the map. For exactly these same reasons, <tt>at()</tt> would be equally useful +in <tt>std::unordered_map</tt>. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add the following functions to the definition of <tt>unordered_map</tt> under "lookup" (23.7.1 [unord.map]): +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>mapped_type& at(const key_type& k); +const mapped_type &at(const key_type &k) const; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Add the following definitions to 23.7.1.2 [unord.map.elem]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>mapped_type& at(const key_type& k); +const mapped_type &at(const key_type &k) const; +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Returns:</i> A reference to <tt>x.second</tt>, where <tt>x</tt> is the (unique) element +whose key is equivalent to <tt>k</tt>. +</p> +<p> +<i>Throws:</i> An exception object of type <tt>out_of_range</tt> if no such element +is present. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Bellevue: Editorial note: the "(unique)" differs from map. +]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="762"></a>762. <tt>std::unique_ptr</tt> requires complete type?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.9 [unique.ptr] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2007-11-30 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#unique.ptr">issues</a> in [unique.ptr].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In contrast to the proposed <tt>std::shared_ptr</tt>, <tt>std::unique_ptr</tt> +does currently not support incomplete types, because it +gives no explicit grant - thus instantiating <tt>unique_ptr</tt> with +an incomplete pointee type <tt>T</tt> automatically belongs to +undefined behaviour according to 17.6.3.8 [res.on.functions]/2, last +bullet. This is an unnecessary restriction and prevents +many well-established patterns - like the bridge pattern - +for <tt>std::unique_ptr</tt>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Bellevue: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to open. The LWG is comfortable with the intent of allowing +incomplete types and making <tt>unique_ptr</tt> more like <tt>shared_ptr</tt>, but we are +not comfortable with the wording. The specification for <tt>unique_ptr</tt> +should be more like that of <tt>shared_ptr</tt>. We need to know, for individual +member functions, which ones require their types to be complete. The +<tt>shared_ptr</tt> specification is careful to say that for each function, and +we need the same level of care here. We also aren't comfortable with the +"part of the operational semantic" language; it's not used elsewhere in +the standard, and it's not clear what it means. We need a volunteer to +produce new wording. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +The proposed changes in the following revision refers to the current state of +N2521 including the assumption that X [unique.ptr.compiletime] will be removed +according to the current state of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#740">740</a>. +</p> +<p> +The specialization <tt>unique_ptr<T[]></tt> has some more restrictive constraints on +type-completeness on <tt>T</tt> than <tt>unique_ptr<T></tt>. The following proposed wordings +try to cope with that. If the committee sees less usefulness on relaxed +constraints on <tt>unique_ptr<T[]></tt>, the alternative would be to stop this relaxation +e.g. by adding one further bullet to 20.9.9.3 [unique.ptr.runtime]/1: +"<tt>T</tt> shall be a complete type, if used as template argument of +<tt>unique_ptr<T[], D></tt> +</p> +<p> +This issue has some overlap with <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#673">673</a>, but it seems not to cause any +problems with this one, +because <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#673">673</a> adds only optional requirements on <tt>D</tt> that do not conflict +with the here discussed +ones, provided that <tt>D::pointer</tt>'s operations (including default +construction, copy construction/assignment, +and pointer conversion) are specified <em>not</em> to throw, otherwise this +would have impact on the +current specification of <tt>unique_ptr</tt>. +</p> + +<ol> +<li> +<p> +In 20.9.9 [unique.ptr]/2 add as the last sentence to the existing para: +</p> + +<blockquote> +The <tt>unique_ptr</tt> provides a semantics of strict ownership. A +<tt>unique_ptr</tt> owns the object it holds a pointer to. A +<tt>unique_ptr</tt> is not <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>, nor +<tt>CopyAssignable</tt>, however it is <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> and +<tt>MoveAssignable</tt>. <ins>The template parameter <tt>T</tt> of +<tt>unique_ptr</tt> may be an incomplete type.</ins> [ <i>Note:</i> The +uses of <tt>unique_ptr</tt> include providing exception safety for +dynamically allcoated memory, passing ownership of dynamically allocated +memory to a function, and returning dynamically allocated memory from a +function. -- <i>end note</i> ] +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +20.9.9.2.1 [unique.ptr.single.ctor]/1: No changes necessary. +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p><i>[ +N.B.: We only need the requirement that <tt>D</tt> is <tt>DefaultConstructible</tt>. +The current wording says just this. +]</i></p> + +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +In 20.9.9.2.1 [unique.ptr.single.ctor]/5 change the requires clause to say: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Requires:</i> <del>The expression <tt>D()(p)</tt> shall be well formed. The default constructor +of <tt>D</tt> shall not throw an exception.</del> +<del><tt>D</tt> must not be a reference type.</del> +<ins> +<tt>D</tt> shall be default constructible, and that construction +shall not throw an exception. +</ins> +</p> +<p><i>[ +N.B.: There is no need that the expression <tt>D()(p)</tt> is well-formed at +this point. I assume that the current wording is based on the +corresponding <tt>shared_ptr</tt> wording. In case of <tt>shared_ptr</tt> this +requirement is necessary, because the corresponding c'tor *can* fail +and must invoke delete <tt>p/d(p)</tt> in this case. <tt>Unique_ptr</tt> is simpler in +this regard. The *only* functions that must insist on well-formedness +and well-definedness of the expression <tt>get_deleter()(get())</tt> are (1) +the destructor and (2) <tt>reset</tt>. The reasoning for the wording change to +explicitly require <tt>DefaultConstructible</tt> of <tt>D</tt> is to guarantee that +invocation of +<tt>D</tt>'s default c'tor is both well-formed and well-defined. Note also that +we do *not* need the +requirement that <tt>T</tt> must be complete, also in contrast to <tt>shared_ptr</tt>. +<tt>Shared_ptr</tt> needs this, because it's c'tor is a template c'tor which +potentially requires <tt>Convertible<Y*, X*></tt>, which +again requires Completeness of <tt>Y</tt>, if <tt>!SameType<X, Y></tt> +]</i></p> + +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Merge 20.9.9.2.1 [unique.ptr.single.ctor]/12+13 thereby removing the sentence +of 12, but transferring the "requires" to 13: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Requires:</i> If <tt>D</tt> is not an lvalue-reference type then[..] +</p> +<p><i>[ +N.B.: For the same reasons as for (3), there is no need that <tt>d(p)</tt> is +well-formed/well-defined at this point. The current wording guarantees +all what we need, namely that the initialization of both the <tt>T*</tt> +pointer and the <tt>D</tt> deleter are well-formed and well-defined. +]</i></p> + +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +20.9.9.2.1 [unique.ptr.single.ctor]/17: No changes necessary. +</li> +<li> +<p>20.9.9.2.1 [unique.ptr.single.ctor]/21:</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Requires:</i> If <tt>D</tt> is not a reference type, construction of +the deleter <tt>D</tt> from an rvalue of type <tt>E</tt> shall be well +formed and shall not throw an exception. If <tt>D</tt> is a reference +type, then <tt>E</tt> shall be the same type as <tt>D</tt> (diagnostic +required). <tt>U*</tt> shall be implicitly convertible to <tt>T*</tt>. +<ins>[<i>Note:</i> These requirements imply that <tt>T</tt> and <tt>U</tt> +be complete types. <i>-- end note</i>]</ins> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +N.B.: The current wording of 21 already implicitly guarantees that <tt>U</tt> +is completely defined, because it requires that <tt>Convertible<U*, T*></tt> is +true. If the committee wishes this explicit requirement can be added, +e.g. "<tt>U</tt> shall be a complete type." +]</i></p> + +</li> + +<li> +<p> +20.9.9.2.2 [unique.ptr.single.dtor]: Just before p1 add a new paragraph: +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Requires:</i> The expression <tt>get_deleter()(get())</tt> shall be well-formed, +shall have well-defined behavior, and shall not throw exceptions. +<ins>[<i>Note:</i> The use of <tt>default_delete</tt> requires <tt>T</tt> to +be a complete type. <i>-- end note</i>]</ins> +</p> +<p><i>[ +N.B.: This requirement ensures that the whole responsibility on +type-completeness of <tt>T</tt> is delegated to this expression. +]</i></p> + +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +20.9.9.2.3 [unique.ptr.single.asgn]/1: No changes necessary, except the +current editorial issue, that "must shall" has to be changed to +"shall", but this change is not a special part of this resolution. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +N.B. The current wording is sufficient, because we can delegate all +further requirements on the requirements of the effects clause +]</i></p> + +</li> + +<li> +<p> +20.9.9.2.3 [unique.ptr.single.asgn]/6: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Requires:</i> Assignment of the deleter <tt>D</tt> from an rvalue +<tt>D</tt> shall not throw an exception. <tt>U*</tt> shall be implicitly +convertible to <tt>T*</tt>. +<ins>[<i>Note:</i> These requirements imply that <tt>T</tt> and <tt>U</tt> +be complete types. <i>-- end note</i>]</ins> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +N.B.: The current wording of p. 6 already implicitly guarantees that +<tt>U</tt> is completely defined, because it requires that <tt>Convertible<U*, T*></tt> +is true, see (6)+(8). +]</i></p> + +</li> + +<li> +<p> +20.9.9.2.3 [unique.ptr.single.asgn]/11: No changes necessary. +</p> +<p><i>[ +N.B.: Delegation to requirements of effects clause is sufficient. +]</i></p> + +</li> + +<li> +20.9.9.2.4 [unique.ptr.single.observers]/1+4+7+9+11: +</li> + +<blockquote> +<pre>T* operator->() const;</pre> +<blockquote> +<ins><i>Note:</i> Use typically requires <tt>T</tt> shall be complete. <i>-- end note</i>]</ins> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<li> +20.9.9.2.5 [unique.ptr.single.modifiers]/1: No changes necessary. +</li> + +<li> +<p> +20.9.9.2.5 [unique.ptr.single.modifiers]/4: Just before p. 4 add a new paragraph: +</p> +<blockquote> +<i>Requires:</i> The expression <tt>get_deleter()(get())</tt> shall be well-formed, +shall have well-defined behavior, and shall not throw exceptions. +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +20.9.9.2.5 [unique.ptr.single.modifiers]/7: No changes necessary. +</li> + +<li> +<p> +20.9.9.3 [unique.ptr.runtime]: Add one additional bullet on paragraph 1: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +A specialization for array types is provided with a slightly altered interface. +</p> + +<ul> +<li> +... +</li> +<li> +<ins><tt>T</tt> shall be a complete type.</ins> +</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + +<p><i>[ +post Bellevue: Daniel provided revised wording. +]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="765"></a>765. more on iterator validity</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> X [iterator.concepts] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2007-12-14 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#iterator.concepts">issues</a> in [iterator.concepts].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + <p> + +Issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#278">278</a> +defines the meaning of the term "invalid iterator" as one that may be +singular. + + </p> + <p> + +Consider the following code: + + </p> + <pre> std::deque<int> x, y; + std::deque<int>::iterator i = x.end(), j = y.end(); + x.swap(y); + </pre> + <p> + +Given that <code>swap()</code> is required not to invalidate iterators +and using the definition above, what should be the expected result of +comparing <code>i</code> and <code>j</code> to <code>x.end()</code> +and <code>y.end()</code>, respectively, after the <code>swap()</code>? + + </p> + <p> + +I.e., is the expression below required to evaluate +to <code>true</code>? + + </p> + <pre> i == y.end() && j == x.end() + </pre> + <p> + +(There are at least two implementations where the expression +returns <code>false</code>.) + + </p> + <p> + +More generally, is the definition introduced in issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#278">278</a> meant to +make any guarantees about whether iterators actually point to the same +elements or be associated with the same containers after a +non-invalidating operation as they did before? + + </p> + <p> + +Here's a motivating example intended to demonstrate the importance of +the question: + + </p> + <pre> Container x, y ({ 1, 2}); // pseudocode to initialize y with { 1, 2 } + Container::iterator i = y.begin() + 1; + Container::iterator j = y.end(); + std::swap(x, y); + std::find(i, j, 3); + </pre> + <p> + +<code>swap()</code> guarantees that <code>i</code> and <code>j</code> +continue to be valid. Unless the spec says that even though they are +valid they may no longer denote a valid range the code above must be +well-defined. Expert opinions on this differ as does the behavior of +popular implementations for some standard <code>Containers</code>. + + </p> +<p><i>[ +San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Pablo: add a note to the last bullet of paragraph 11 of 23.1.1 clarifying that the end() iterator doesn't refer to an element and that it can therefore be invalidated. +</p> +<p> +Proposed wording: +</p> +<blockquote> +[<i>Note:</i> The <tt>end()</tt> iterator does not refer to any element and can +therefore be invalidated. <i>-- end note</i>] +</blockquote> +<p> +Howard will add this proposed wording to the issue and then move it to Review. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Lawrence: suggestion: "Note: The <tt>end()</tt> iterator does not refer to any element" +</p> +<p> +Walter: "Note: The <tt>end()</tt> iterator can nevertheless be invalidated, +because it does not refer to any element." +</p> +<p> +Nick: "The <tt>end()</tt> iterator does not refer to any element. It is therefore +subject to being invalidated." +</p> +<p> +Consensus: go with Nick +</p> +<p> +With that update, Recommend Tentatively Ready. +</p> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add to 23.2.1 [container.requirements.general], p11: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Unless otherwise specified (see 23.1.4.1, 23.1.5.1, 23.2.2.3, and +23.2.6.4) all container types defined in this Clause meet the following +additional requirements: +</p> +<ul> +<li>...</li> +<li> +no <tt>swap()</tt> function invalidates any references, pointers, or +iterators referring to the elements of the containers being swapped. +<ins>[<i>Note:</i> The <tt>end()</tt> iterator does not refer to any element. It is therefore +subject to being invalidated. <i>-- end note</i>]</ins> +</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="766"></a>766. Inconsistent exception guarantees between ordered and unordered associative containers</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2 [container.requirements], 23.2.5.1 [unord.req.except] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Ion Gaztańaga <b>Opened:</b> 2007-12-22 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#container.requirements">issues</a> in [container.requirements].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +23.2 [container.requirements]p10 states: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Unless otherwise specified (see 23.2.2.3 and 23.2.5.4) all container types defined in this clause meet the following +additional requirements: +</p> +<ul> + +<li>[...]</li> + +<li>no <tt>erase()</tt>, <tt>pop_back()</tt> or <tt>pop_front()</tt> function throws an exception.</li> + +</ul> +</blockquote> + +<p> +23.3.2.3 [deque.modifiers] and 23.4.1.4 [vector.modifiers] offer +additional guarantees for <tt>deque</tt>/<tt>vector insert()</tt> and +<tt>erase()</tt> members. However, 23.2 [container.requirements]p10 does not mention 23.2.5.1 [unord.req.except] that specifies exception safety guarantees +for unordered containers. In addition, 23.2.5.1 [unord.req.except]p1 offers the following guaratee for +<tt>erase()</tt>: +</p> + +<blockquote> +No <tt>erase()</tt> function throws an exception unless that exception +is thrown by the container's Hash or Pred object (if any). +</blockquote> + +<p> +Summary: +</p> + +<p> +According to 23.2 [container.requirements]p10 no +<tt>erase()</tt> function should throw an exception unless otherwise +specified. Although does not explicitly mention 23.2.5.1 [unord.req.except], this section offers additional guarantees +for unordered containers, allowing <tt>erase()</tt> to throw if +predicate or hash function throws. +</p> + +<p> +In contrast, associative containers have no exception safety guarantees +section so no <tt>erase()</tt> function should throw, <em>including +<tt>erase(k)</tt></em> that needs to use the predicate function to +perform its work. This means that the predicate of an associative +container is not allowed to throw. +</p> + +<p> +So: +</p> + +<ol> +<li> +<tt>erase(k)</tt> for associative containers is not allowed to throw. On +the other hand, <tt>erase(k)</tt> for unordered associative containers +is allowed to throw. +</li> +<li> +<tt>erase(q)</tt> for associative containers is not allowed to throw. On +the other hand, <tt>erase(q)</tt> for unordered associative containers +is allowed to throw if it uses the hash or predicate. +</li> +<li> +To fulfill 1), predicates of associative containers are not allowed to throw. +Predicates of unordered associative containers are allowed to throw. +</li> +<li> +2) breaks a widely used programming pattern (flyweight pattern) for +unordered containers, where objects are registered in a global map in +their constructors and unregistered in their destructors. If <tt>erase(q)</tt> is +allowed to throw, the destructor of the object would need to rethrow the +exception or swallow it, leaving the object registered. +</li> +</ol> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Create a new sub-section of 23.2.4 [associative.reqmts] (perhaps [associative.req.except]) titled "Exception +safety guarantees". +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +1 For associative containers, no <tt>clear()</tt> function throws an exception. +<tt>erase(k)</tt> does not throw an exception unless that exception is thrown by +the container's Pred object (if any). +</p> + +<p> +2 For associative containers, if an exception is thrown by any operation +from within an <tt>insert()</tt> function inserting a single element, the +<tt>insert()</tt> function has no effect. +</p> + +<p> +3 For associative containers, no <tt>swap</tt> function throws an exception +unless that exception is thrown by the copy constructor or copy +assignment operator of the container's Pred object (if any). +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 23.2.5.1 [unord.req.except]p1: +</p> + +<blockquote> +For unordered associative containers, no <tt>clear()</tt> function +throws an exception. <del>No</del> <tt>erase(<ins>k</ins>)</tt> +<del>function</del> <ins>does not</ins> throw<del>s</del> an exception +unless that exception is thrown by the container's Hash or Pred object +(if any). +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 23.2 [container.requirements]p10 to add references to new sections: +</p> + +<blockquote> +Unless otherwise specified (see [deque.modifiers]<ins>,</ins> +<del>and</del> [vector.modifiers]<ins>, [associative.req.except], +[unord.req.except]</ins>) all container types defined in this clause meet +the following additional requirements: +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 23.2 [container.requirements]p10 referring to <tt>swap</tt>: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<ul> +<li> +no <tt>swap()</tt> function throws an exception<del> unless that exception is thrown +by the copy constructor or assignment operator of the container's +Compare object (if any; see [associative.reqmts])</del>. +</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="768"></a>768. Typos in [atomics]?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 29.5 [atomics.types.generic] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alberto Ganesh Barbati <b>Opened:</b> 2007-12-28 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#atomics.types.generic">issues</a> in [atomics.types.generic].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +in the latest publicly available draft, paper +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2461.pdf">N2641</a>, +in section 29.5 [atomics.types.generic], the following specialization of the template +<tt>atomic<></tt> is provided for pointers: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T> struct atomic<T*> : atomic_address { + T* fetch_add(ptrdiff_t, memory_order = memory_order_seq_cst) volatile; + T* fetch_sub(ptrdiff_t, memory_order = memory_order_seq_cst) volatile; + + atomic() = default; + constexpr explicit atomic(T); + atomic(const atomic&) = delete; + atomic& operator=(const atomic&) = delete; + + T* operator=(T*) volatile; + T* operator++(int) volatile; + T* operator--(int) volatile; + T* operator++() volatile; + T* operator--() volatile; + T* operator+=(ptrdiff_t) volatile; + T* operator-=(ptrdiff_t) volatile; +}; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +First of all, there is a typo in the non-default constructor which +should take a <tt>T*</tt> rather than a <tt>T</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +As you can see, the specialization redefine and therefore hide a few +methods from the base class <tt>atomic_address</tt>, namely <tt>fetch_add</tt>, <tt>fetch_sub</tt>, +<tt>operator=</tt>, <tt>operator+=</tt> and <tt>operator-=</tt>. That's good, but... what happened +to the other methods, in particular these ones: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void store(T*, memory_order = memory_order_seq_cst) volatile; +T* load( memory_order = memory_order_seq_cst ) volatile; +T* swap( T*, memory_order = memory_order_seq_cst ) volatile; +bool compare_swap( T*&, T*, memory_order, memory_order ) volatile; +bool compare_swap( T*&, T*, memory_order = memory_order_seq_cst ) volatile; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +By reading paper +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2427.html">N2427 "C++ Atomic Types and Operations"</a>, +I see that the +definition of the specialization <tt>atomic<T*></tt> matches the one in the +draft, but in the example implementation the methods <tt>load()</tt>, <tt>swap()</tt> +and <tt>compare_swap()</tt> are indeed present. +</p> + +<p> +Strangely, the example implementation does not redefine the method +<tt>store()</tt>. It's true that a <tt>T*</tt> is always convertible to <tt>void*</tt>, but not +hiding the <tt>void*</tt> signature from the base class makes the class +error-prone to say the least: it lets you assign pointers of any type to +a <tt>T*</tt>, without any hint from the compiler. +</p> + +<p> +Is there a true intent to remove them from the specialization or are +they just missing from the definition because of a mistake? +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Bellevue: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +The proposed revisions are accepted. +</p> +<p> +Further discussion: why is the ctor labeled "constexpr"? Lawrence said +this permits the object to be statically initialized, and that's +important because otherwise there would be a race condition on +initialization. +</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change the synopsis in 29.5 [atomics.types.generic]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T> struct atomic<T*> : atomic_address { + <ins>void store(T*, memory_order = memory_order_seq_cst) volatile;</ins> + <ins>T* load( memory_order = memory_order_seq_cst ) volatile;</ins> + <ins>T* swap( T*, memory_order = memory_order_seq_cst ) volatile;</ins> + <ins>bool compare_swap( T*&, T*, memory_order, memory_order ) volatile;</ins> + <ins>bool compare_swap( T*&, T*, memory_order = memory_order_seq_cst ) volatile;</ins> + + T* fetch_add(ptrdiff_t, memory_order = memory_order_seq_cst) volatile; + T* fetch_sub(ptrdiff_t, memory_order = memory_order_seq_cst) volatile; + + atomic() = default; + constexpr explicit atomic(T<ins>*</ins>); + atomic(const atomic&) = delete; + atomic& operator=(const atomic&) = delete; + + T* operator=(T*) volatile; + T* operator++(int) volatile; + T* operator--(int) volatile; + T* operator++() volatile; + T* operator--() volatile; + T* operator+=(ptrdiff_t) volatile; + T* operator-=(ptrdiff_t) volatile; +}; +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="769"></a>769. std::function should use nullptr_t instead of "unspecified-null-pointer-type"</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8.14.2 [func.wrap.func] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2008-01-10 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#func.wrap.func">issues</a> in [func.wrap.func].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +N2461 already replaced in 20.8.14.2 [func.wrap.func] it's originally proposed +(implicit) conversion operator to "unspecified-bool-type" by the new +explicit bool conversion, but the inverse conversion should also +use the new <tt>std::nullptr_t</tt> type instead of "unspecified-null-pointer- +type". +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +In 20.8 [function.objects], header <tt><functional></tt> synopsis replace: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class R, class... ArgTypes> + bool operator==(const function<R(ArgTypes...)>&, <del>unspecified-null-pointer-type</del> <ins>nullptr_t</ins>); +template<class R, class... ArgTypes> + bool operator==(<del>unspecified-null-pointer-type</del> <ins>nullptr_t</ins> , const function<R(ArgTypes...)>&); +template<class R, class... ArgTypes> + bool operator!=(const function<R(ArgTypes...)>&, <del>unspecified-null-pointer-type</del> <ins>nullptr_t</ins>); +template<class R, class... ArgTypes> + bool operator!=(<del>unspecified-null-pointer-type</del> <ins>nullptr_t</ins> , const function<R(ArgTypes...)>&); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +In the class function synopsis of 20.8.14.2 [func.wrap.func] replace +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>function(<del>unspecified-null-pointer-type</del> <ins>nullptr_t</ins>); +... +function& operator=(<del>unspecified-null-pointer-type</del> <ins>nullptr_t</ins>); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +In 20.8.14.2 [func.wrap.func], "Null pointer comparisons" replace: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class R, class... ArgTypes> + bool operator==(const function<R(ArgTypes...)>&, <del>unspecified-null-pointer-type</del> <ins>nullptr_t</ins>); +template <class R, class... ArgTypes> + bool operator==(<del>unspecified-null-pointer-type</del> <ins>nullptr_t</ins> , const function<R(ArgTypes...)>&); +template <class R, class... ArgTypes> + bool operator!=(const function<R(ArgTypes...)>&, <del>unspecified-null-pointer-type</del> <ins>nullptr_t</ins>); +template <class R, class... ArgTypes> + bool operator!=(<del>unspecified-null-pointer-type</del> <ins>nullptr_t</ins> , const function<R(ArgTypes...)>&); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +In 20.8.14.2.1 [func.wrap.func.con], replace +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>function(<del>unspecified-null-pointer-type</del> <ins>nullptr_t</ins>); +... +function& operator=(<del>unspecified-null-pointer-type</del> <ins>nullptr_t</ins>); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +In 20.8.14.2.6 [func.wrap.func.nullptr], replace +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class R, class... ArgTypes> + bool operator==(const function<R(ArgTypes...)>& f, <del>unspecified-null-pointer-type</del> <ins>nullptr_t</ins>); +template <class R, class... ArgTypes> + bool operator==(<del>unspecified-null-pointer-type</del> <ins>nullptr_t</ins> , const function<R(ArgTypes...)>& f); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +and replace +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class R, class... ArgTypes> + bool operator!=(const function<R(ArgTypes...)>& f, <del>unspecified-null-pointer-type</del> <ins>nullptr_t</ins>); +template <class R, class... ArgTypes> + bool operator!=(<del>unspecified-null-pointer-type</del> <ins>nullptr_t</ins> , const function<R(ArgTypes...)>& f); +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="770"></a>770. std::function should use rvalue swap</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8.14 [func.wrap] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2008-01-10 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +It is expected that typical implementations of <tt>std::function</tt> will +use dynamic memory allocations at least under given conditions, +so it seems appropriate to change the current lvalue swappabilty of +this class to rvalue swappability. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 20.8 [function.objects], header <tt><functional></tt> synopsis, just below of +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class R, class... ArgTypes> + void swap(function<R(ArgTypes...)>&, function<R(ArgTypes...)>&); +<ins>template<class R, class... ArgTypes> + void swap(function<R(ArgTypes...)>&&, function<R(ArgTypes...)>&); +template<class R, class... ArgTypes> + void swap(function<R(ArgTypes...)>&, function<R(ArgTypes...)>&&);</ins> +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +In 20.8.14.2 [func.wrap.func] class <tt>function</tt> definition, change +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void swap(function&<ins>&</ins>); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +In 20.8.14.2 [func.wrap.func], just below of +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class R, class... ArgTypes> + void swap(function<R(ArgTypes...)>&, function<R(ArgTypes...)>&); +<ins>template <class R, class... ArgTypes> + void swap(function<R(ArgTypes...)>&&, function<R(ArgTypes...)>&); +template <class R, class... ArgTypes> + void swap(function<R(ArgTypes...)>&, function<R(ArgTypes...)>&&);</ins> +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +In 20.8.14.2.2 [func.wrap.func.mod] change +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void swap(function&<ins>&</ins> other); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +In 20.8.14.2.7 [func.wrap.func.alg] add the two overloads +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>template<class R, class... ArgTypes> + void swap(function<R(ArgTypes...)>&& f1, function<R(ArgTypes...)>& f2); +template<class R, class... ArgTypes> + void swap(function<R(ArgTypes...)>& f1, function<R(ArgTypes...)>&& f2);</ins> +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="771"></a>771. Impossible throws clause in [string.conversions]</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.5 [string.conversions] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2008-01-13 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#string.conversions">issues</a> in [string.conversions].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The new <tt>to_string</tt> and <tt>to_wstring</tt> functions described in 21.5 [string.conversions] +have throws clauses (paragraphs 8 and 16) which say: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Throws:</i> nothing +</blockquote> + +<p> +Since all overloads return either a <tt>std::string</tt> or a <tt>std::wstring</tt> by value +this throws clause is impossible to realize in general, since the <tt>basic_string</tt> +constructors can fail due to out-of-memory conditions. Either these throws +clauses should be removed or should be more detailled like: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Throws:</i> Nothing if the string construction throws nothing +</blockquote> + +<p> +Further there is an editorial issue in p. 14: All three <tt>to_wstring</tt> +overloads return a <tt>string</tt>, which should be <tt>wstring</tt> instead (The +header <tt><string></tt> synopsis of 21.3 [string.classes] is correct in this +regard). +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 21.5 [string.conversions], remove the paragraphs 8 and 16. +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>string to_string(long long val); +string to_string(unsigned long long val); +string to_string(long double val); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<del><i>Throws:</i> nothing</del> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<blockquote> +<pre><ins>w</ins>string to_wstring(long long val); +<ins>w</ins>string to_wstring(unsigned long long val); +<ins>w</ins>string to_wstring(long double val); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<del><i>Throws:</i> nothing</del> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="772"></a>772. Impossible return clause in [string.conversions]</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.5 [string.conversions] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2008-01-13 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#string.conversions">issues</a> in [string.conversions].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The return clause 21.5 [string.conversions]/paragraph 15 of the new <tt>to_wstring</tt> +overloads says: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Returns:</i> each function returns a <tt>wstring</tt> object holding the character +representation of the value of its argument that would be generated by +calling <tt>wsprintf(buf, fmt, val)</tt> with a format specifier of <tt>L"%lld"</tt>, <tt>L"%ulld"</tt>, +or <tt>L"%f"</tt>, respectively. +</blockquote> + +<p> +Problem is: There does not exist any <tt>wsprintf</tt> function in C99 (I checked +the 2nd edition of ISO 9899, and the first and the second corrigenda from +2001-09-01 and 2004-11-15). What probably meant here is the function +<tt>swprintf</tt> from <tt><wchar.h>/<cwchar></tt>, but this has the non-equivalent +declaration: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>int swprintf(wchar_t * restrict s, size_t n, +const wchar_t * restrict format, ...); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +therefore the paragraph needs to mention the <tt>size_t</tt> parameter <tt>n</tt>. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change the current wording of 21.5 [string.conversions]/p. 15 to: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Returns:</i> <del>e</del><ins>E</ins>ach function returns a +<tt>wstring</tt> object holding the character representation of the +value of its argument that would be generated by calling +<tt><del>ws</del><ins>sw</ins>printf(buf, <ins>bufsz,</ins> fmt, +val)</tt> with a format specifier <ins><tt>fmt</tt></ins> of <tt>L"%lld"</tt>, +<tt>L"%ulld"</tt>, or <tt>L"%f"</tt>, respectively<ins>, where <tt>buf</tt> +designates an internal character buffer of sufficient size <tt>bufsz</tt></ins>. +</blockquote> + +<p> +[Hint to the editor: The resolution also adds to mention the name of +the format specifier "fmt"] +</p> + +<p> +I also would like to remark that the current wording of it's equivalent +paragraph 7 should also mention the meaning of <tt>buf</tt> and <tt>fmt</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +Change the current wording of 21.5 [string.conversions]/p. 7 to: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Returns:</i> <del>e</del><ins>E</ins>ach function returns a string object holding the +character representation of the value of its argument that would be +generated by calling <tt>sprintf(buf, fmt, val)</tt> with a format specifier <ins><tt>fmt</tt></ins> of +<tt>"%lld"</tt>, <tt>"%ulld"</tt>, or <tt>"%f"</tt>, respectively<ins>, where <tt>buf</tt> designates an internal +character buffer of sufficient size</ins>. +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="774"></a>774. Member swap undefined for most containers</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23 [containers] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2008-01-14 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#containers">issues</a> in [containers].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +It appears most containers declare but do not define a member-swap +function. +</p> + +<p> +This is unfortunate, as all overload the <tt>swap</tt> algorithm to call the +member-swap function! +(required for <tt>swappable</tt> guarantees [Table 37] and Container Requirements +[Table 87]) +</p> + +<p> +Note in particular that Table 87 gives semantics of <tt>a.swap(b)</tt> as <tt>swap(a,b)</tt>, +yet for all containers we define <tt>swap(a,b)</tt> to call <tt>a.swap(b)</tt> - a circular +definition. +</p> + +<p> +A quick survey of clause 23 shows that the following containers provide a +definition for member-swap: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>array +queue +stack +vector +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Whereas the following declare it, but do not define the semantics: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>deque +list +map +multimap +multiset +priority_queue +set +unordered_map +unordered_multi_map +unordered_multi_set +unordered_set +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Suggested resolution: +</p> +<blockquote> +Provide a definition for each of the affected containers... +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Bellevue: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Open and ask Alisdair to provide wording. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Daniel to provide wording. +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2590.pdf">N2590</a> +is no longer applicable. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-28 Daniel provided wording. +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<ol> +<li> +It assumes that the proposed resolution for <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#883">883</a> is applied, +which breaks the circularity of definition between member +<tt>swap</tt> and free <tt>swap</tt>. +</li> + +<li> +It uses the notation of the pre-concept allocator trait +<tt>allocator_propagation_map</tt>, which might be renamed after the +next refactoring phase of generalized allocators. +</li> + +<li> +It requires that compare objects, key equal functions and +hash functions in containers are swapped via unqualified free +<tt>swap</tt> according to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#594">594</a>. +</li> +</ol> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-09-30 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +The outcome of this issue should be considered with the outcome of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1198">1198</a> both in style and in content (e.g. bullet 9 suggests to +define the semantic of <tt>void +priority_queue::swap(priority_queue&)</tt> in terms of the member +<tt>swap</tt> of the container). +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Looked at, but took no action on as it overlaps too much with +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2982.pdf">N2982</a>. +Waiting for a new draft WP. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Leave as open. Pablo to provide wording. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10-26 Pablo updated wording. Here is the wording he replaced: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote class="note"> +<ol> +<li> +<p> +Add a new Throws clause just after X [allocator.propagation.map]/5: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>static void swap(Alloc& a, Alloc& b); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> [..] +</p> + +<p> +<ins><i>Throws:</i> Nothing.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +<p><i>[ +This exception requirement is added, such that it's combination with the +general container requirements of +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2723.pdf">N2723</a> +[container.requirements.general]/9 +make it unambiguously clear that the following descriptions of "swaps the +allocators" have the following meaning: (a) This swap is done by calling +<tt>allocator_propagation_map<allocator_type>::swap</tt> and (b) This allocator +swap does never propagate an exception +]</i></p> + +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 23.2.4.1 [associative.reqmts.except]/3 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +For associative containers, no <tt>swap</tt> function throws an exception unless that +exception is thrown by the <del>copy constructor or copy assignment +operator</del> +<ins><tt>swap</tt></ins> of the container's <tt>Pred</tt> object<ins>s</ins><del> (if any)</del>. +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 23.2.5.1 [unord.req.except]/3 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +For unordered associative containers, no <tt>swap</tt> function throws an +exception unless +that exception is thrown by the <del>copy constructor or copy +assignment operator</del> +<ins><tt>swap</tt></ins> of the container's <tt>Hash</tt> or <tt>Pred</tt> object<ins>s, +respectively</ins><del> (if any)</del>. +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Insert a new paragraph just after 23.3 [sequences]/1: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<ins>In addition to being available via inclusion of the <tt><algorithm></tt> header, +the <tt>swap</tt> function templates in 25.3.3 [alg.swap] are also available when the +header <tt><queue></tt> is included.</ins> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +There is a new issue in process that will suggest a minimum header for <tt>swap</tt> +and <tt>move</tt>. If this one is provided, this text can be removed and the header +dependency should be added to <tt><queue></tt> +]</i></p> + + +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Add one further clause at the end of 23.3.1.2 [array.special]: +</p> +<p><i>[This part is added, because otherwise <tt>array::swap</tt> would otherwise +contradict the +general contract of 23.2.1 [container.requirements.general] p. 10 b. 5]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<ins><i>Throws:</i> Nothing, unless one of the element-wise <tt>swap</tt> calls throws +an exception.</ins> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<ol type="a"> +<li> +<p> +In 23.3.2 [deque], class template deque synopsis change as indicated: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>void swap(deque<del><T,Alloc></del>&); +</pre></blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +At the end of 23.3.2.3 [deque.modifiers] add as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>void swap(deque& x);</ins> +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins><i>Effects:</i> Exchanges the contents and swaps the allocators of <tt>*this</tt> +with that of <tt>x</tt>.</ins> +</p> +<p> +<ins><i>Complexity:</i> Constant time.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> +</li> + +<li> +<ol type="a"> +<li> +<p> +In 23.3.3 [forwardlist], class template <tt>forward_list</tt> synposis change as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void swap(forward_list<del><T,Allocator></del>&); +</pre></blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +At the end of 23.3.3.4 [forwardlist.modifiers] add as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>void swap(forward_list& x);</ins> +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins><i>Effects:</i> Exchanges the contents and swaps the allocators of <tt>*this</tt> +with that of <tt>x</tt>.</ins> +</p> +<p> +<ins><i>Complexity:</i> Constant time.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> +</li> + +<li> +<ol type="a"> +<li> +<p> +In 23.3.4 [list], class template <tt>list</tt> synopsis change as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void swap(list<del><T,Allocator></del>&); +</pre></blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +At the end of 23.3.4.3 [list.modifiers] add as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>void swap(list& x);</ins> +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins><i>Effects:</i> Exchanges the contents and swaps the allocators of <tt>*this</tt> +with that of <tt>x</tt>.</ins> +</p> + +<p> +<ins><i>Complexity:</i> Constant time.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +At the end of 23.5.2.3 [priqueue.members] add a new prototype description: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>void swap(priority_queue& q);</ins> +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>Compare</tt> shall satisfy the <tt>Swappable</tt> requirements +( [swappable]).</ins> +</p> + +<p><i>[ +This requirement is added to ensure that even a user defined <tt>swap</tt> +which is found by +ADL for <tt>Compare</tt> satisfies the <tt>Swappable</tt> requirements +]</i></p> + + +<p> +<ins><i>Effects:</i> <tt>this->c.swap(q.c); swap(this->comp, q.comp);</tt></ins> +</p> +<p> +<ins><i>Throws:</i> What and if <tt>c.swap(q.c)</tt> and <tt>swap(comp, q.comp)</tt> throws.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +<p><i>[ +This part is added, because otherwise <tt>priority_queue::swap</tt> would otherwise +contradict the general contract of 23.2.1 [container.requirements.general] p. 10 b. 5 +]</i></p> + +</li> + +<li> +<ol type="a"> +<li> +<p> +In 23.4.1 [vector], class template <tt>vector</tt> synopsis change as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void swap(vector<del><T,Allocator></del>&); +</pre></blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 23.4.1.2 [vector.capacity]/8 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void swap(vector<del><T,Allocator></del>& x); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<i>Effects:</i> Exchanges the contents and <tt>capacity()</tt> <ins>and swaps the +allocators</ins> +of <tt>*this</tt> with that of <tt>x</tt>. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Insert a new paragraph just before 23.6 [associative]/1: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<ins>In addition to being available via inclusion of the <tt><algorithm></tt> header, +the <tt>swap</tt> function templates in 25.3.3 [alg.swap] are also available when any of the +headers <tt><map></tt> or <tt><set></tt> are included.</ins> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<ol type="a"> +<li> +<p> +In 23.6.1 [map], class template <tt>map</tt> synopsis change as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void swap(map<del><Key,T,Compare,Allocator></del>&); +</pre></blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +At the end of 23.6.1.3 [map.modifiers] add as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>void swap(map& x);</ins> +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins><i>Requires:</i> Compare shall satisfy the <tt>Swappable</tt> requirements +( [swappable]).</ins> +</p> + +<p><i>[ +This requirement is added to ensure that even a user defined <tt>swap</tt> +which is found by ADL for <tt>Compare</tt> satisfies the <tt>Swappable</tt> +requirements +]</i></p> + + +<p> +<ins><i>Effects:</i> Exchanges the contents and swaps the allocators of <tt>*this</tt> +with that of <tt>x</tt>, followed by an unqualified <tt>swap</tt> of the comparison objects +of <tt>*this</tt> and <tt>x</tt>.</ins> +</p> + +<p> +<ins><i>Complexity:</i> Constant time</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> +</li> + +<li> +<ol type="a"> +<li> +<p> +In 23.6.2 [multimap], class template <tt>multimap</tt> synopsis change as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void swap(multimap<del><Key,T,Compare,Allocator></del>&); +</pre></blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +At the end of 23.6.2.2 [multimap.modifiers] add as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>void swap(multimap& x);</ins> +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins><i>Requires:</i> Compare shall satisfy the <tt>Swappable</tt> requirements +( [swappable]).</ins> +</p> +<p> +<ins><i>Effects:</i> Exchanges the contents and swaps the allocators of <tt>*this</tt> +with that of <tt>x</tt>, followed by an unqualified <tt>swap</tt> of the comparison objects +of <tt>*this</tt> and <tt>x</tt>.</ins> +</p> +<p> +<ins><i>Complexity:</i> Constant time</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> +</li> + +<li> +<ol type="a"> +<li> +<p> +In 23.6.3 [set], class template <tt>set</tt> synopsis change as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void swap(set<del><Key,Compare,Allocator></del>&); +</pre></blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +After section 23.6.3.1 [set.cons] add a new section <ins><tt>set</tt> modifiers + [set.modifiers]</ins> +and add the following paragraphs: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>void swap(set& x);</ins> +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins><i>Requires:</i> Compare shall satisfy the <tt>Swappable</tt> requirements +( [swappable]).</ins> +</p> + +<p> +<ins><i>Effects:</i> Exchanges the contents and swaps the allocators of <tt>*this</tt> +with that of <tt>x</tt>, followed by an unqualified <tt>swap</tt> of the comparison objects +of <tt>*this</tt> and <tt>x</tt>.</ins> +</p> + +<p> +<ins>Complexity: Constant time</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> +</li> + +<li> +<ol type="a"> +<li> +<p> +In 23.6.4 [multiset], class template <tt>multiset</tt> synosis, change as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void swap(multiset<del><Key,Compare,Allocator></del>&); +</pre></blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +After section 23.6.4.1 [multiset.cons] add a new section <ins><tt>multiset</tt> modifiers + [multiset.modifiers]</ins> and add the following paragraphs: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>void swap(multiset& x);</ins> +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins><i>Requires:</i> Compare shall satisfy the <tt>Swappable</tt> requirements +( [swappable]).</ins> +</p> + +<p> +<ins><i>Effects:</i> Exchanges the contents and swaps the allocators of <tt>*this</tt> +with that of <tt>x</tt>, followed by an unqualified <tt>swap</tt> of the comparison objects +of <tt>*this</tt> and <tt>x</tt>.</ins> +</p> + +<p> +<ins><i>Complexity:</i> Constant time</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Insert a new paragraph just before 23.7 [unord]/1: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<ins>In addition to being available via inclusion of the <tt><algorithm></tt> header, +the <tt>swap</tt> function templates in 25.3.3 [alg.swap] are also available when any of the +headers <tt><unordered_map></tt> or <tt><unordered_set></tt> are included.</ins> +</blockquote> + +</li> + +<li> +<p> +After section 23.7.1.2 [unord.map.elem] add a new section <ins>unordered_map +modifiers [unord.map.modifiers]</ins> and add the following paragraphs: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>void swap(unordered_map& x);</ins> +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>Hash</tt> and <tt>Pred</tt> shall satisfy the <tt>Swappable</tt> requirements +( [swappable]).</ins> +</p> + +<p><i>[ +This requirement is added to ensure that even a user defined <tt>swap</tt> +which is found by ADL for <tt>Hash</tt> and <tt>Pred</tt> satisfies the <tt>Swappable</tt> +requirements +]</i></p> + + +<p> +<ins><i>Effects:</i> Exchanges the contents and hash policy and swaps the +allocators of <tt>*this</tt> +with that of <tt>x</tt>, followed by an unqualified <tt>swap</tt> of the <tt>Pred</tt> objects +and an unqualified <tt>swap</tt> of the <tt>Hash</tt> objects of <tt>*this</tt> and <tt>x</tt>.</ins> +</p> + +<p> +<ins><i>Complexity:</i> Constant time</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +After section 23.7.2.1 [unord.multimap.cnstr] add a new section +<ins>unordered_multimap +modifiers [unord.multimap.modifiers]</ins> and add the following paragraphs: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>void swap(unordered_multimap& x);</ins> +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>Hash</tt> and <tt>Pred</tt> shall satisfy the <tt>Swappable</tt> requirements +( [swappable]).</ins> +</p> + +<p> +<ins><i>Effects:</i> Exchanges the contents and hash policy and swaps the +allocators of <tt>*this</tt> +with that of <tt>x</tt>, followed by an unqualified <tt>swap</tt> of the <tt>Pred</tt> objects +and an unqualified <tt>swap</tt> of the <tt>Hash</tt> objects of <tt>*this</tt> and <tt>x</tt></ins> +</p> +<p> +<ins><i>Complexity:</i> Constant time</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +After section 23.7.3.1 [unord.set.cnstr] add a new section +<ins>unordered_set modifiers + [unord.set.modifiers]</ins> and add the following paragraphs: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>void swap(unordered_set& x);</ins> +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>Hash</tt> and <tt>Pred</tt> shall satisfy the <tt>Swappable</tt> requirements +( [swappable]).</ins> +</p> + +<p> +<ins><i>Effects:</i> Exchanges the contents and hash policy and swaps the +allocators of <tt>*this</tt> +with that of <tt>x</tt>, followed by an unqualified <tt>swap</tt> of the <tt>Pred</tt> objects +and an unqualified <tt>swap</tt> of the <tt>Hash</tt> objects of <tt>*this</tt> and <tt>x</tt></ins> +</p> + +<p> +<ins><i>Complexity:</i> Constant time</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +After section 23.7.4.1 [unord.multiset.cnstr] add a new section +<ins>unordered_multiset +modifiers [unord.multiset.modifiers]</ins> and add the following paragraphs: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>void swap(unordered_multiset& x);</ins> +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>Hash</tt> and <tt>Pred</tt> shall satisfy the <tt>Swappable</tt> requirements +( [swappable]).</ins> +</p> + +<p> +<ins><i>Effects:</i> Exchanges the contents and hash policy and swaps the +allocators of <tt>*this</tt> +with that of <tt>x</tt>, followed by an unqualified <tt>swap</tt> of the <tt>Pred</tt> objects +and an unqualified <tt>swap</tt> of the <tt>Hash</tt> objects of <tt>*this</tt> and <tt>x</tt></ins> +</p> +<p> +<ins><i>Complexity:</i> Constant time</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +</ol> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10-30 Pablo and Daniel updated wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010 Pittsburgh: Ready for Pittsburgh. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p><i>[ +This resolution is based on the September 2009 WP, +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2960.pdf">N2960</a>, +except that it +assumes that +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2982.pdf">N2982</a> +and issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#883">883</a> and <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1232">1232</a> have already been applied. Note in +particular that Table 91 in +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2960.pdf">N2960</a> +is refered to as Table 90 because +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2982.pdf">N2982</a> +removed the old Table 90. This resolution also addresses issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#431">431</a>. +]</i></p> + +<p> +In 23.2.1 [container.requirements.general], replace the a.swap(b) row in table 90, +"container requirements" (was table 91 before the application of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2982.pdf">N2982</a> to the +WP): +</p> +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> + <tbody><tr> + <td><code>a.swap(b)</code></td> + <td><code>void</code></td> + <td> </td> + <td><code><del>swap(a,b)</del><ins>Exchange the contents of <tt>a</tt> and <tt>b</tt>.</ins></code></td> + <td>(Note A)</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td><ins><code>swap(a,b)</code></ins></td> + <td><ins><code>void</code></ins></td> + <td><code> </code></td> + <td><ins><code>a.swap(b)</code></ins></td> + <td><ins>(Note A)</ins></td> + </tr> +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> +<p> +Modify the notes immediately following Table 90 in +23.2.1 [container.requirements.general] as follows (The wording below is after the +application of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2982.pdf">N2982</a> to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2960.pdf">N2960</a>. The editor might also want to combine Notes +A and B into one.): +</p> +<blockquote><p> +Notes: the algorithms<del> swap(),</del> equal() and lexicographical_compare() +are defined in Clause 25. Those entries marked "(Note A)" or "(Note B)" +<del>should</del> have <ins>linear complexity for array and</ins> constant +complexity <ins>for all other standard containers</ins>. +</p></blockquote> +<p> +In 23.2.1 [container.requirements.general], before paragraph 8, add: +</p> +<blockquote><p><ins> +The expression <code>a.swap(b)</code>, for containers <code>a</code> +and <code>b</code> of a standard container type other than <code>array</code>, +exchanges the values of <code>a</code> and <code>b</code> without invoking any +move, copy, or swap operations on the individual container elements. +Any <code>Compare</code>, <code>Pred</code>, or <code>Hash</code> function +objects belonging to <code>a</code> and <code>b</code> shall be +<code>swappable</code> and are exchanged by unqualified calls +to non-member <code>swap</code>. If +<code>allocator_traits<allocator_type>::propagate_on_container_swap::value +== true</code>, then the allocators of <code>a</code> and <code>b</code> are +also exchanged using an unqualified call to non-member <code>swap</code>. +Otherwise, the behavior is undefined unless <code>a.get_allocator() == +b.get_allocator()</code>. Each iterator refering to an element in one +container before the swap shall refer to the same element in the other +container after the swap. It is unspecified whether an iterator with +value <code>a.end()</code> before the swap will have +value <code>b.end()</code> after the swap. In addition to being available via +inclusion of the <code><utility></code> header, the <code>swap</code> +function template in 25.3.3 [alg.swap] is also available within the definition of +every standard container's <code>swap</code> function. +</ins></p></blockquote> +<p><i>[ +Note to the editor: Paragraph 2 starts with a sentence fragment, +clearly from an editing or source-control error. +]</i></p> + +<p> +Modify 23.2.4.1 [associative.reqmts.except] as follows: +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +<b>23.2.4.1 Exception safety guarantees 23.2.4.1 [associative.reqmts.except]</b> +</p> +<p> +For associative containers, no <code>clear()</code> function throws an +exception. <code>erase(k)</code> does not throw an exception unless that +exception is thrown by the +container's <code><del>Pred</del><ins>Compare</ins></code> object (if any). +</p> +<p> +For associative containers, if an exception is thrown by any operation from +within an <code>insert()</code> function inserting a single element, +the <code>insert()</code> function has no effect. +</p> +<p> +For associative containers, no <code>swap</code> function throws an exception +unless that exception is thrown by the <del>copy constructor +or copy assignment operator</del><ins>swap</ins> of the +container's <code><del>Pred</del><ins>Compare</ins></code> object (if any). +</p></blockquote> +<p> +Modify 23.2.5.1 [unord.req.except], paragraph 3 as follows: +</p> +<blockquote><p> +For unordered associative containers, no <code>swap</code> function throws an +exception unless that exception is thrown by the <del>copy constructor or copy +assignment operator</del><ins>swap</ins> of the container's <code>Hash</code> +or <code>Pred</code> object (if any). +</p></blockquote> +<p> +Modify section 23.3.1.2 [array.special]: +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +<b>array specialized algorithms 23.3.1.2 [array.special]</b> +</p> +<p> +<code>template <class T, size_t N> void swap(array<T,N>& x,array<T,N>& y);</code> +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> <code><del>swap_ranges(x.begin(), x.end(), y.begin() );</del><ins>x.swap(y);</ins></code> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +<p> +Add a new section after 23.3.1.5 [array.fill] (Note to the editor: array::fill make use +of a concept requirement that must be removed or changed to text.): +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins><b>array::swap [array.swap]</b></ins> +</p> +<p> +<ins><code>void swap(array& y);</code></ins> +</p> +<blockquote> +<p><ins> +<i>Effects:</i> <code>swap_ranges(this->begin(), this->end(), y.begin() );</code> +</ins></p> +<p><ins> +<i>Throws:</i> Nothing unless one of the element-wise swap calls throws an +exception. +</ins></p> +<p><ins> +[<i>Note</i>: Unlike other containers' <code>swap</code> functions, +<code>array::swap</code> takes linear, not constant, time, may exit via an +exception, and does not cause iterators to become associated with the other +container. — <i>end note</i>] +</ins></p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Insert a new paragraph just after 23.5 [container.adaptors]/1: +</p> +<blockquote><p><ins> +For container adaptors, no <code>swap</code> function throws an exception +unless that exception is thrown by the swap of the +adaptor's <code>Container</code> or <code>Compare</code> object (if any). +</ins></p></blockquote> + + + + + + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="775"></a>775. Tuple indexing should be unsigned?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.4.2.5 [tuple.helper] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2008-01-16 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#tuple.helper">issues</a> in [tuple.helper].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The tuple element access API identifies the element in the sequence +using signed integers, and then goes on to enforce the requirement that +I be >= 0. There is a much easier way to do this - declare I as +<tt>unsigned</tt>. +</p> +<p> +In fact the proposal is to use <code>std::size_t</code>, matching the type used in the <tt>tuple_size</tt> API. +</p> +<p> +A second suggestion is that it is hard to imagine an API that deduces +and index at compile time and returns a reference throwing an exception. +Add a specific <em>Throws:</em> Nothing paragraph to each element +access API. +</p> +<p> +In addition to <code>tuple</code>, update the API applies to +<code>pair</code> and <code>array</code>, and should be updated +accordingly. +</p> + +<p> +A third observation is that the return type of the <code>get</code> +functions for <code>std::pair</code> is pseudo-code, but it is not +clearly marked as such. There is actually no need for pseudo-code as +the return type can be specified precisely with a call to +<code>tuple_element</code>. This is already done for +<code>std::tuple</code>, and <code>std::array</code> does not have a +problem as all elements are of type <code>T</code>. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Update header <utility> synopsis in 20.3 [utility] +</p> +<pre><em>// 20.2.3, tuple-like access to pair:</em> +template <class T> class tuple_size; +template <<del>int</del><ins>size_t</ins> I, class T> class tuple_element; + +template <class T1, class T2> struct tuple_size<std::pair<T1, T2> >; +template <class T1, class T2> struct tuple_element<0, std::pair<T1, T2> >; +template <class T1, class T2> struct tuple_element<1, std::pair<T1, T2> >; + +template<<del>int</del><ins>size_t</ins> I, class T1, class T2> + <del>P</del><ins>typename tuple_element<I, std::pair<T1, T2> >::type </ins>& get(std::pair<T1, T2>&); +template<<del>int</del><ins>size_t</ins> I, class T1, class T2> + const <del>P</del><ins>typename tuple_element<I, std::pair<T1, T2> >::type </ins>& get(const std::pair<T1, T2>&); +</pre> +<p> +Update <strong>20.3.5 [pairs] Pairs</strong> +</p> +<pre>template<<del>int</del><ins>size_t</ins> I, class T1, class T2> + <del>P</del><ins>typename tuple_element<I, std::pair<T1, T2> >::type </ins>& get(pair<T1, T2>&); +template<<del>int</del><ins>size_t</ins> I, class T1, class T2> + const <del>P</del><ins>typename tuple_element<I, std::pair<T1, T2> >::type </ins>& get(const pair<T1, T2>&); +</pre> +<p> +<del>24 <em>Return type:</em> If <code>I == 0</code> then <code>P</code> is <code>T1</code>, if <code>I == 1</code> then <code>P</code> is <code>T2</code>, and otherwise the program is ill-formed.</del> +</p> +<p> +25 <em>Returns:</em> If <code>I == 0</code> returns <code>p.first</code>, <del>otherwise</del> <ins>if <code>I == 1</code></ins> returns <code>p.second</code><ins>, and otherwise the program is ill-formed</ins>. +</p> +<p> +<ins><em>Throws:</em> Nothing.</ins> +</p> + + +<p> +Update header <tuple> synopsis in 20.4 [tuple] with a APIs as below: +</p> +<pre>template <<del>int</del><ins>size_t</ins> I, class T> class tuple_element; <em>// undefined</em> +template <<del>int</del><ins>size_t</ins> I, class... Types> class tuple_element<I, tuple<Types...> >; + +<em>// 20.3.1.4, element access:</em> +template <<del>int</del><ins>size_t</ins> I, class... Types> + typename tuple_element<I, tuple<Types...> >::type& get(tuple<Types...>&); +template <<del>int</del><ins>size_t</ins> I, class ... types> + typename tuple_element<I, tuple<Types...> >::type const& get(const tuple<Types...>&); +</pre> + +<p> +Update <strong>20.4.2.5 [tuple.helper] Tuple helper classes</strong> +</p> +<pre>template <<del>int</del><ins>size_t</ins> I, class... Types> +class tuple_element<I, tuple<Types...> > { +public: + typedef TI type; +};</pre> +<p> +1 <em>Requires:</em> <code><del>0 <= I and </del>I < sizeof...(Types)</code>. The program is ill-formed if <code>I</code> is out of bounds. +</p> +<p> +2 <em>Type:</em> <code>TI</code> is the type of the <code>I</code>th element of <code>Types</code>, where indexing is zero-based. +</p> +<p> +Update <strong>20.4.2.6 [tuple.elem] Element access</strong> +</p> +<pre>template <<del>int</del><ins>size_t</ins> I, class... types > +typename tuple_element<I, tuple<Types...> >::type& get(tuple<Types...>& t); +</pre> +1 <em>Requires:</em> <code><del>0 <= I and </del>I < sizeof...(Types)</code>. The program is ill-formed if <code>I</code> is out of bounds. +<p> +2 <em>Returns:</em> A reference to the <code>I</code>th element of <code>t</code>, where indexing is zero-based. +</p> +<ins><em>Throws:</em> Nothing.</ins> +<pre>template <<del>int</del><ins>size_t</ins> I, class... types> +typename tuple_element<I, tuple<Types...> >::type const& get(const tuple<Types...>& t); +</pre> +<p> +3 <em>Requires:</em> <code><del>0 <= I and </del>I < sizeof...(Types)</code>. The program is ill-formed if <code>I</code> is out of bounds. +</p> +<p> +4 <em>Returns:</em> A const reference to the <code>I</code>th element of <code>t</code>, where indexing is zero-based. +</p> +<p> +<ins><em>Throws:</em> Nothing.</ins> +</p> + + +<p> +Update header <array> synopsis in 20.3 [utility] +</p> +<pre>template <class T> class tuple_size; <em>// forward declaration</em> +template <<del>int</del><ins>size_t</ins> I, class T> class tuple_element; <em>// forward declaration</em> +template <class T, size_t N> + struct tuple_size<array<T, N> >; +template <<del>int</del><ins>size_t</ins> I, class T, size_t N> + struct tuple_element<I, array<T, N> >; +template <<del>int</del><ins>size_t</ins> I, class T, size_t N> + T& get(array<T, N>&); +template <<del>int</del><ins>size_t</ins> I, class T, size_t N> + const T& get(const array<T, N>&); +</pre> + +<p> +Update <strong>23.3.1.8 [array.tuple] Tuple interface to class template array</strong> +</p> +<pre>tuple_element<<ins>size_t </ins>I, array<T, N> >::type +</pre> +<p> +3 <em>Requires:</em> <code><del>0 <= </del>I < N.</code> The program is ill-formed if <code>I</code> is out of bounds. +</p> +<p> +4 <em>Value:</em> The type <code>T</code>. +</p> +<pre>template <<del>int</del><ins>size_t</ins> I, class T, size_t N> T& get(array<T, N>& a); +</pre> +<p> +5 <em>Requires:</em> <code><del>0 <= </del>I < N</code>. The program is ill-formed if <code>I</code> is out of bounds. +</p> +<p> +<em>Returns:</em> A reference to the <code>I</code>th element of <code>a</code>, where indexing is zero-based. +</p> +<p> +<ins><em>Throws:</em> Nothing.</ins> +</p> +<pre>template <<del>int</del><ins>size_t</ins> I, class T, size_t N> const T& get(const array<T, N>& a); +</pre> +<p> +6 <em>Requires:</em> <code><del>0 <= </del>I < N</code>. The program is ill-formed if <code>I</code> is out of bounds. +</p> +<p> +7 <em>Returns:</em> A const reference to the <code>I</code>th element of <code>a</code>, where indexing is zero-based. +</p> +<p> +<ins><em>Throws:</em> Nothing.</ins> +</p> + + +<p><i>[ +Bellevue: Note also that the phrase "The program is ill-formed if I is +out of bounds" in the requires clauses are probably unnecessary, and +could be removed at the editor's discretion. Also std:: qualification +for pair is also unnecessary. +]</i></p> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="776"></a>776. Undescribed assign function of std::array</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.3.1 [array] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2008-01-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#array">issues</a> in [array].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The class template array synopsis in 23.3.1 [array]/3 declares a member +function +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void assign(const T& u); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +which's semantic is no-where described. Since this signature is +not part of the container requirements, such a semantic cannot +be derived by those. +</p> + +<p> +I found only one reference to this function in the issue list, +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#588">588</a> where the question is raised: +</p> + +<blockquote> +what's the effect of calling <tt>assign(T&)</tt> on a zero-sized array? +</blockquote> + +<p> +which does not answer the basic question of this issue. +</p> + +<p> +If this function shall be part of the <tt>std::array</tt>, it's probable +semantic should correspond to that of <tt>boost::array</tt>, but of +course such wording must be added. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Just after the section 23.3.1.4 [array.data] add the following new section: +</p> + +<p> +23.2.1.5 array::fill [array.fill] +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>void fill(const T& u); +</pre> + +<p> +1: <i>Effects:</i> <tt>fill_n(begin(), N, u)</tt> +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +[N.B: I wonder, why class <tt>array</tt> does not have a "modifiers" +section. If it had, then <tt>assign</tt> would naturally belong to it] +</p> + +<p> +Change the synopsis in 23.3.1 [array]/3: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T, size_t N> +struct array { + ... + void <del>assign</del> <ins>fill</ins>(const T& u); + ... +</pre></blockquote> + + +<p><i>[ +Bellevue: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Suggest substituting "fill" instead of "assign". +</p> +<p> +Set state to Review given substitution of "fill" for "assign". +</p> +</blockquote> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="777"></a>777. Atomics Library Issue</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 29.6 [atomics.types.operations] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Lawrence Crowl <b>Opened:</b> 2008-01-21 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index-open.html#atomics.types.operations">active issues</a> in [atomics.types.operations].</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#atomics.types.operations">issues</a> in [atomics.types.operations].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The load functions are defined as +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>C atomic_load(volatile A* object); +C atomic_load_explicit(volatile A* object, memory_order); +C A::load(memory_order order = memory_order_seq_cst) volatile; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +which prevents their use in <tt>const</tt> contexts. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +post Bellevue Peter adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#777">777</a> suggests making <tt>atomic_load</tt> operate on <tt>const</tt> objects. There is a +subtle point here. Atomic loads do not generally write to the object, except +potentially for the <tt>memory_order_seq_cst</tt> constraint. Depending on the +architecture, a dummy write with the same value may be required to be issued +by the atomic load to maintain sequential consistency. This, in turn, may +make the following code: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>const atomic_int x{}; + +int main() +{ + x.load(); +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +dump core under a straightforward implementation that puts const objects in +a read-only section. +</p> +<p> +There are ways to sidestep the problem, but it needs to be considered. +</p> +<p> +The tradeoff is between making the data member of the atomic types +mutable and requiring the user to explicitly mark atomic members as +mutable, as is already the case with mutexes. +</p> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add the <tt>const</tt> qualifier to <tt>*object</tt> and <tt>*this</tt>. +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>C atomic_load(<ins>const</ins> volatile A* object); +C atomic_load_explicit(<ins>const</ins> volatile A* object, memory_order); +C A::load(memory_order order = memory_order_seq_cst) <ins>const</ins> volatile; +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="778"></a>778. std::bitset does not have any constructor taking a string literal</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.5.1 [bitset.cons] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Thorsten Ottosen <b>Opened:</b> 2008-01-24 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#bitset.cons">issues</a> in [bitset.cons].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#116">116</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +A small issue with <tt>std::bitset</tt>: it does not have any constructor +taking a string literal, which is clumsy and looks like an oversigt when +we tried to enable uniform use of <tt>string</tt> and <tt>const char*</tt> in the library. +</p> + +<p> +Suggestion: Add +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>explicit bitset( const char* str ); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +to std::bitset. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add to synopsis in 20.5 [template.bitset] +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>explicit bitset( const char* str ); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Add to synopsis in 20.5.1 [bitset.cons] +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>explicit bitset( const char* str ); +</pre> +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Constructs a <tt>bitset</tt> as if <tt>bitset(string(str))</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="779"></a>779. Resolution of #283 incomplete</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.3.8 [alg.remove] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2008-01-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#alg.remove">issues</a> in [alg.remove].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The resolution of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#283">283</a> did not resolve similar necessary changes for algorithm +<tt>remove_copy[_if]</tt>, +which seems to be an oversight. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 25.3.8 [alg.remove]/p.6, replace the N2461 requires clause with: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Requires:</i> <del>Type <tt>T</tt> is <tt>EqualityComparable</tt> (31).</del> The ranges <tt>[first,last)</tt> +and <tt>[result,result + (last - first))</tt> shall not overlap. <ins>The expression <tt>*result = *first</tt> shall be +valid.</ins> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="780"></a>780. <tt>std::merge()</tt> specification incorrect/insufficient</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.4.4 [alg.merge] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2008-01-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Though issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#283">283</a> has fixed many open issues, it seems that some are still open: +</p> + +<p> +Both 25.3.4 [lib.alg.merge] in 14882:2003 and 25.4.4 [alg.merge] in N2461 +have no Requires element and the Effects element contains some requirements, +which is probably editorial. Worse is that: +</p> + +<ul> +<li> +no assignment requirements are specified (neither implicit nor explicit). +</li> + +<li> +the effects clause just speaks of "merges", which is badly worded +near to a circular definition. +</li> + +<li> +p. 2 mentions a range <tt>[first, last)</tt>, which is not defined by the +function arguments or otherwise. +</li> + +<li> +p. 2 says "according to the ordering defined by comp" which is both +incomplete (because +this excludes the first variant with <) and redundant (because the +following subordinate +clause mentions comp again) +</li> +</ul> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit Alisdair adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Suggest: +</p> +<blockquote> +(where <tt>last</tt> is equal to <tt>next(result, distance(first1, last1) + +distance(first2, last2))</tt>, such that resulting range will be sorted in +non-decreasing order; that is, for every iterator <tt>i</tt> in <tt>[result,last)</tt> other +than <tt>result</tt>, the condition <tt>*i < *prev(i)</tt> or, respectively, <tt>comp(*i, +*prev(i))</tt> will be <tt>false</tt>. +</blockquote> + +<p> +Note that this might still not be technically accurate in the case of +<tt>InputIterators</tt>, depending on other resolutions working their way through the +system (<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1011">1011</a>). +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +If we want to use <tt>prev</tt> and <tt>next</tt> here (Note: <tt>merge</tt> +is sufficiently satisfied with <tt>InputIterator</tt>) we should instead *add* more to +25 [algorithms]/6, but I can currently not propose any good wording for this. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Pete points out the existing wording in [algorithms]/4 +that permits the use of + in algorithm specifications. +</p> +<p> +Alisdair points out that that wording may not apply to input iterators. +</p> +<p> +Move to Review. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-08-23 Daniel reopens: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +The proposed wording must be rephrased, because the part +</p> + +<blockquote> +for every iterator <tt>i</tt> in <tt>[result,last)</tt> other than <tt>result</tt>, the condition +<tt>*i < *(i - 1)</tt> or, respectively, <tt>comp(*i, *(i - 1))</tt> will be <tt>false</tt>" +</blockquote> + +<p> +isn't meaningful, because the range <tt>[result,last)</tt> is that of a pure +<tt>OutputIterator</tt>, which is not <em>readable</em> in general. +</p> + +<p><i>[Howard: Proposed wording updated by Daniel, status moved from Ready to Review.]</i></p> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Matt has some different words to propose. Those words have been moved into +the proposed wording section, and the original proposed wording now appears +here: +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +In 25.4.4 [alg.merge] replace p.1+ 2: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> <del>Merges</del><ins>Copies all the elements of the</ins> +two sorted ranges +<tt>[first1,last1)</tt> and <tt>[first2,last2)</tt> into the range <tt>[result,result + +(last1 - first1) + (last2 - first2))</tt> +<ins>, such that resulting range will be sorted in non-decreasing +order; that is for every +pair of iterators <tt>i</tt> and <tt>j</tt> of either input ranges, where <tt>*i</tt> was copied +to the output range +before <tt>*j</tt> was copied to the output range, the condition <tt>*j < *i</tt> or, +respectively, <tt>comp(*j, *i)</tt> +will be <tt>false</tt>.</ins> +</p> + +<p> +<ins><i>Requires:</i></ins>The resulting range shall not overlap with either +of the original ranges. +<del>The list will be sorted in non-decreasing order according to the +ordering defined by +<tt>comp</tt>; that is, for every iterator <tt>i</tt> in <tt>[first,last)</tt> other than <tt>first</tt>, +the condition <tt>*i < *(i - 1)</tt> or +<tt>comp(*i, *(i - 1))</tt> will be <tt>false</tt>.</del> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-10 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +Change 25.4.4 [alg.merge] 1 and 2: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p>1 <del> +<i>Effects:</i> Merges two sorted ranges <tt>[first1,last1)</tt> and +<tt>[first2,last2)</tt> into the range <tt>[result, result + (last1 - +first1) + (last2 - first2))</tt>. +</del></p> +<p><ins> +<i>Effects:</i> Copies all the elements of the two ranges +<tt>[first1,last1)</tt> and <tt>[first2,last2)</tt> into the range +<tt>[result, result_last)</tt>, where <tt>result_last</tt> is <tt>result ++ (last1 - first1) + (last2 - first2)</tt>, such that the resulting +range satisfies <tt>is_sorted(result, result_last)</tt> or +<tt>is_sorted(result, result_last, comp)</tt>, respectively. +</ins></p> + +<p> +2 <ins><i>Requires:</i></ins> <ins>The ranges <tt>[first1,last1)</tt> and +<tt>[first2,last2)</tt> shall be sorted with respect to <tt>operator<</tt> or +<tt>comp</tt>.</ins> The resulting range shall not overlap with either of the +original ranges. <del>The list will be sorted in non-decreasing order according +to the ordering defined by <tt>comp</tt>; that is, for every iterator <tt>i</tt> +in <tt>[first,last)</tt> other than <tt>first</tt>, the condition <tt>*i < +*(i - 1)</tt> or <tt>comp(*i, *(i - 1))</tt> will be <tt>false</tt>.</del> +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 25.4.4 [alg.merge]/6+7 as indicated <i>[This ensures harmonization +between <tt>inplace_merge</tt> and <tt>merge</tt>]</i> +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +6 <i>Effects:</i> Merges two <del>sorted</del> consecutive ranges +<tt>[first,middle)</tt> and <tt>[middle,last)</tt>, putting the result of the +merge into the range <tt>[first,last)</tt>. The resulting range will be in +non-decreasing order; that is, for every iterator <tt>i</tt> in +<tt>[first,last)</tt> other than <tt>first</tt>, the condition <tt>*i < *(i - +1)</tt> or, respectively, <tt>comp(*i, *(i - 1))</tt> will be false. +</p> + +<p> +7 <i>Requires:</i> <ins>The ranges <tt>[first,middle)</tt> and +<tt>[middle,last)</tt> shall be sorted with respect to <tt>operator<</tt> or +<tt>comp</tt>.</ins> The type of <tt>*first</tt> shall satisfy the +<tt>Swappable</tt> requirements (37), the <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> +requirements (Table 33), and the the <tt>MoveAssignable</tt> requirements (Table +35). +</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="781"></a>781. <tt>std::complex</tt> should add missing C99 functions</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.4.7 [complex.value.ops] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2008-01-26 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#complex.value.ops">issues</a> in [complex.value.ops].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +A comparision of the N2461 header <tt><complex></tt> synopsis ([complex.syn]) +with the C99 standard (ISO 9899, 2nd edition and the two corrigenda) show +some complex functions that are missing in C++. These are: +</p> + +<ol> +<li> +7.3.9.4: (required elements of the C99 library)<br> +The <tt>cproj</tt> functions +</li> +<li> +7.26.1: (optional elements of the C99 library)<br> +<pre>cerf cerfc cexp2 +cexpm1 clog10 clog1p +clog2 clgamma ctgamma +</pre> +</li> +</ol> + +<p> +I propose that at least the required <tt>cproj</tt> overloads are provided as equivalent +C++ functions. This addition is easy to do in one sentence (delegation to C99 +function). +</p> + +<p> +Please note also that the current entry <tt>polar</tt> +in 26.4.9 [cmplx.over]/1 +should be removed from the mentioned overload list. It does not make sense to require that a +function already expecting <em>scalar</em> arguments +should cast these arguments into corresponding +<tt>complex<T></tt> arguments, which are not accepted by +this function. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 26.4.1 [complex.syn] add just between the declaration of <tt>conj</tt> and <tt>fabs</tt>: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class T> complex<T> conj(const complex<T>&); +<ins>template<class T> complex<T> proj(const complex<T>&);</ins> +template<class T> complex<T> fabs(const complex<T>&); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +In 26.4.7 [complex.value.ops] just after p.6 (return clause of <tt>conj</tt>) add: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template<class T> complex<T> proj(const complex<T>& x); +</pre> +<blockquote> + +<i>Effects:</i> Behaves the same as C99 function <tt>cproj</tt>, defined in +subclause 7.3.9.4." +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +In 26.4.9 [cmplx.over]/1, add one further entry <tt>proj</tt> to +the overload list. +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +The following function templates shall have additional overloads: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>arg norm +conj <del>polar</del> <ins>proj</ins> +imag real +</pre></blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="782"></a>782. Extended <tt>seed_seq</tt> constructor is useless</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.7.1 [rand.util.seedseq] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2008-01-27 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#rand.util.seedseq">issues</a> in [rand.util.seedseq].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Part of the resolution of n2423, issue 8 was the proposal to +extend the <tt>seed_seq</tt> constructor accepting an input range +as follows (which is now part of N2461): +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class InputIterator, +size_t u = numeric_limits<iterator_traits<InputIterator>::value_type>::digits> +seed_seq(InputIterator begin, InputIterator end); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +First, the expression <tt>iterator_traits<InputIterator>::value_type</tt> +is invalid due to missing <tt>typename</tt> keyword, which is easy to +fix. +</p> + +<p> +Second (and worse), while the language now supports default +template arguments of function templates, this customization +point via the second <tt>size_t</tt> template parameter is of no advantage, +because <tt>u</tt> can never be deduced, and worse - because it is a +constructor function template - it can also never be explicitly +provided (14.8.1 [temp.arg.explicit]/7). +</p> + +<p> +The question arises, which advantages result from a compile-time +knowledge of <tt>u</tt> versus a run time knowledge? If run time knowledge +suffices, this parameter should be provided as normal function +default argument [Resolution marked (A)], if compile-time knowledge +is important, this could be done via a tagging template or more +user-friendly via a standardized helper generator function +(<tt>make_seed_seq</tt>), which allows this [Resolution marked (B)]. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Bellevue: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Fermilab does not have a strong opinion. Would prefer to go with +solution A. Bill agrees that solution A is a lot simpler and does the +job. +</p> +<p> +Proposed Resolution: Accept Solution A. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#803">803</a> claims to make this issue moot. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<ol type="A"> +<li> +<p> +In 26.5.7.1 [rand.util.seedseq]/2, class <tt>seed_seq</tt> synopsis replace: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>class seed_seq +{ +public: + ... + template<class InputIterator<del>, + size_t u = numeric_limits<iterator_traits<InputIterator>::value_type>::digits</del>> + seed_seq(InputIterator begin, InputIterator end<ins>, + size_t u = numeric_limits<typename iterator_traits<InputIterator>::value_type>::digits</ins>); + ... +}; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +and do a similar replacement in the member description between +p.3 and p.4. +</p> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +In 26.5.7.1 [rand.util.seedseq]/2, class <tt>seed_seq</tt> synopsis <em>and</em> in the +member description between p.3 and p.4 replace: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class InputIterator<del>, + size_t u = numeric_limits<iterator_traits<InputIterator>::value_type>::digits</del>> + seed_seq(InputIterator begin, InputIterator end); +<ins>template<class InputIterator, size_t u> +seed_seq(InputIterator begin, InputIterator end, <i>implementation-defined</i> s);</ins> +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +In 26.5.2 [rand.synopsis], header <tt><random></tt> synopsis, immediately after the +class <tt>seed_seq</tt> declaration <em>and</em> in 26.5.7.1 [rand.util.seedseq]/2, immediately +after the class <tt>seed_seq</tt> definition add: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<size_t u, class InputIterator> + seed_seq make_seed_seq(InputIterator begin, InputIterator end); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +In 26.5.7.1 [rand.util.seedseq], just before p.5 insert two paragraphs: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +The first constructor behaves as if it would provide an +integral constant expression <tt>u</tt> of type <tt>size_t</tt> of value +<tt>numeric_limits<typename iterator_traits<InputIterator>::value_type>::digits</tt>. +</p> +<p> +The second constructor uses an implementation-defined mechanism +to provide an integral constant expression <tt>u</tt> of type <tt>size_t</tt> and +is called by the function <tt>make_seed_seq</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +In 26.5.7.1 [rand.util.seedseq], just after the last paragraph add: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template<size_t u, class InputIterator> + seed_seq make_seed_seq(InputIterator begin, InputIterator end); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +where <tt>u</tt> is used to construct an object <tt>s</tt> of implementation-defined type. +</p> +<p> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt>seed_seq(begin, end, s)</tt>; +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +</li> +</ol> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="783"></a>783. <tt>thread::id</tt> reuse</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30.3.1.1 [thread.thread.id] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Hans Boehm <b>Opened:</b> 2008-02-01 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#thread.thread.id">issues</a> in [thread.thread.id].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The current working paper +(<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2497.html">N2497</a>, +integrated just before Bellevue) is +not completely clear whether a given <tt>thread::id</tt> value may be reused once +a thread has exited and has been joined or detached. Posix allows +thread ids (<tt>pthread_t</tt> values) to be reused in this case. Although it is +not completely clear whether this originally was the right decision, it +is clearly the established practice, and we believe it was always the +intent of the C++ threads API to follow Posix and allow this. Howard +Hinnant's example implementation implicitly relies on allowing reuse +of ids, since it uses Posix thread ids directly. +</p> + +<p> +It is important to be clear on this point, since it the reuse of thread +ids often requires extra care in client code, which would not be +necessary if thread ids were unique across all time. For example, a +hash table indexed by thread id may have to be careful not to associate +data values from an old thread with a new one that happens to reuse the +id. Simply removing the old entry after joining a thread may not be +sufficient, if it creates a visible window between the join and removal +during which a new thread with the same id could have been created and +added to the table. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +post Bellevue Peter adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +There is a real issue with <tt>thread::id</tt> reuse, but I urge the LWG to +reconsider fixing this by disallowing reuse, rather than explicitly allowing +it. Dealing with thread id reuse is an incredibly painful exercise that +would just force the world to reimplement a non-conflicting <tt>thread::id</tt> over +and over. +</p> +<p> +In addition, it would be nice if a <tt>thread::id</tt> could be manipulated +atomically in a lock-free manner, as motivated by the recursive lock +example: +</p> + +<p> +<a href="http://www.decadentplace.org.uk/pipermail/cpp-threads/2006-August/001091.html">http://www.decadentplace.org.uk/pipermail/cpp-threads/2006-August/001091.html</a> +</p> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add a sentence to 30.3.1.1 [thread.thread.id]/p1: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +An object of type <code>thread::id</code> provides +a unique identifier for each thread of execution +and a single distinct value for all thread objects +that do not represent a thread of execution ([thread.threads.class]). +Each thread of execution has a <code>thread::id</code> +that is not equal to the <code>thread::id</code> +of other threads of execution +and that is not equal to +the <code>thread::id</code> of <code>std::thread</code> objects +that do not represent threads of execution. +<ins>The library may reuse the value of a <code>thread::id</code> of a +terminated thread that can no longer be joined.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="786"></a>786. Thread library timed waits, UTC and monotonic clocks</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.11 [time] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Christopher Kohlhoff, Jeff Garland <b>Opened:</b> 2008-02-03 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-19</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#time">issues</a> in [time].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The draft C++0x thread library requires that the time points of type +<tt>system_time</tt> and returned by <tt>get_system_time()</tt> represent Coordinated +Universal Time (UTC) (section [datetime.system]). This can lead to +surprising behavior when a library user performs a duration-based wait, +such as <tt>condition_variable::timed_wait()</tt>. A complete explanation of the +problem may be found in the +<a href="http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/xrat/xsh_chap02.html#tag_03_02_08_19">Rationale for the Monotonic Clock</a> +section in POSIX, but in summary: +</p> + +<ul> +<li> +Operations such as <tt>condition_variable::timed_wait()</tt> (and its POSIX +equivalent, <tt>pthread_cond_timedwait()</tt>) are specified using absolute times +to address the problem of spurious wakeups. +</li> + +<li> +The typical use of the timed wait operations is to perform a relative +wait. This may be achieved by first calculating an absolute time as the +sum of the current time and the desired duration. In fact, the C++0x +thread library includes duration-based overloads of +<tt>condition_variable::timed_wait()</tt> that behave as if by calling the +corresponding absolute time overload with a time point value of +<tt>get_system_time() + rel_time</tt>. +</li> + +<li> +A UTC clock may be affected by changes to the system time, such as +synchronization with an external source, leap seconds, or manual changes +to the clock. +</li> + +<li> +Should the clock change during a timed wait operation, the actual +duration of the wait will not be the expected length. For example, a +user may intend a timed wait of one second duration but, due to an +adjustment of the system clock backwards by a minute, the wait instead +takes 61 seconds. +</li> +</ul> + +<p> +POSIX solves the problem by introducing a new monotonic clock, which is +unaffected by changes to the system time. When a condition variable is +initialized, the user may specify whether the monotonic clock is to be +used. (It is worth noting that on POSIX systems it is not possible to +use <tt>condition_variable::native_handle()</tt> to access this facility, since +the desired clock type must be specified during construction of the +condition variable object.) +</p> + +<p> +In the context of the C++0x thread library, there are added dimensions +to the problem due to the need to support platforms other than POSIX: +</p> + +<ul> +<li> +Some environments (such as embedded systems) do not have a UTC clock, but do have a monotonic clock. +</li> + +<li> +Some environments do not have a monotonic clock, but do have a UTC clock. +</li> + +<li> +The Microsoft Windows API's synchronization functions use relative +timeouts based on an implied monotonic clock. A program that switches +from the Windows API to the C++0x thread library will now find itself +susceptible to clock changes. +</li> +</ul> + +<p> +One possible minimal solution: +</p> + +<ul> +<li> +Strike normative references to UTC and an epoch based on 1970-01-01. +</li> + +<li> +Make the semantics of <tt>system_time</tt> and <tt>get_system_time()</tt> +implementation-defined (i.e standard library implementors may choose the +appropriate underlying clock based on the capabilities of the target +platform). +</li> + +<li> +Add a non-normative note encouraging use of a monotonic clock. +</li> + +<li> +Remove <tt>system_time::seconds_since_epoch()</tt>. +</li> + +<li> +Change the constructor <tt>explicit system_time(time_t secs, nanoseconds ns += 0)</tt> to <tt>explicit system_time(nanoseconds ns)</tt>. +</li> +</ul> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +</p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +Addressed by +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2661.html">N2661: A Foundation to Sleep On</a>. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="787"></a>787. complexity of <tt>binary_search</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.4.3.4 [binary.search] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2007-09-08 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In 25.4.3.4 [binary.search]/3 the complexity of <tt>binary_search</tt> is described as +</p> + +<blockquote> +At most <tt>log(last - first) + 2</tt> comparisons. +</blockquote> + +<p> +This should be precised and brought in line with the nomenclature used for +<tt>lower_bound</tt>, <tt>upper_bound</tt>, and <tt>equal_range</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +All existing libraries I'm aware of, delegate to +<tt>lower_bound</tt> (+ one further comparison). Since +issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#384">384</a> +has now WP status, the resolution of #787 should +be brought in-line with <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#384">384</a> by changing the <tt>+ 2</tt> +to <tt>+ O(1)</tt>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Sophia Antipolis: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Alisdair prefers to apply an upper bound instead of O(1), but that would +require fixing for <tt>lower_bound</tt>, <tt>upper_bound</tt> etc. as well. If he really +cares about it, he'll send an issue to Howard. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 25.4.3.4 [binary.search]/3 +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Complexity:</i> At most <tt>log<ins><sub>2</sub></ins>(last - first) + <del>2</del> <ins><i>O</i>(1)</ins></tt> comparisons. +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="788"></a>788. ambiguity in [istream.iterator]</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 24.6.1 [istream.iterator] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2008-02-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#istream.iterator">issues</a> in [istream.iterator].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p><b>Addresses UK 287</b></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +It is not clear what the initial state of an <tt>istream_iterator</tt> should be. Is +_value_ initialized by reading the stream, or default/value initialized? If +it is initialized by reading the stream, what happens if the initialization +is deferred until first dereference, when ideally the iterator value should +have been that of an end-of-stream iterator which is not safely +dereferencable? +</p> + +<p> +Recommendation: Specify _value_ is initialized by reading the stream, or +the iterator takes on the end-of-stream value if the stream is empty. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +The description of how an istream_iterator object becomes an +end-of-stream iterator is a) ambiguous and b) out of date WRT +issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#468">468</a>: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<tt>istream_iterator</tt> reads (using <tt>operator>></tt>) successive elements from the +input stream for which it was constructed. After it is constructed, and +every time <tt>++</tt> is used, the iterator reads and stores a value of <tt>T</tt>. If +the end of stream is reached (<tt>operator void*()</tt> on the stream returns +<tt>false</tt>), the iterator becomes equal to the <i>end-of-stream</i> iterator value. +The constructor with no arguments <tt>istream_iterator()</tt> always constructs +an end of stream input iterator object, which is the only legitimate +iterator to be used for the end condition. The result of <tt>operator*</tt> on an +end of stream is not defined. For any other iterator value a <tt>const T&</tt> is +returned. The result of <tt>operator-></tt> on an end of stream is not defined. +For any other iterator value a <tt>const T*</tt> is returned. It is impossible to +store things into istream iterators. The main peculiarity of the istream +iterators is the fact that <tt>++</tt> operators are not equality preserving, +that is, <tt>i == j</tt> does not guarantee at all that <tt>++i == ++j</tt>. Every time <tt>++</tt> +is used a new value is read. +</blockquote> + +<p> +<tt>istream::operator void*()</tt> returns null if <tt>istream::fail()</tt> is <tt>true</tt>, +otherwise non-null. <tt>istream::fail()</tt> returns <tt>true</tt> if <tt>failbit</tt> or +<tt>badbit</tt> is set in <tt>rdstate()</tt>. Reaching the end of stream doesn't +necessarily imply that <tt>failbit</tt> or <tt>badbit</tt> is set (e.g., after +extracting an <tt>int</tt> from <tt>stringstream("123")</tt> the stream object will +have reached the end of stream but <tt>fail()</tt> is <tt>false</tt> and <tt>operator +void*()</tt> will return a non-null value). +</p> + +<p> +Also I would prefer to be explicit about calling <tt>fail()</tt> here +(there is no <tt>operator void*()</tt> anymore.) +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved from Ready to Open for the purposes of using this issue to address NB UK 287. +Martin to handle. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +This improves the wording. +</p> +<p> +Move to Ready. +</p> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 24.6.1 [istream.iterator]/1: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<tt>istream_iterator</tt> reads (using <tt>operator>></tt>) successive elements from the +input stream for which it was constructed. After it is constructed, and +every time <tt>++</tt> is used, the iterator reads and stores a value of <tt>T</tt>. If +<del>the end of stream is reached</del> <ins>the iterator fails to read and store a value of <tt>T</tt></ins> +(<tt><del>operator void*()</del> <ins>fail()</ins></tt> on the stream returns +<tt><del>false</del> <ins>true</ins></tt>), the iterator becomes equal to the <i>end-of-stream</i> iterator value. +The constructor with no arguments <tt>istream_iterator()</tt> always constructs +an end of stream input iterator object, which is the only legitimate +iterator to be used for the end condition. The result of <tt>operator*</tt> on an +end of stream is not defined. For any other iterator value a <tt>const T&</tt> is +returned. The result of <tt>operator-></tt> on an end of stream is not defined. +For any other iterator value a <tt>const T*</tt> is returned. It is impossible to +store things into istream iterators. The main peculiarity of the istream +iterators is the fact that <tt>++</tt> operators are not equality preserving, +that is, <tt>i == j</tt> does not guarantee at all that <tt>++i == ++j</tt>. Every time <tt>++</tt> +is used a new value is read. +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="789"></a>789. <tt>xor_combine_engine(result_type)</tt> should be explicit</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> X [rand.adapt.xor] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> P.J. Plauger <b>Opened:</b> 2008-02-09 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#rand.adapt.xor">issues</a> in [rand.adapt.xor].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +<tt>xor_combine_engine(result_type)</tt> should be <tt>explicit</tt>. (Obvious oversight.) +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Bellevue: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Non-controversial. Bill is right, but Fermilab believes that this is +easy to use badly and hard to use right, and so it should be removed +entirely. Got into TR1 by well defined route, do we have permission to +remove stuff? Should probably check with Jens, as it is believed he is +the originator. Broad consensus that this is not a robust engine +adapter. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Remove xor_combine_engine from synopsis of 26.5.2 [rand.synopsis]. +</p> +<p> +Remove X [rand.adapt.xor] <tt>xor_combine_engine</tt>. +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="792"></a>792. <tt>piecewise_constant_distribution</tt> is undefined for a range with just one endpoint</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.8.5.2 [rand.dist.samp.pconst] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> P.J. Plauger <b>Opened:</b> 2008-02-09 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#rand.dist.samp.pconst">issues</a> in [rand.dist.samp.pconst].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +<tt>piecewise_constant_distribution</tt> is undefined for a range with just one +endpoint. (Probably should be the same as an empty range.) +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 26.5.8.5.2 [rand.dist.samp.pconst] paragraph 3b: +</p> + +<blockquote> +b) If <tt>firstB == lastB</tt> <ins>or the sequence <tt>w</tt> has the length zero</ins>, +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="798"></a>798. Refactoring of binders lead to interface breakage</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> D.11 [depr.lib.binders] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2008-02-14 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#depr.lib.binders">issues</a> in [depr.lib.binders].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2521.pdf">N2521</a> +and its earlier predecessors have moved the old binders from +[lib.binders] to D.11 [depr.lib.binders] thereby introducing some renaming +of the template parameter names (<tt>Operation -> Fn</tt>). During this +renaming process the <em>protected</em> data member <tt>op</tt> was also renamed to +<tt>fn</tt>, which seems as an unnecessary interface breakage to me - even if +this user access point is probably rarely used. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change D.11.1 [depr.lib.binder.1st]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template <class Fn> +class binder1st + : public unary_function<typename Fn::second_argument_type, + typename Fn::result_type> { +protected: + Fn <del>fn</del> <ins>op</ins>; + typename Fn::first_argument_type value; +public: + binder1st(const Fn& x, + const typename Fn::first_argument_type& y); + typename Fn::result_type + operator()(const typename Fn::second_argument_type& x) const; + typename Fn::result_type + operator()(typename Fn::second_argument_type& x) const; +}; +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-1- The constructor initializes <del><tt>fn</tt></del> <ins><tt>op</tt></ins> with <tt>x</tt> and <tt>value</tt> with <tt>y</tt>. +</p> +<p> +-2- <tt>operator()</tt> returns <tt><del>fn</del><ins>op</ins>(value,x)</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change D.11.3 [depr.lib.binder.2nd]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template <class Fn> +class binder2nd + : public unary_function<typename Fn::first_argument_type, + typename Fn::result_type> { +protected: + Fn <del>fn</del> <ins>op</ins>; + typename Fn::second_argument_type value; +public: + binder2nd(const Fn& x, + const typename Fn::second_argument_type& y); + typename Fn::result_type + operator()(const typename Fn::first_argument_type& x) const; + typename Fn::result_type + operator()(typename Fn::first_argument_type& x) const; +}; +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-1- The constructor initializes <del><tt>fn</tt></del> <ins><tt>op</tt></ins> with <tt>x</tt> and <tt>value</tt> with <tt>y</tt>. +</p> +<p> +-2- <tt>operator()</tt> returns <tt><del>fn</del><ins>op</ins>(value,x)</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="801"></a>801. <tt>tuple</tt> and <tt>pair</tt> trivial members</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.4 [tuple] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Lawrence Crowl <b>Opened:</b> 2008-02-18 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-26</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#tuple">issues</a> in [tuple].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Classes with trivial special member functions are inherently more +efficient than classes without such functions. This efficiency is +particularly pronounced on modern ABIs that can pass small classes +in registers. Examples include value classes such as complex numbers +and floating-point intervals. Perhaps more important, though, are +classes that are simple collections, like <tt>pair</tt> and <tt>tuple</tt>. When the +parameter types of these classes are trivial, the <tt>pair</tt>s and <tt>tuple</tt>s +themselves can be trivial, leading to substantial performance wins. +</p> +<p> +The current working draft make specification of trivial functions +(where possible) much easer through <tt>default</tt>ed and <tt>delete</tt>d functions. +As long as the semantics of defaulted and deleted functions match +the intended semantics, specification of defaulted and deleted +functions will yield more efficient programs. +</p> +<p> +There are at least two cases where specification of an explicitly +defaulted function may be desirable. +</p> +<p> +First, the <tt>std::pair</tt> template has a non-trivial default constructor, +which prevents static initialization of the pair even when the +types are statically initializable. Changing the definition to +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>pair() = default; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +would enable such initialization. Unfortunately, the change is +not semantically neutral in that the current definition effectively +forces value initialization whereas the change would not value +initialize in some contexts. +</p> + +<p> +** Does the committee confirm that forced value initialization +was the intent? If not, does the committee wish to change the +behavior of <tt>std::pair</tt> in C++0x? +</p> +<p> +Second, the same default constructor issue applies to <tt>std::tuple</tt>. +Furthermore, the <tt>tuple</tt> copy constructor is current non-trivial, +which effectively prevents passing it in registers. To enable +passing <tt>tuples</tt> in registers, the copy constructor should be +make explicitly <tt>default</tt>ed. The new declarations are: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>tuple() = default; +tuple(const tuple&) = default; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +This changes is not implementation neutral. In particular, it +prevents implementations based on pointers to the parameter +types. It does however, permit implementations using the +parameter types as bases. +</p> +<p> +** How does the committee wish to trade implementation +efficiency versus implementation flexibility? +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Bellevue: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +General agreement; the first half of the issue is NAD. +</p> +<p> +Before voting on the second half, it was agreed that a "Strongly Favor" +vote meant support for trivial tuples (assuming usual requirements met), +even at the expense of other desired qualities. A "Weakly Favor" vote +meant support only if not at the expense of other desired qualities. +</p> +<p> +Concensus: Go forward, but not at expense of other desired qualities. +</p> +<p> +It was agreed to Alisdair should fold this work in with his other +pair/tuple action items, above, and that issue 801 should be "open", but +tabled until Alisdair's proposals are disposed of. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-27 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +This is partly solved by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1117">1117</a>. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Wait for dust to settle from fixing exception safety problem +with rvalue refs. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-20 Alisdair adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Basically, this issue is what should we do with the default constructor +for pairs and tuples of trivial types. The motivation of the issue was +to force static initialization rather than dynamic initialization, and +was rejected in the case of pair as it would change the meaning of +existing programs. The advice was "do the best we can" for tuple +without changing existing meaning. +</p> + +<p> +Frankfurt seems to simply wait and see the resolution on no-throw move +constructors, which (I believe) is only tangentially related to this +issue, but as good as any to defer until Santa Cruz. +</p> + +<p> +Looking again now, I think constant (static) initialization for pair can +be salvaged by making the default construct constexpr. I have a +clarification from Core that this is intended to work, even if the +constructor is not trivial/constexpr, so long as no temporaries are +implied in the process (even if elided). +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Leave as open. Alisdair to provide wording. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010 Pittsburgh: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +We believe this may be NAD Editorial since both pair and tuple now have +constexpr default constructors, but we're not sure. +</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><i>[ +2010 Rapperswil: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Daniel believes his pair/tuple paper will resolve this issue. <tt>constexpr</tt> will allow static initialization, and he is already changing the move and copy constructors to be defaulted. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-10-24 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +The proposed resolution of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3140.html">n3140</a> should resolve this issue. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +See <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3140.html">n3140</a>. +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="804"></a>804. Some problems with classes <tt>error_code</tt>/<tt>error_condition</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 19.5 [syserr] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2008-02-24 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#syserr">issues</a> in [syserr].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<ol type="A"> +<li> +<p> +19.5.2.1 [syserr.errcode.overview]/1, class <tt>error_code</tt> and +19.5.3.1 [syserr.errcondition.overview]/, class <tt>error_condition</tt> synopses +declare an expository data member <tt>cat_</tt>: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>const error_category& cat_; // exposition only +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +which is used to define the semantics of several members. The decision +to use a member of reference type lead to several problems: +</p> +<ol> +<li> +The classes are not <tt>(Copy)Assignable</tt>, which is probably not the intent. +</li> +<li> +The post conditions of all modifiers from +19.5.2.3 [syserr.errcode.modifiers] and 19.5.3.3 [syserr.errcondition.modifiers], resp., +cannot be fulfilled. +</li> +</ol> +<p> +The simple fix would be to replace the reference by a pointer member. +</p> +</li> + +<li> +I would like to give the editorial remark that in both classes the +constrained <tt>operator=</tt> +overload (template with <tt>ErrorCodeEnum</tt> argument) makes in invalid +usage of <tt>std::enable_if</tt>: By using the default value for the second <tt>enable_if</tt> +parameter the return type would be defined to be <tt>void&</tt> even in otherwise +valid circumstances - this return type must be explicitly provided (In +<tt>error_condition</tt> the first declaration uses an explicit value, but of wrong +type). +</li> + +<li> +The member function <tt>message</tt> throws clauses ( +19.5.1.2 [syserr.errcat.virtuals]/10, 19.5.2.4 [syserr.errcode.observers]/8, and +19.5.3.4 [syserr.errcondition.observers]/6) guarantee "throws nothing", +although +they return a <tt>std::string</tt> by value, which might throw in out-of-memory +conditions (see related issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#771">771</a>). +</li> +</ol> + +<p><i>[ +Sophia Antipolis: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Part A: NAD (editorial), cleared by the resolution of issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#832">832</a>. +</p> +<p> +Part B: Technically correct, save for typo. Rendered moot by the concept proposal +(<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2620.html">N2620</a>) NAD (editorial). +</p> +<p> +Part C: We agree; this is consistent with the resolution of issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#721">721</a>. +</p> +<p> +Howard: please ping Beman, asking him to clear away parts A and B from +the wording in the proposed resolution, so it is clear to the editor +what needs to be applied to the working paper. +</p> +<p> +Beman provided updated wording. Since issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#832">832</a> is not going +forward, the provided wording includes resolution of part A. +</p> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +Resolution of part A: +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +Change 19.5.2.1 [syserr.errcode.overview] Class error_code overview synopsis as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>private: + int val_; // exposition only + const error_category<del>&</del><ins>*</ins> cat_; // exposition only +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Change 19.5.2.2 [syserr.errcode.constructors] Class error_code constructors as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>error_code(); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Constructs an object of type <tt>error_code</tt>. +</p> +<p> +<i>Postconditions:</i> <tt>val_ == 0</tt> and <tt>cat_ == <ins>&</ins>system_category</tt>. +</p> +<p> +<i>Throws:</i> Nothing. +</p> +</blockquote> +<pre>error_code(int val, const error_category& cat); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Constructs an object of type <tt>error_code</tt>. +</p> +<p> +<i>Postconditions:</i> <tt>val_ == val</tt> and <tt>cat_ == <ins>&</ins>cat</tt>. +</p> +<p> +<i>Throws:</i> Nothing. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 19.5.2.3 [syserr.errcode.modifiers] Class error_code modifiers as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>void assign(int val, const error_category& cat); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Postconditions:</i> <tt>val_ == val</tt> and <tt>cat_ == <ins>&</ins>cat</tt>. +</p> +<p> +<i>Throws:</i> Nothing. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 19.5.2.4 [syserr.errcode.observers] Class error_code observers as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +const error_category& category() const; +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt><ins>*</ins>cat_</tt>. +</p> +<p> +<i>Throws:</i> Nothing. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 19.5.3.1 [syserr.errcondition.overview] Class error_condition overview synopsis as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>private: + int val_; // exposition only + const error_category<del>&</del><ins>*</ins> cat_; // exposition only +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Change 19.5.3.2 [syserr.errcondition.constructors] Class error_condition constructors as indicated: +</p> +<p><i>[ +(If the proposed resolution of issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#805">805</a> has already been applied, the +name <tt>posix_category</tt> will have been changed to <tt>generic_category</tt>. That has +no effect on this resolution.) +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<pre>error_condition(); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Constructs an object of type <tt>error_condition</tt>. +</p> +<p> +<i>Postconditions:</i> <tt>val_ == 0</tt> and <tt>cat_ == <ins>&</ins>posix_category</tt>. +</p> +<p> +<i>Throws:</i> Nothing. +</p> +</blockquote> +<pre>error_condition(int val, const error_category& cat); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Constructs an object of type <tt>error_condition</tt>. +</p> +<p> +<i>Postconditions:</i> <tt>val_ == val</tt> and <tt>cat_ == <ins>&</ins>cat</tt>. +</p> +<p> +<i>Throws:</i> Nothing. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 19.5.3.3 [syserr.errcondition.modifiers] Class error_condition modifiers as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +void assign(int val, const error_category& cat); +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Postconditions:</i> <tt>val_ == val</tt> and <tt>cat_ == <ins>&</ins>cat</tt>. +</p> +<p> +<i>Throws:</i> Nothing. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 19.5.3.4 [syserr.errcondition.observers] Class error_condition observers as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +const error_category& category() const; +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt><ins>*</ins>cat_</tt>. +</p> +<p> +<i>Throws:</i> Nothing. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Resolution of part C: +</p> + +<blockquote> + +<p> +In 19.5.1.2 [syserr.errcat.virtuals], remove the throws clause p. 10. +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>virtual string message(int ev) const = 0; +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Returns:</i> A string that describes the error condition denoted by <tt>ev</tt>. +</p> +<p> +<del><i>Throws:</i> Nothing.</del> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +In 19.5.2.4 [syserr.errcode.observers], remove the throws clause p. 8. +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>string message() const; +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt>category().message(value())</tt>. +</p> +<p> +<del><i>Throws:</i> Nothing.</del> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +In 19.5.3.4 [syserr.errcondition.observers], remove the throws clause p. 6. +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>string message() const; +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt>category().message(value())</tt>. +</p> +<p> +<del><i>Throws:</i> Nothing.</del> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="805"></a>805. <tt>posix_error::posix_errno</tt> concerns</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 19.5 [syserr] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Jens Maurer <b>Opened:</b> 2008-02-24 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#syserr">issues</a> in [syserr].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +19.5 [syserr] +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>namespace posix_error { + enum posix_errno { + address_family_not_supported, // EAFNOSUPPORT + ... +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +should rather use the new scoped-enum facility (7.2 [dcl.enum]), +which would avoid the necessity for a new <tt>posix_error</tt> +namespace, if I understand correctly. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Further discussion: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +See <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2347.pdf">N2347</a>, +Strongly Typed Enums, since renamed Scoped Enums. +</p> +<p> +Alberto Ganesh Barbati also raised this issue in private email, and also proposed the scoped-enum solution. +</p> +<p> +Nick Stoughton asked in Bellevue that <tt>posix_error</tt> and <tt>posix_errno</tt> not be used as names. The LWG agreed. +</p> +<p> +The wording for the Proposed resolution was provided by Beman Dawes. +</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change System error support 19.5 [syserr] as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>namespace posix_error {</del> + enum <del>posix_errno</del> <ins>class errc</ins> { + address_family_not_supported, // EAFNOSUPPORT + ... + wrong_protocol_type, // EPROTOTYPE + }; +<del>} // namespace posix_error</del> + +template <> struct is_error_condition_enum<<del>posix_error::posix_errno</del> <ins>errc</ins>> + : public true_type {} + +<del>namespace posix_error {</del> + error_code make_error_code(<del>posix_errno</del> <ins>errc</ins> e); + error_condition make_error_condition(<del>posix_errno</del> <ins>errc</ins> e); +<del>} // namespace posix_error</del> +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Change System error support 19.5 [syserr] : +</p> + +<blockquote> +<del>The <tt>is_error_code_enum</tt> and <tt>is_error_condition_enum</tt> templates may be +specialized for user-defined types to indicate that such a type is +eligible for class <tt>error_code</tt> and class <tt>error_condition</tt> automatic +conversions, respectively.</del> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change System error support 19.5 [syserr] and its subsections: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<ul> +<li> +remove all occurrences of <tt>posix_error::</tt> +</li> +<li> +change all instances of <tt>posix_errno</tt> to <tt>errc</tt> +</li> +<li> +change all instances of <tt>posix_category</tt> to <tt>generic_category</tt> +</li> +<li> +change all instances of <tt>get_posix_category</tt> to <tt>get_generic_category</tt> +</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change Error category objects 19.5.1.5 [syserr.errcat.objects], paragraph 2: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Remarks:</i> The object's <tt>default_error_condition</tt> and equivalent virtual +functions shall behave as specified for the class <tt>error_category</tt>. The +object's name virtual function shall return a pointer to the string +<del>"POSIX"</del> <ins>"generic"</ins>. +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 19.5.2.5 [syserr.errcode.nonmembers] Class <tt>error_code</tt> non-member functions as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>error_code make_error_code(<del>posix_errno</del> <ins>errc</ins> e); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt>error_code(<ins>static_cast<int>(</ins>e<ins>)</ins>, <del>posix</del><ins>generic</ins>_category)</tt>. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 19.5.3.5 [syserr.errcondition.nonmembers] Class <tt>error_condition</tt> non-member functions as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>error_condition make_error_condition(<del>posix_errno</del> <ins>errc</ins> e); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt>error_condition(<ins>static_cast<int>(</ins>e<ins>)</ins>, <del>posix</del><ins>generic</ins>_category)</tt>. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<table border="1"> +<tbody><tr> +<th colspan="2">Names Considered</th> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>portable</tt></td> +<td> +Too non-specific. Did not wish to reserve such a common word in +namespace std. Not quite the right meaning, either. +</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>portable_error</tt></td> +<td> +Too long. Explicit qualification is always required for scoped enums, so +a short name is desirable. Not quite the right meaning, either. May be +misleading because <tt>*_error</tt> in the std lib is usually an exception class +name. +</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>std_error</tt></td> +<td> +Fairly short, yet explicit. But in fully qualified names like +<tt>std::std_error::not_enough_memory</tt>, the std_ would be unfortunate. Not +quite the right meaning, either. May be misleading because <tt>*_error</tt> in +the std lib is usually an exception class name. +</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>generic</tt></td> +<td> +Short enough. The category could be <tt>generic_category</tt>. Fully qualified +names like <tt>std::generic::not_enough_memory</tt> read well. Reserving in +namespace std seems dicey. +</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>generic_error</tt></td> +<td> +Longish. The category could be <tt>generic_category</tt>. Fully qualified names +like <tt>std::generic_error::not_enough_memory</tt> read well. Misleading because +<tt>*_error</tt> in the std lib is usually an exception class name. +</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>generic_err</tt></td> +<td> +A bit less longish. The category could be <tt>generic_category</tt>. Fully +qualified names like <tt>std::generic_err::not_enough_memory</tt> read well. +</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>gen_err</tt></td> +<td> +Shorter still. The category could be <tt>generic_category</tt>. Fully qualified +names like <tt>std::gen_err::not_enough_memory</tt> read well. +</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>generr</tt></td> +<td> +Shorter still. The category could be <tt>generic_category</tt>. Fully qualified +names like <tt>std::generr::not_enough_memory</tt> read well. +</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>error</tt></td> +<td> +Shorter still. The category could be <tt>generic_category</tt>. Fully qualified +names like <tt>std::error::not_enough_memory</tt> read well. Do we want to use +this general a name? +</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>err</tt></td> +<td> +Shorter still. The category could be <tt>generic_category</tt>. Fully qualified +names like <tt>std::err::not_enough_memory</tt> read well. Although alone it +looks odd as a name, given the existing <tt>errno</tt> and <tt>namespace std</tt> names, +it seems fairly intuitive. +Problem: <tt>err</tt> is used throughout the standard library as an argument name +and in examples as a variable name; it seems too confusing to add yet +another use of the name. +</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>errc</tt></td> +<td> +Short enough. The "c" stands for "constant". The category could be +<tt>generic_category</tt>. Fully qualified names like +<tt>std::errc::not_enough_memory</tt> read well. Although alone it looks odd as a +name, given the existing <tt>errno</tt> and <tt>namespace std</tt> names, it seems fairly +intuitive. There are no uses of <tt>errc</tt> in the current C++ standard. +</td> +</tr> +</tbody></table> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="806"></a>806. <tt>unique_ptr::reset</tt> effects incorrect, too permissive</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.9.2.5 [unique.ptr.single.modifiers] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Peter Dimov <b>Opened:</b> 2008-03-13 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#unique.ptr.single.modifiers">issues</a> in [unique.ptr.single.modifiers].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +<tt>void unique_ptr::reset(T* p = 0)</tt> is currently specified as: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Effects:</i> If <tt>p == get()</tt> there are no effects. Otherwise <tt>get_deleter()(get())</tt>. +</blockquote> + +<p> +There are two problems with this. One, if <tt>get() == 0</tt> and <tt>p != 0</tt>, the +deleter is called with a NULL pointer, and this is probably not what's +intended (the destructor avoids calling the deleter with 0.) +</p> + +<p> +Two, the special check for <tt>get() == p</tt> is generally not needed and such a +situation usually indicates an error in the client code, which is being +masked. As a data point, <tt>boost::shared_ptr</tt> was changed to assert on such +self-resets in 2001 and there were no complaints. +</p> + +<p> +One might think that self-resets are necessary for operator= to work; it's specified to perform +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>reset( u.release() ); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +and the self-assignment +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>p = move(p); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +might appear to result in a self-reset. But it doesn't; the <tt>release()</tt> is +performed first, zeroing the stored pointer. In other words, <tt>p.reset( +q.release() )</tt> works even when <tt>p</tt> and <tt>q</tt> are the same <tt>unique_ptr</tt>, and there +is no need to special-case <tt>p.reset( q.get() )</tt> to work in a similar +scenario, as it definitely doesn't when <tt>p</tt> and <tt>q</tt> are separate. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +Change 20.9.9.2.5 [unique.ptr.single.modifiers]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>void reset(T* p = 0); +</pre> +<blockquote> +-4- <i>Effects:</i> If <tt><del>p ==</del> get()<ins> == 0</ins></tt> there are no effects. Otherwise <tt>get_deleter()(get())</tt>. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 20.9.9.3.3 [unique.ptr.runtime.modifiers]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>void reset(T* p = 0); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p>...</p> +<p> +-2- <i>Effects:</i> If <tt><del>p ==</del> get()<ins> == 0</ins></tt> there are no effects. Otherwise <tt>get_deleter()(get())</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="807"></a>807. <tt>tuple</tt> construction should not fail unless its element's construction fails</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.4.2.1 [tuple.cnstr] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2008-03-13 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#tuple.cnstr">issues</a> in [tuple.cnstr].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#527">527</a> Added a throws clause to <tt>bind</tt> constructors. I believe the same throws clause +should be added to <tt>tuple</tt> except it ought to take into account move constructors as well. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add to 20.4.2.1 [tuple.cnstr]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +For each <tt>tuple</tt> constructor and assignment operator, an exception is thrown only if the construction +or assignment of one of the types in <tt>Types</tt> throws an exception. +</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="808"></a>808. [forward] incorrect redundant specification</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.3.3 [forward] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Jens Maurer <b>Opened:</b> 2008-03-13 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#forward">issues</a> in [forward].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +p4 (forward) says: +</p> +<blockquote> +<i>Return type:</i> If <tt>T</tt> is an lvalue-reference type, an lvalue; otherwise, an rvalue. +</blockquote> + +<p> +First of all, lvalue-ness and rvalue-ness are properties of an expression, +not of a type (see 3.10 [basic.lval]). Thus, the phrasing "Return type" is wrong. +Second, the phrase says exactly what the core language wording says for +folding references in 14.3.1 [temp.arg.type]/p4 and for function return values +in 5.2.2 [expr.call]/p10. (If we feel the wording should be retained, it should +at most be a note with cross-references to those sections.) +</p> +<p> +The prose after the example talks about "forwarding as an <tt>int&</tt> (an lvalue)" etc. +In my opinion, this is a category error: "<tt>int&</tt>" is a type, "lvalue" is a +property of an expression, orthogonal to its type. (Btw, expressions cannot +have reference type, ever.) +</p> +<p> +Similar with move: +</p> +<blockquote> +Return type: an rvalue. +</blockquote> +<p> +is just wrong and also redundant. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 20.3.3 [forward] as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template <class T> T&& forward(typename identity<T>::type&& t); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p>...</p> +<p> +<del><i>Return type:</i> If <tt>T</tt> is an lvalue-reference type, an lvalue; otherwise, an rvalue.</del> +</p> +<p>...</p> +<p> +-7- In the first call to <tt>factory</tt>, <tt>A1</tt> is deduced as <tt>int</tt>, so 2 is forwarded to <tt>A</tt>'s constructor +as <del>an <tt>int&&</tt> (</del>an rvalue<del>)</del>. In the second call to factory, <tt>A1</tt> is deduced +as <tt>int&</tt>, so <tt>i</tt> is forwarded to <tt>A</tt>'s constructor as <del>an <tt>int&</tt> (</del>an lvalue<del>)</del>. +In both cases, <tt>A2</tt> is deduced as double, so 1.414 is forwarded to <tt>A</tt>'s constructor as +<del><tt>double&&</tt> (</del>an rvalue<del>)</del>. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class T> typename remove_reference<T>::type&& move(T&& t); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p>...</p> +<p> +<del><i>Return type:</i> an rvalue.</del> +</p> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="809"></a>809. std::swap should be overloaded for array types</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.3.3 [alg.swap] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Niels Dekker <b>Opened:</b> 2008-02-28 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#alg.swap">issues</a> in [alg.swap].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +For the sake of generic programming, the header <code><algorithm></code> should provide an +overload of <code>std::swap</code> for array types: +</p><pre>template<class T, size_t N> void swap(T (&a)[N], T (&b)[N]); +</pre> +<p></p> + +<p> +It became apparent to me that this overload is missing, when I considered how to write a swap +function for a generic wrapper class template. +(Actually I was thinking of Boost's <a href="http://www.boost.org/libs/utility/value_init.htm">value_initialized</a>.) +Please look at the following template, <code>W</code>, and suppose that is intended to be a very +<em>generic</em> wrapper: +</p><pre>template<class T> class W { +public: + T data; +}; +</pre> +Clearly <code>W<T></code> is <em>CopyConstructible and CopyAssignable</em>, and therefore +<em>Swappable</em>, whenever <code>T</code> is <em>CopyConstructible and CopyAssignable</em>. +Moreover, <code>W<T></code> is <em>also</em> Swappable when <code>T</code> is an array type +whose element type is CopyConstructible and CopyAssignable. +Still it is recommended to add a <em>custom</em> swap function template to such a class template, +for the sake of efficiency and exception safety. +(E.g., <em>Scott Meyers, Effective C++, Third Edition, item 25: Consider support for a non-throwing +swap</em>.) +This function template is typically written as follows: +<pre>template<class T> void swap(W<T>& x, W<T>& y) { + using std::swap; + swap(x.data, y.data); +} +</pre> +Unfortunately, this will introduce an undesirable inconsistency, when <code>T</code> is an array. +For instance, <code>W<std::string[8]></code> is Swappable, but the current Standard does not +allow calling the custom swap function that was especially written for <code>W</code>! +<pre>W<std::string[8]> w1, w2; // Two objects of a Swappable type. +std::swap(w1, w2); // Well-defined, but inefficient. +using std::swap; +swap(w1, w2); // Ill-formed, just because ADL finds W's swap function!!! +</pre> + +<code>W</code>'s <code>swap</code> function would try to call <code>std::swap</code> for an array, +<code>std::string[8]</code>, which is not supported by the Standard Library. +This issue is easily solved by providing an overload of <code>std::swap</code> for array types. +This swap function should be implemented in terms of swapping the elements of the arrays, so that +it would be non-throwing for arrays whose element types have a non-throwing swap. +<p></p> + +<p> +Note that such an overload of <code>std::swap</code> should also support <em>multi-dimensional</em> +arrays. Fortunately that isn't really an issue, because it would do so <i>automatically</i>, by +means of recursion. +</p> + +<p> +For your information, there was a discussion on this issue at comp.lang.c++.moderated: <a href="http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.c++.moderated/browse_thread/thread/9341ebd3635c9c74">[Standard +Library] Shouldn't std::swap be overloaded for C-style arrays?</a> +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add an extra condition to the definition of Swappable requirements [swappable] in 20.2.1 [utility.arg.requirements]: +</p> +<blockquote> +- <tt>T</tt> is <tt>Swappable</tt> if <tt>T</tt> is an array type whose element type is <tt>Swappable</tt>. +</blockquote> +<p> +Add the following to 25.3.3 [alg.swap]: +</p> +<blockquote> +<pre>template<class T, size_t N> void swap(T (&a)[N], T (&b)[N]); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<i>Requires:</i> Type <code>T</code> shall be <tt>Swappable</tt>. +</blockquote> +<blockquote> +<i>Effects:</i> <code>swap_ranges(a, a + N, b);</code> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="810"></a>810. Missing traits dependencies in operational semantics of extended manipulators</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.4 [ext.manip] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2008-03-01 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#ext.manip">issues</a> in [ext.manip].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The recent draft (as well as the original proposal n2072) uses an +operational semantic +for <tt>get_money</tt> ([ext.manip]/4) and <tt>put_money</tt> ([ext.manip]/6), which uses +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>istreambuf_iterator<charT> +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +and +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>ostreambuf_iterator<charT> +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +resp, instead of the iterator instances, with explicitly provided +traits argument (The operational semantic defined by <tt>f</tt> is also traits +dependent). This is an obvious oversight because both <tt>*stream_buf</tt> +c'tors expect a <tt>basic_streambuf<charT,traits></tt> as argument. +</p> +<p> +The same problem occurs within the <tt>get_time</tt> and <tt>put_time</tt> semantic +where additional to the problem we +have an editorial issue in <tt>get_time</tt> (<tt>streambuf_iterator</tt> instead of +<tt>istreambuf_iterator</tt>). +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +This appears to be an issue of presentation. +</p> +<p> +We agree with the proposed resolution. +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 27.7.4 [ext.manip]/4 within function <tt>f</tt> replace the first line +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class charT, class traits, class moneyT> +void f(basic_ios<charT, traits>& str, moneyT& mon, bool intl) { + typedef istreambuf_iterator<charT<ins>, traits</ins>> Iter; + ... +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +In 27.7.4 [ext.manip]/5 remove the first template <tt>charT</tt> parameter: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <<del>class charT, </del>class moneyT> unspecified put_money(const moneyT& mon, bool intl = false<ins>)</ins>; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +In 27.7.4 [ext.manip]/6 within function <tt>f</tt> replace the first line +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class charT, class traits, class moneyT> +void f(basic_ios<charT, traits>& str, const moneyT& mon, bool intl) { + typedef ostreambuf_iterator<charT<ins>, traits</ins>> Iter; + ... +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +In 27.7.4 [ext.manip]/8 within function <tt>f</tt> replace the first line +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class charT, class traits> +void f(basic_ios<charT, traits>& str, struct tm *tmb, const charT *fmt) { + typedef <ins>i</ins>streambuf_iterator<charT<ins>, traits</ins>> Iter; + ... +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +In 27.7.4 [ext.manip]/10 within function <tt>f</tt> replace the first line +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class charT, class traits> +void f(basic_ios<charT, traits>& str, const struct tm *tmb, const charT *fmt) { + typedef ostreambuf_iterator<charT<ins>, traits</ins>> Iter; + ... +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +In 27.7 [iostream.format], Header <tt><iomanip></tt> synopsis change: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <<del>class charT, </del>class moneyT> T8 put_money(const moneyT& mon, bool intl = false); +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="811"></a>811. <tt>pair</tt> of pointers no longer works with literal 0</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.3.5 [pairs] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Doug Gregor <b>Opened:</b> 2008-03-14 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#pairs">issues</a> in [pairs].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<blockquote><pre>#include <utility> + +int main() +{ + std::pair<char *, char *> p (0,0); +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +I just got a bug report about that, because it's valid C++03, but not +C++0x. The important realization, for me, is that the emplace +proposal---which made <tt>push_back</tt> variadic, causing the <tt>push_back(0)</tt> +issue---didn't cause this break in backward compatibility. The break +actually happened when we added this pair constructor as part of adding +rvalue references into the language, long before variadic templates or +emplace came along: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class U, class V> pair(U&& x, V&& y); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Now, concepts will address this issue by constraining that <tt>pair</tt> +constructor to only <tt>U</tt>'s and <tt>V</tt>'s that can properly construct "first" and +"second", e.g. (from +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2322.pdf">N2322</a>): +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class U , class V > +requires Constructible<T1, U&&> && Constructible<T2, V&&> +pair(U&& x , V&& y ); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Suggested to resolve using pass-by-value for that case. +</p> +<p> +Side question: Should pair interoperate with tuples? Can construct a +tuple of a pair, but not a pair from a two-element tuple. +</p> +<p> +Related to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#885">885</a>. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-28 Reopened by Alisdair. No longer solved by concepts. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Leave as open. Howard to provide wording. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-06 Howard provided wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-09 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 6 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p><i>[ +San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Solved by +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2770.pdf">N2770</a>. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +The rationale is obsolete. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add a paragraph to 20.3.5 [pairs]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template<class U, class V> pair(U&& x, V&& y); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +6 <i>Effects:</i> The constructor initializes <tt>first</tt> with +<tt>std::forward<U>(x)</tt> and second with +<tt>std::forward<V>(y)</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +<ins><i>Remarks:</i> <tt>U</tt> shall be implicitly convertible to +<tt>first_type</tt> and <tt>V</tt> shall be implicitly convertible to +<tt>second_type</tt>, else this constructor shall not participate in overload +resolution.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="813"></a>813. "empty" undefined for <tt>shared_ptr</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.10.2 [util.smartptr.shared] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 2008-02-26 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#util.smartptr.shared">issues</a> in [util.smartptr.shared].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Several places in 20.9.10.2 [util.smartptr.shared] refer to an "empty" <tt>shared_ptr</tt>. +However, that term is nowhere defined. The closest thing we have to a +definition is that the default constructor creates an empty <tt>shared_ptr</tt> +and that a copy of a default-constructed <tt>shared_ptr</tt> is empty. Are any +other <tt>shared_ptr</tt>s empty? For example, is <tt>shared_ptr((T*) 0)</tt> empty? What +are the properties of an empty <tt>shared_ptr</tt>? We should either clarify this +term or stop using it. +</p><p> +</p> +One reason it's not good enough to leave this term up to the reader's +intuition is that, in light of +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/JTC1/sc22/WG21/docs/papers/2007/n2351.htm">N2351</a> +and issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#711">711</a>, most readers' +intuitive understanding is likely to be wrong. Intuitively one might +expect that an empty <tt>shared_ptr</tt> is one that doesn't store a pointer, +but, whatever the definition is, that isn't it. +<p></p> + +<p><i>[ +Peter adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Or, what is an "empty" <tt>shared_ptr</tt>? +</p> + +<ul> +<li> +<p> +Are any other <tt>shared_ptrs</tt> empty? +</p> +<p> +Yes. Whether a given <tt>shared_ptr</tt> instance is empty or not is (*) +completely specified by the last mutating operation on that instance. +Give me an example and I'll tell you whether the <tt>shared_ptr</tt> is empty or +not. +</p> +<blockquote> +(*) If it isn't, this is a legitimate defect. +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +For example, is <tt>shared_ptr((T*) 0)</tt> empty? +</p> +<p> +No. If it were empty, it would have a <tt>use_count()</tt> of 0, whereas it is +specified to have an <tt>use_count()</tt> of 1. +</p> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +What are the properties of an empty <tt>shared_ptr</tt>? +</p> +<p> +The properties of an empty <tt>shared_ptr</tt> can be derived from the +specification. One example is that its destructor is a no-op. Another is +that its <tt>use_count()</tt> returns 0. I can enumerate the full list if you +really like. +</p> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +We should either clarify this term or stop using it. +</p> +<p> +I don't agree with the imperative tone +</p> +<p> +A clarification would be either a no-op - if it doesn't contradict the +existing wording - or a big mistake if it does. +</p> +<p> +I agree that a clarification that is formally a no-op may add value. +</p> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +However, that term is nowhere defined. +</p> +<p> +Terms can be useful without a definition. Consider the following +simplistic example. We have a type <tt>X</tt> with the following operations +defined: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>X x; +X x2(x); +X f(X x); +X g(X x1, X x2); +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +A default-constructed value is green.<br> +A copy has the same color as the original.<br> +<tt>f(x)</tt> returns a red value if the argument is green, a green value otherwise.<br> +<tt>g(x1,x2)</tt> returns a green value if the arguments are of the same color, a red value otherwise. +</p> + +<p> +Given these definitions, you can determine the color of every instance +of type <tt>X</tt>, even if you have absolutely no idea what green and red mean. +</p> + +<p> +Green and red are "nowhere defined" and completely defined at the same time. +</p> +</li> +</ul> + +<p> +Alisdair's wording is fine. +</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Append the following sentance to 20.9.10.2 [util.smartptr.shared] +</p> +<blockquote> +The <code>shared_ptr</code> class template stores a pointer, usually obtained +via <code>new</code>. <code>shared_ptr</code> implements semantics of +shared ownership; the last remaining owner of the pointer is responsible for +destroying the object, or otherwise releasing the resources associated with +the stored pointer. <ins>A <code>shared_ptr</code> object that does not own +a pointer is said to be <i>empty</i>.</ins> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="814"></a>814. <tt>vector<bool>::swap(reference, reference)</tt> not defined</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.4.2 [vector.bool] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2008-03-17 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#vector.bool">issues</a> in [vector.bool].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +<tt>vector<bool>::swap(reference, reference)</tt> has no definition. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Open. Alisdair to provide a resolution. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit Daniel provided wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +We agree with the proposed resolution. +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Just after 23.4.2 [vector.bool]/5 add the following prototype and description: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins>static void swap(reference x, reference y);</ins> +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins>-6- <i>Effects:</i> Exchanges the contents of <tt>x</tt> and <tt>y</tt> as-if</ins> by: +</p> +<blockquote><pre><ins> +bool b = x; +x = y; +y = b; +</ins></pre></blockquote> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="815"></a>815. <tt>std::function</tt> and <tt>reference_closure</tt> do not use perfect forwarding</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8.14.2.4 [func.wrap.func.inv] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2008-03-16 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-19</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#func.wrap.func.inv">issues</a> in [func.wrap.func.inv].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +<tt>std::function</tt> and <tt>reference_closure</tt> should use "perfect forwarding" as +described in the rvalue core proposal. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Sophia Antipolis: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +According to Doug Gregor, as far as <tt>std::function</tt> is concerned, perfect +forwarding can not be obtained because of type erasure. Not everyone +agreed with this diagnosis of forwarding. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-01 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Sebastian Gesemann brought to my attention that the <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> +requirement on <tt>function</tt>'s <tt>ArgTypes...</tt> is an unnecessary +restriction. +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<Returnable R, <b>CopyConstructible</b>... ArgTypes> +class function<R(ArgTypes...)> +... +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +On further investigation, this complaint seemed to be the same +issue as this one. I believe the reason <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> was put +on <tt>ArgTypes</tt> in the first place was because of the nature of the +<i>invoke</i> member: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class R, class ...ArgTypes> +R +function<R(ArgTypes...)>::operator()(ArgTypes... arg) const +{ + if (f_ == 0) + throw bad_function_call(); + return (*f_)(arg...); +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +However now with rvalue-refs, "by value" no longer implies <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> +(as Sebastian correctly points out). If rvalue arguments are supplied, <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> +is sufficient. Furthermore, the constraint need not be applied in <tt>function</tt> +if I understand correctly. Rather the client must apply the proper constraints +at the call site. Therefore, at the very least, I recommend that <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> +be removed from the template class <tt>function</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +Furthermore we need to mandate that the <i>invoker</i> is coded as: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class R, class ...ArgTypes> +R +function<R(ArgTypes...)>::operator()(ArgTypes... arg) const +{ + if (f_ == 0) + throw bad_function_call(); + return (*f_)(<b>std::forward<ArgTypes>(</b>arg<b>)</b>...); +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Note that <tt>ArgTypes&&</tt> (the "perfect forwarding signature") is not +appropriate here as this is not a deduced context for <tt>ArgTypes</tt>. Instead +the client's arguments must implicitly convert to the non-deduced <tt>ArgType</tt> +type. Catching these arguments by value makes sense to enable decay. +</p> + +<p> +Next <tt>forward</tt> is used to move the <tt>ArgTypes</tt> as efficiently as +possible, and also with minimum requirements (not <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>) +to the type-erased functor. For object types, this will be a <tt>move</tt>. For +reference type <tt>ArgTypes</tt>, this will be a copy. The end result <em>must</em> be +that the following is a valid program: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>#include <functional> +#include <memory> +#include <cassert> + +std::unique_ptr<int> +f(std::unique_ptr<int> p, int& i) +{ + ++i; + return std::move(p); +} + +int main() +{ + int i = 2; + std::function<std::unique_ptr<int>(std::unique_ptr<int>, + int&> g(f); + std::unique_ptr<int> p = g(std::unique_ptr<int>(new int(1)), i); + assert(*p == 1); + assert(i == 3); +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Tested in pre-concepts rvalue-ref-enabled compiler. +]</i></p> + + +<p> +In the example above, the first <tt>ArgType</tt> is <tt>unique_ptr<int></tt> +and the second <tt>ArgType</tt> is <tt>int&</tt>. Both <em>must</em> work! +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-27 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +in the 2009-05-01 comment of above mentioned issue Howard +</p> + +<ol type="a"> +<li> +Recommends to replace the <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> requirement by a +<tt>MoveConstructible</tt> requirement +</li> +<li> +Says: "Furthermore, the constraint need not be applied in <tt>function</tt> if I +understand correctly. Rather the client must apply the proper constraints +at the call site" +</li> +</ol> +<p> +I'm fine with (a), but I think comment (b) is incorrect, at least in the +sense I read these sentences. Let's look at Howard's example code: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>function<R(ArgTypes...)>::operator()(ArgTypes... arg) const +{ + if (f_ == 0) + throw bad_function_call(); + return (*f_)(std::forward<ArgTypes>(arg)...); +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +In the constrained scope of this <tt>operator()</tt> overload the expression +"<tt>(*f_)(std::forward<ArgTypes>(arg)...)</tt>" must be valid. How can it +do so, if <tt>ArgTypes</tt> aren't at least <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>? +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Leave this open and wait until concepts are removed from the Working +Draft so that we know how to write the proposed resolution in terms of +diffs to otherwise stable text. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Leave as open. Howard to provide wording. Howard welcomes any help. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-12-12 Jonathan Wakely adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +20.8.14.2 [func.wrap.func] says +</p> + +<blockquote> +2 A function object <tt>f</tt> of type <tt>F</tt> is Callable for argument +types <tt>T1, T2, ..., TN</tt> in <tt>ArgTypes</tt> and a return type +<tt>R</tt>, if, given lvalues <tt>t1, t2, ..., tN</tt> of types <tt>T1, T2, ..., +TN</tt>, respectively, <tt>INVOKE (f, t1, t2, ..., tN)</tt> is well formed +(20.7.2) and, if <tt>R</tt> is not <tt>void</tt>, convertible to <tt>R</tt>. +</blockquote> + +<p> +N.B. lvalues, which means you can't use <tt>function<R(T&&)></tt> +or <tt>function<R(unique_ptr<T>)></tt> +</p> + +<p> +I recently implemented rvalue arguments in GCC's <tt>std::function</tt>, all +that was needed was to use <tt>std::forward<ArgTypes></tt> in a few +places. The example in issue 815 works. +</p> + +<p> +I think 815 could be resolved by removing the requirement that the target +function be callable with lvalues. Saying <tt>ArgTypes</tt> need to be +<tt>CopyConstructible</tt> is wrong, and IMHO saying <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> +is unnecessary, since the by-value signature implies that already, but if it is +needed it should only be on <tt>operator()</tt>, not the whole class (you could +in theory instantiate <tt>std::function<R(noncopyable)></tt> as long as +you don't invoke the call operator.) +</p> + +<p> +I think defining invocation in terms of <tt>INVOKE</tt> already implies perfect +forwarding, so we don't need to say explicitly that <tt>std::forward</tt> should +be used (N.B. the types that are forwarded are those in <tt>ArgTypes</tt>, which +can differ from the actual parameter types of the target function. The actual +parameter types have gone via type erasure, but that's not a problem - IMHO +forwarding the arguments as <tt>ArgTypes</tt> is the right thing to do anyway.) +</p> + +<p> +Is it sufficient to simply replace "lvalues" with "values"? or do we need to say +something like "lvalues when <tt>Ti</tt> is an lvalue-reference and rvalues +otherwise"? I prefer the former, so I propose the following resolution for 815: +</p> + +<p> +Edit 20.8.14.2 [func.wrap.func] paragraph 2: +</p> + +<blockquote> +2 A function object <tt>f</tt> of type <tt>F</tt> is Callable for argument +types <tt>T1, T2, ..., TN</tt> in <tt>ArgTypes</tt> and a return type +<tt>R</tt>, if, given <del>l</del>values <tt>t1, t2, ..., tN</tt> of types +<tt>T1, T2, ..., TN</tt>, respectively, <tt>INVOKE (f, t1, t2, ..., tN)</tt> is +well formed (20.7.2) and, if <tt>R</tt> is not <tt>void</tt>, convertible to +<tt>R</tt>. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-12-12 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +I don't like the reduction to "values" and prefer the alternative solution +suggested using "lvalues when Ti is an lvalue-reference and rvalues otherwise". +The reason why I dislike the shorter version is based on different usages of +"values" as part of defining the semantics of requirement tables via +expressions. E.g. 20.2.1 [utility.arg.requirements]/1 says "<tt>a</tt>, +<tt>b</tt>, and <tt>c</tt> are values of type <tt>const T;</tt>" or similar in +23.2.1 [container.requirements.general]/4 or /14 etc. My current reading +of all these parts is that <em>both</em> rvalues and lvalues are required to be +supported, but this interpretation would violate the intention of the suggested +fix of #815, if I correctly understand Jonathan's rationale. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-12-12 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<blockquote> +"lvalues when Ti is an lvalue-reference and rvalues otherwise" +</blockquote> +<p> +doesn't quite work here because the <tt>Ti</tt> aren't deduced. They are +specified by the <tt>function</tt> type. <tt>Ti</tt> might be <tt>const +int&</tt> (an lvalue reference) and a valid <tt>ti</tt> might be <tt>2</tt> +(a non-const rvalue). I've taken another stab at the wording using +"expressions" and "bindable to". +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-09 Wording updated by Jonathan, Ganesh and Daniel. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-09 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-10 Daniel opens to improve wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-11 This issue is now addressed by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#870">870</a>. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-12 Moved to Tentatively NAD Editorial after 5 positive votes on +c++std-lib. Rationale added below. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +Addressed by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#870">870</a>. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Edit 20.8.14.2 [func.wrap.func] paragraph 2: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +2 A function object <tt>f</tt> of type <tt>F</tt> is Callable for argument +types <del><tt>T1, T2, ..., TN</tt> in</del> <tt>ArgTypes</tt> and <del>a</del> +return type <tt>R</tt><del>,</del> if<del>, given lvalues <tt>t1, t2, ..., +tN</tt> of types <tt>T1, T2, ..., TN</tt>, respectively,</del> <ins>the +expression</ins> <tt><i>INVOKE</i>(f, <ins>declval<ArgTypes>()..., +R</ins><del>t1, t2, ..., tN</del>)</tt><ins>, considered as an unevaluated +operand (5 [expr]),</ins> is well formed (20.7.2)<del> and, if +<tt>R</tt> is not <tt>void</tt>, convertible to <tt>R</tt></del>. +</p> + +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="816"></a>816. Should <tt>bind()</tt>'s returned functor have a nofail copy ctor when <tt>bind()</tt> is nofail?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8.10.1.2 [func.bind.bind] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Stephan T. Lavavej <b>Opened:</b> 2008-02-08 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-19</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#func.bind.bind">issues</a> in [func.bind.bind].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Library Issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#527">527</a> notes that <tt>bind(f, t1, ..., tN)</tt> +should be nofail when <tt>f, t1, ..., tN</tt> have nofail copy ctors. +</p> +<p> +However, no guarantees are provided for the copy ctor of the functor +returned by <tt>bind()</tt>. (It's guaranteed to have a copy ctor, which can +throw implementation-defined exceptions: <tt>bind()</tt> returns a forwarding +call wrapper, TR1 3.6.3/2. A forwarding call wrapper is a call wrapper, +TR1 3.3/4. Every call wrapper shall be CopyConstructible, TR1 3.3/4. +Everything without an exception-specification may throw +implementation-defined exceptions unless otherwise specified, C++03 +17.4.4.8/3.) +</p> +<p> +Should the nofail guarantee requested by Library Issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#527">527</a> be extended +to cover both calling <tt>bind()</tt> and copying the returned functor? +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<tt>tuple</tt> construction should probably have a similar guarantee. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Howard to provide wording. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit, Anthony provided wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +Part of all of this issue appears to be rendered moot +by the proposed resolution to issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#817">817</a> (q.v.). +We recommend the issues be considered simultaneously +(or possibly even merged) +to ensure there is no overlap. +Move to Open, and likewise for issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#817">817</a>. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Related to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#817">817</a> (see below). Leave Open. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. Decoupling from issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#817">817</a>. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-11 Moved from Ready to Tentatively NAD Editorial, rationale added below. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +This issue is solved as proposed by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#817">817</a>. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add a new sentence to the end of paragraphs 2 and 4 of 20.8.10.1.2 [func.bind.bind]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-2- <i>Returns:</i> A forwarding call wrapper <tt>g</tt> with a weak result type (20.6.2). The effect of <tt>g(u1, u2, +..., uM)</tt> shall be <tt><i>INVOKE</i>(f, v1, v2, ..., vN, Callable<F cv,V1, V2, ..., VN>::result_type)</tt>, where <i>cv</i> +represents the <i>cv</i>-qualifiers of <tt>g</tt> and the values and types of the bound arguments +<tt>v1, v2, ..., vN</tt> are determined as specified below. +<ins>The copy constructor and move constructor of the forwarding call wrapper shall throw an +exception if and only if the corresponding constructor of <tt>F</tt> or any of the types +in <tt>BoundArgs...</tt> throw an exception.</ins> +</p> +<p>...</p> +<p> +-5- <i>Returns:</i> A forwarding call wrapper <tt>g</tt> with a nested type <tt>result_type</tt> defined as a synonym +for <tt>R</tt>. The effect of <tt>g(u1, u2, ..., uM)</tt> shall be <tt><i>INVOKE</i>(f, v1, v2, ..., vN, R)</tt>, where the +values and types of the bound arguments <tt>v1, v2, ..., vN</tt> are determined as specified below. +<ins>The copy constructor and move constructor of the forwarding call wrapper shall throw an +exception if and only if the corresponding constructor of <tt>F</tt> or any of the types +in <tt>BoundArgs...</tt> throw an exception.</ins> +</p> + +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="817"></a>817. <tt>bind</tt> needs to be moved</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8.10.1.2 [func.bind.bind] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2008-03-17 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#func.bind.bind">issues</a> in [func.bind.bind].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses US 72, JP 38 and DE 21</b></p> + +<p> +The functor returned by <tt>bind()</tt> should have a move constructor that +requires only move construction of its contained functor and bound arguments. +That way move-only functors can be passed to objects such as <tt>thread</tt>. +</p> +<p> +This issue is related to issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#816">816</a>. +</p> + +<p> +US 72: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<tt>bind</tt> should support move-only functors and bound arguments. +</blockquote> + +<p> +JP 38: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +add the move requirement for bind's return type. +</p> +<p> +For example, assume following <tt>th1</tt> and <tt>th2</tt>, +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void f(vector<int> v) { } + +vector<int> v{ ... }; +thread th1([v]{ f(v); }); +thread th2(bind(f, v)); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +When function object are set to thread, <tt>v</tt> is moved to <tt>th1</tt>'s lambda +expression in a Move Constructor of lambda expression because <tt>th1</tt>'s lambda +expression has a Move Constructor. But <tt>bind</tt> of <tt>th2</tt>'s +return type doesn't have the requirement of Move, so it may not +moved but copied. +</p> +<p> +Add the requirement of move to get rid of this useless copy. +</p> +<p> +And also, add the <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> as well as <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +DE 21 +</p> + +<blockquote> +The specification for bind claims twice that "the values and types for +the bound arguments v1, v2, ..., vN are determined as specified below". +No such specification appears to exist. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Howard to provide wording. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit Alisdair and Howard provided wording. +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Several issues are being combined in this resolution. They are all touching the +same words so this is an attempt to keep one issue from stepping on another, and +a place to see the complete solution in one place. +</p> + +<ol> +<li> +<tt>bind</tt> needs to be "moved". +</li> +<li> +20.8.10.1.2 [func.bind.bind]/p3, p6 and p7 were accidently removed from N2798. +</li> +<li> +Issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#929">929</a> argues for a way to pass by && for +efficiency but retain the decaying behavior of pass by value for the +<tt>thread</tt> constructor. That same solution is applicable here. +</li> +</ol> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +We were going to recommend moving this issue to Tentatively Ready +until we noticed potential overlap with issue 816 (q.v.). +</p> +<p> +Move to Open, +and recommend both issues be considered together +(and possibly merged). +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +The proposed resolution uses concepts. Leave Open. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Leave as Open. Howard to provide deconceptified wording. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-07 Howard updates wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-15 Further updates by Peter, Chris and Daniel. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Moved to Tentatively Ready after 6 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 20.8 [function.objects] p2: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class F<del>n</del>, class... <del>Types</del> <ins>BoundArgs</ins>> + <i>unspecified</i> bind(F<del>n</del><ins>&&</ins>, <del>Types</del> <ins>BoundArgs&&</ins>...); +template<class R, class F<del>n</del>, class... <del>Types</del> <ins>BoundArgs</ins>> + <i>unspecified</i> bind(F<del>n</del><ins>&&</ins>, <del>Types</del> <ins>BoundArgs&&</ins>...); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Change 20.8.2 [func.require]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +4 Every call wrapper (20.8.1 [func.def]) shall be +<tt><del>Copy</del><ins>Move</ins>Constructible</tt>. A <i>simple call +wrapper</i> is a call wrapper that is <ins><tt>CopyConstructible</tt> and</ins> +<tt>CopyAssignable</tt> and whose copy constructor<ins>, move constructor</ins> and assignment operator do not +throw exceptions. A <i>forwarding call wrapper</i> is a call wrapper that can be +called with an argument list. [<i>Note:</i> in a typical implementation +forwarding call wrappers have an overloaded function call operator of the form +</p> +<blockquote><pre>template<class... <del>ArgTypes</del><ins>UnBoundsArgs</ins>> +R operator()(<del>ArgTypes</del><ins>UnBoundsArgs</ins>&&... <ins>unbound_</ins>args) cv-qual; +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +— <i>end note</i>] +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 20.8.10.1.2 [func.bind.bind]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p><ins> +Within this clause: +</ins></p> + +<ul> +<li><ins> +Let <tt>FD</tt> be a synonym for the type <tt>decay<F>::type</tt>. +</ins></li> +<li><ins> +Let <tt>fd</tt> be an lvalue of type <tt>FD</tt> constructed from +<tt>std::forward<F>(f)</tt>. +</ins></li> +<li><ins> +Let <tt>Ti</tt> be a synonym for the i<sup><i>th</i></sup> type in the +template parameter pack <tt>BoundArgs</tt>. +</ins></li> +<li><ins> +Let <tt>TiD</tt> be a synonym for the type <tt>decay<Ti>::type</tt>. +</ins></li> +<li><ins> +Let <tt>ti</tt> be the i<sup><i>th</i></sup> argument in the function parameter +pack <tt>bound_args</tt>. +</ins></li> +<li><ins> +Let <tt>tid</tt> be an lvalue of type <tt>TiD</tt> constructed from +<tt>std::forward<Ti>(ti)</tt>. +</ins></li> +<li><ins> +Let <tt>Uj</tt> be the j<sup><i>th</i></sup> deduced type of the <tt>UnBoundArgs&&...</tt> +parameter of the <tt>operator()</tt> of the forwarding call wrapper. +</ins></li> +<li><ins> +Let <tt>uj</tt> be the j<sup><i>th</i></sup> argument associated with <tt>Uj</tt>. +</ins></li> +</ul> + +<pre>template<class F, class... BoundArgs> + <i>unspecified</i> bind(F<ins>&&</ins> f, BoundArgs<ins>&&</ins>... bound_args); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-1- <i>Requires:</i> +<ins><tt>is_constructible<FD, F>::value</tt> +shall be <tt>true</tt>.</ins> +<ins>For each <tt>Ti</tt> in <tt>BoundArgs</tt>, +<tt>is_constructible<TiD, Ti>::value</tt> shall be +<tt>true</tt></ins>. +<del><tt>F</tt> and each <tt>Ti</tt> in +<tt>BoundArgs</tt> shall be CopyConstructible.</del> +<tt><i>INVOKE</i>(f<ins>d</ins>, w1, w2, ..., wN)</tt> (20.8.2 [func.require]) shall be a valid expression for some values +<i>w1, w2, ..., wN</i>, where <tt>N == sizeof...(bound_args)</tt>. +</p> +<p> +-2- <i>Returns:</i> A forwarding call wrapper <tt>g</tt> with a weak +result type (20.8.2 [func.require]). The effect of <tt>g(u1, u2, +..., uM)</tt> shall be <tt><i>INVOKE</i>(f<ins>d</ins>, v1, v2, ..., vN, +result_of<F<ins>D</ins> <i>cv</i> (V1, V2, ..., VN)>::type)</tt>, where +<i>cv</i> represents the <i>cv</i>-qualifiers of <tt>g</tt> and the +values and types of the bound arguments <tt>v1, v2, ..., vN</tt> are +determined as specified below. +<ins>The copy constructor and move constructor of the forwarding call wrapper shall throw an +exception if and only if the corresponding constructor of <tt>FD</tt> or of any of the types +<tt>TiD</tt> throws an exception.</ins> +</p> +<p> +-3- <i>Throws:</i> Nothing unless the <del>copy</del> +construct<ins>ion</ins><del>or</del> of +<tt><del>F</del><ins>fd</ins></tt> or of one of the <ins>values +<tt>tid</tt></ins> <del>types in the <tt>BoundArgs...</tt> pack +expansion</del> throws an exception. +</p> +<p> +<ins> +<i>Remarks:</i> The <i>unspecified</i> return type shall satisfy the +requirements of <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>. If all of <tt>FD</tt> and +<tt>TiD</tt> satisfy the requirements of <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> then +the <i>unspecified</i> return type shall satisfy the requirements of +<tt>CopyConstructible</tt>. [<i>Note:</i> This implies that all of +<tt>FD</tt> and <tt>TiD</tt> shall be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> — +<i>end note</i>] +</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> + +<pre>template<class R, class F, class... BoundArgs> + <i>unspecified</i> bind(F<ins>&&</ins> f, BoundArgs<ins>&&</ins>... bound_args); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-4- <i>Requires:</i> +<ins><tt>is_constructible<FD, F>::value</tt> +shall be <tt>true</tt>.</ins> +<ins>For each <tt>Ti</tt> in <tt>BoundArgs</tt>, +<tt>is_constructible<TiD, Ti>::value</tt> shall be +<tt>true</tt></ins>. +<del><tt>F</tt> and each <tt>Ti</tt> in +<tt>BoundArgs</tt> shall be CopyConstructible.</del> +<tt><i>INVOKE</i>(f<ins>d</ins>, w1, +w2, ..., wN)</tt> shall be a valid expression for some values <i>w1, w2, +..., wN</i>, where <tt>N == sizeof...(bound_args)</tt>. +</p> +<p> +-5- <i>Returns:</i> A forwarding call wrapper <tt>g</tt> with a nested +type <tt>result_type</tt> defined as a synonym for <tt>R</tt>. The +effect of <tt>g(u1, u2, ..., uM)</tt> shall be <tt><i>INVOKE</i>(f<ins>d</ins>, v1, +v2, ..., vN, R)</tt>, where the values and types of the bound arguments +<tt>v1, v2, ..., vN</tt> are determined as specified below. +<ins>The copy constructor and move constructor of the forwarding call wrapper shall throw an +exception if and only if the corresponding constructor of <tt>FD</tt> or of any of the types +<tt>TiD</tt> throws an exception.</ins> +</p> +<p> +-6- <i>Throws:</i> Nothing unless the <del>copy</del> +construct<ins>ion</ins><del>or</del> of +<tt><del>F</del><ins>fd</ins></tt> or of one of the <ins>values +<tt>tid</tt></ins> <del>types in the <tt>BoundArgs...</tt> pack +expansion</del> throws an exception. +</p> +<p> +<ins> +<i>Remarks:</i> The <i>unspecified</i> return type shall satisfy the +requirements of <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>. If all of <tt>FD</tt> and +<tt>TiD</tt> satisfy the requirements of <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> then +the <i>unspecified</i> return type shall satisfy the requirements of +<tt>CopyConstructible</tt>. [<i>Note:</i> This implies that all of +<tt>FD</tt> and <tt>TiD</tt> shall be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> — +<i>end note</i>] +</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +-7- The values of the <i>bound arguments</i> <tt>v1, v2, ..., vN</tt> and +their corresponding types <tt>V1, V2, ..., VN</tt> depend on the type<ins>s +<tt>TiD</tt> derived from</ins> +<del>of the corresponding argument <tt>ti</tt> in <tt>bound_args</tt> of type +<tt>Ti</tt> in <tt>BoundArgs</tt> in</del> +the call to <tt>bind</tt> and the +<i>cv</i>-qualifiers <i>cv</i> of the call wrapper <tt>g</tt> as +follows: +</p> + +<ul> +<li> +if <tt><del>ti</del> <ins>TiD</ins></tt> is <del>of type</del> +<tt>reference_wrapper<T></tt> the argument is +<tt>ti<ins>d</ins>.get()</tt> and its type <tt>Vi</tt> is <tt>T&</tt>; +</li> +<li> +if the value of +<tt><del>std::</del>is_bind_expression<Ti<ins>D</ins>>::value</tt> is +<tt>true</tt> the argument is <tt>ti<ins>d</ins>(<ins>std::forward<Uj>(uj)...</ins> <del>u1, u2, ..., uM</del>)</tt> +and its type <tt>Vi</tt> is <tt>result_of<Ti<ins>D</ins> <i>cv</i> +(<ins>Uj...</ins> <del>U1&, U2&, ..., UM&</del>)>::type</tt>; +</li> +<li> +if the value <tt>j</tt> of +<tt><del>std::</del>is_placeholder<Ti<ins>D</ins>>::value</tt> is not zero +the argument is <tt>std::forward<Uj>(uj)</tt> and its type +<tt>Vi</tt> is <tt>Uj&&</tt>; +</li> +<li> +otherwise the value is <tt>ti<ins>d</ins></tt> and its type <tt>Vi</tt> +is <tt>Ti<ins>D</ins> <i>cv</i> &</tt>. +</li> +</ul> + +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="818"></a>818. wording for memory ordering</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 29.3 [atomics.order] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Jens Maurer <b>Opened:</b> 2008-03-22 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#atomics.order">issues</a> in [atomics.order].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +29.3 [atomics.order] p1 says in the table that +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<tbody><tr> +<th>Element</th><th>Meaning</th> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><tt>memory_order_acq_rel</tt></td> +<td>the operation has both acquire and release semantics</td> +</tr> +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + +<p> +To my naked eye, that seems to imply that even an atomic read has both +acquire and release semantics. +</p> + +<p> +Then, p1 says in the table: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<tbody><tr> +<th>Element</th><th>Meaning</th> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><tt>memory_order_seq_cst</tt></td> +<td>the operation has both acquire and release semantics, + and, in addition, has sequentially-consistent operation ordering</td> +</tr> +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + +<p> +So that seems to be "the same thing" as <tt>memory_order_acq_rel</tt>, with additional +constraints. +</p> + +<p> +I'm then reading p2, where it says: +</p> + +<blockquote> +The <tt>memory_order_seq_cst</tt> operations that load a value are acquire operations +on the affected locations. The <tt>memory_order_seq_cst</tt> operations that store a value +are release operations on the affected locations. +</blockquote> + +<p> +That seems to imply that atomic reads only have acquire semantics. If that +is intended, does this also apply to <tt>memory_order_acq_rel</tt> and the individual +load/store operations as well? +</p> + +<p> +Also, the table in p1 contains phrases with "thus" that seem to indicate +consequences of normative wording in 1.10 [intro.multithread]. That shouldn't be in +normative text, for the fear of redundant or inconsistent specification with +the other normative text. +</p> + +<p> +Double-check 29.6 [atomics.types.operations] that each +operation clearly says whether it's a load or a store operation, or +both. (It could be clearer, IMO. Solution not in current proposed resolution.) +</p> + +<p> +29.3 [atomics.order] p2: What's a "consistent execution"? It's not defined in +1.10 [intro.multithread], it's just used in notes there. +</p> + +<p> +And why does 29.6 [atomics.types.operations] p9 for "load" say: +</p> + + +<blockquote> +<i>Requires:</i> The order argument shall not be <tt>memory_order_acquire</tt> +nor <tt>memory_order_acq_rel</tt>. +</blockquote> + +<p> +(Since this is exactly the same restriction as for "store", it seems to be a typo.) +</p> + +<p> +And then: 29.6 [atomics.types.operations] p12: +</p> + +<blockquote> +These operations are read-modify-write operations in the sense of the +"synchronizes with" definition (1.10 [intro.multithread]), so both such an operation and the +evaluation that produced the input value synchronize with any evaluation +that reads the updated value. +</blockquote> + +<p> +This is redundant with 1.10 [intro.multithread], see above for the reasoning. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Boehm: "I don't think that this changes anything terribly substantive, +but it improves the text." +</p> +<p> +Note that "Rephrase the table in as [sic] follows..." should read +"Replace the table in [atomics.order] with the following...." +</p> +<p> +The proposed resolution needs more work. Crowl volunteered to address +all of the atomics issues in one paper. +</p> + +<p> +This issue is addressed in +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2783.html">N2783</a>. +</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +edit 29.3 [atomics.order], paragraph 1 as follows. +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +The enumeration <code>memory_order</code> +specifies the detailed regular (non-atomic) memory synchronization order +as defined in <del>Clause 1.7</del> <ins>section 1.10</ins> +and may provide for operation ordering. +Its enumerated values and their meanings are as follows: +</p> +<blockquote> +<dl> +<dt><ins>For <code>memory_order_relaxed</code>,</ins></dt> +<dd><ins>no operation orders memory.</ins></dd> +<dt><ins>For <code>memory_order_release</code>, +<code>memory_order_acq_rel</code>, +and <code>memory_order_seq_cst</code>,</ins></dt> +<dd><ins>a store operation performs a release operation +on the affected memory location.</ins></dd> +<dt><ins>For <code>memory_order_consume</code>,</ins></dt> +<dd><ins>a load operation performs a consume operation +on the affected memory location.</ins></dd> +<dt><ins>For <code>memory_order_acquire</code>, +<code>memory_order_acq_rel</code>, +and <code>memory_order_seq_cst</code>,</ins></dt> +<dd><ins>a load operation performs an acquire operation +on the affected memory location.</ins></dd> +</dl> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +remove table 136 in 29.3 [atomics.order]. +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption><del>Table 136 — memory_order effects</del></caption> +<tbody><tr><th><del>Element</del></th><th><del>Meaning</del></th></tr> +<tr><td valign="top"><del><code>memory_order_relaxed</code></del></td> +<td valign="top"><del>the operation does not order memory</del></td></tr> +<tr><td valign="top"><del><code>memory_order_release</code></del></td> +<td valign="top"><del>the operation +performs a release operation on the affected memory location, +thus making regular memory writes visible to other threads +through the atomic variable to which it is applied</del></td></tr> +<tr><td valign="top"><del><code>memory_order_acquire</code></del></td> +<td valign="top"><del>the operation +performs an acquire operation on the affected memory location, +thus making regular memory writes in other threads +released through the atomic variable to which it is applied +visible to the current thread</del></td></tr> +<tr><td valign="top"><del><code>memory_order_consume</code></del></td> +<td valign="top"><del>the operation +performs a consume operation on the affected memory location, +thus making regular memory writes in other threads +released through the atomic variable to which it is applied +visible to the regular memory reads +that are dependencies of this consume operation.</del></td></tr> +<tr><td valign="top"><del><code>memory_order_acq_rel</code></del></td> +<td valign="top"><del>the operation has both acquire and release semantics</del></td></tr> +<tr><td valign="top"><del><code>memory_order_seq_cst</code></del></td> +<td valign="top"><del>the operation has both acquire and release semantics, +and, in addition, has sequentially-consistent operation ordering</del></td></tr> +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + +<p> +edit 29.3 [atomics.order], paragraph 2 as follows. +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<del>The <code>memory_order_seq_cst</code> operations that load a value +are acquire operations on the affected locations. +The <code>memory_order_seq_cst</code> operations that store a value +are release operations on the affected locations. +In addition, in a consistent execution, +there</del> <ins>There</ins> <del>must be</del> <ins>is</ins> +a single total order <var>S</var> +on all <code>memory_order_seq_cst</code> operations, +consistent with the happens before order +and modification orders for all affected locations, +such that each <code>memory_order_seq_cst</code> operation +observes either the last preceding modification +according to this order <var>S</var>, +or the result of an operation that is not <code>memory_order_seq_cst</code>. +[<i>Note:</i> +Although it is not explicitly required that <var>S</var> include locks, +it can always be extended to an order +that does include lock and unlock operations, +since the ordering between those +is already included in the happens before ordering. +—<i>end note</i>] +</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="819"></a>819. rethrow_if_nested</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.8.6 [except.nested] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2008-03-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#except.nested">issues</a> in [except.nested].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Looking at the wording I submitted for <tt>rethrow_if_nested</tt>, I don't think I +got it quite right. +</p> + +<p> +The current wording says: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template <class E> void rethrow_if_nested(const E& e); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Calls <tt>e.rethrow_nested()</tt> only if <tt>e</tt> +is publicly derived from <tt>nested_exception</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +This is trying to be a bit subtle, by requiring <tt>e</tt> (not <tt>E</tt>) to be publicly +derived from <tt>nested_exception</tt> the idea is that a <tt>dynamic_cast</tt> would be +required to be sure. Unfortunately, if <tt>e</tt> is dynamically but not statically +derived from <tt>nested_exception</tt>, <tt>e.rethrow_nested()</tt> is ill-formed. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Alisdair was volunteered to provide wording. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Leave as Open. Alisdair to provide wording. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-09 Alisdair provided wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-03-10 Dietmar updated wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010 Pittsburgh: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Ready for Pittsburgh. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 18.8.6 [except.nested], p8: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class E> void rethrow_if_nested(const E& e); +</pre> +<blockquote> +-8- <i>Effects:</i> <del>Calls <tt>e.rethrow_nested()</tt> +o</del><ins>O</ins>nly if <ins>the dynamic type of</ins> <tt>e</tt> is +publicly <ins>and unambiguously</ins> derived from +<tt>nested_exception</tt> <ins>this calls +<tt>dynamic_cast<const nested_exception&>(e).rethrow_nested()</tt></ins>. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="820"></a>820. <tt>current_exception()</tt>'s interaction with throwing copy ctors</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.8.5 [propagation] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Stephan T. Lavavej <b>Opened:</b> 2008-03-26 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index-open.html#propagation">active issues</a> in [propagation].</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#propagation">issues</a> in [propagation].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +As of N2521, the Working Paper appears to be silent about what +<tt>current_exception()</tt> should do if it tries to copy the currently handled +exception and its copy constructor throws. 18.8.5 [propagation]/7 says "If the +function needs to allocate memory and the attempt fails, it returns an +<tt>exception_ptr</tt> object that refers to an instance of <tt>bad_alloc</tt>.", but +doesn't say anything about what should happen if memory allocation +succeeds but the actual copying fails. +</p> + +<p> +I see three alternatives: (1) return an <tt>exception_ptr</tt> object that refers +to an instance of some fixed exception type, (2) return an <tt>exception_ptr</tt> +object that refers to an instance of the copy ctor's thrown exception +(but if that has a throwing copy ctor, an infinite loop can occur), or +(3) call <tt>terminate()</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +I believe that <tt>terminate()</tt> is the most reasonable course of action, but +before we go implement that, I wanted to raise this issue. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Peter's summary: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +The current practice is to not have throwing copy constructors in +exception classes, because this can lead to <tt>terminate()</tt> as described in +15.5.1 [except.terminate]. Thus calling <tt>terminate()</tt> in this situation seems +consistent and does not introduce any new problems. +</p> + +<p> +However, the resolution of core issue 475 may relax this requirement: +</p> + +<blockquote> +The CWG agreed with the position that <tt>std::uncaught_exception()</tt> should +return <tt>false</tt> during the copy to the exception object and that <tt>std::terminate()</tt> +should not be called if that constructor exits with an exception. +</blockquote> + +<p> +Since throwing copy constructors will no longer call <tt>terminate()</tt>, option +(3) doesn't seem reasonable as it is deemed too drastic a response in a +recoverable situation. +</p> + +<p> +Option (2) cannot be adopted by itself, because a potential infinite +recursion will need to be terminated by one of the other options. +</p> + +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add the following paragraph after 18.8.5 [propagation]/7: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Returns (continued):</i> If the attempt to copy the current exception +object throws an exception, the function returns an <tt>exception_ptr</tt> that +refers to the thrown exception or, if this is not possible, to an +instance of <tt>bad_exception</tt>. +</p> +<p> +[<i>Note:</i> The copy constructor of the thrown exception may also fail, so +the implementation is allowed to substitute a <tt>bad_exception</tt> to avoid +infinite recursion. <i>-- end note.</i>] +</p> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p><i>[ +San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Pete: there may be an implied assumption in the proposed wording that +current_exception() copies the existing exception object; the +implementation may not actually do that. +</p> +<p> +Pete will make the required editorial tweaks to rectify this. +</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="821"></a>821. Minor cleanup : <tt>unique_ptr</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.9.3.3 [unique.ptr.runtime.modifiers] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2008-03-30 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Reading resolution of LWG issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#673">673</a> I noticed the following: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>void reset(<del>T*</del> <ins>pointer</ins> p = <del>0</del> <ins>pointer()</ins>); +</pre> + +<p> +-1- <i>Requires:</i> Does not accept pointer types which are convertible +to <del><tt>T*</tt></del> <ins><tt>pointer</tt></ins> (diagnostic +required). [<i>Note:</i> One implementation technique is to create a private +templated overload. <i>-- end note</i>] +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +This could be cleaned up by mandating the overload as a public deleted +function. In addition, we should probably overload <tt>reset</tt> on <tt>nullptr_t</tt> +to be a stronger match than the deleted overload. Words... +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add to class template definition in 20.9.9.3 [unique.ptr.runtime] +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>// modifiers +pointer release(); +void reset(pointer p = pointer()); +<ins>void reset( nullptr_t );</ins> +<ins>template< typename U > void reset( U ) = delete;</ins> +void swap(unique_ptr&& u); +</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Update 20.9.9.3.3 [unique.ptr.runtime.modifiers] +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>void reset(pointer p = pointer()); +<ins>void reset(nullptr_t);</ins> +</pre> + +<p> +<del>-1- <i>Requires:</i> Does not accept pointer types which are convertible +to <tt>pointer</tt> (diagnostic +required). [<i>Note:</i> One implementation technique is to create a private +templated overload. <i>-- end note</i>]</del> +</p> +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> If <tt>get() == nullptr</tt> there are no effects. Otherwise <tt>get_deleter()(get())</tt>. +</p> +<p>...</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Note this wording incorporates resolutions for <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#806">806</a> (New) and <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#673">673</a> (Ready). +]</i></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="823"></a>823. <tt>identity<void></tt> seems broken</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.3.3 [forward] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Walter Brown <b>Opened:</b> 2008-04-09 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-20</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#forward">issues</a> in [forward].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +N2588 seems to have added an <tt>operator()</tt> member function to the +<tt>identity<></tt> helper in 20.3.3 [forward]. I believe this change makes it no +longer possible to instantiate <tt>identity<void></tt>, as it would require +forming a reference-to-<tt>void</tt> type as this <tt>operator()</tt>'s parameter type. +</p> + +<p> +Suggested resolution: Specialize <tt>identity<void></tt> so as not to require +the member function's presence. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Sophia Antipolis: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Jens: suggests to add a requires clause to avoid specializing on <tt>void</tt>. +</p> +<p> +Alisdair: also consider cv-qualified <tt>void</tt>. +</p> +<p> +Alberto provided proposed wording. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-30 Daniel reopens: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +This issue became closed, because the <tt>ReferentType</tt> requirement +fixed the problem - this is no longer the case. In retrospective it seems +to be that the root of current issues around <tt>std::identity</tt> (823, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#700">700</a>, +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#939">939</a>) +is that it was standardized as something very different (an unconditional +type mapper) than traditional usage indicated (a function object that should +derive from <tt>std::unary_function)</tt>, as the SGI definition does. This issue could +be solved, if <tt>std::identity</tt> is removed (one proposal of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#939">939</a>), but until this +has been decided, this issue should remain open. An alternative for +removing it, would be, to do the following: +</p> + +<ol type="a"> +<li> +<p> +Let <tt>identity</tt> stay as a <em>real</em> function object, which would +now properly +derive from <tt>unary_function</tt>: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T> struct identity : unary_function<T, T> { + const T& operator()(const T&) const; +}; +</pre></blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Invent (if needed) a generic type wrapper (corresponding to concept +<tt>IdentityOf</tt>), +e.g. <tt>identity_of</tt>, and move it's prototype description back to 20.3.3 [forward]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T> struct identity_of { + typedef T type; +}; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +and adapt the <tt>std::forward</tt> signature to use <tt>identity_of</tt> +instead of <tt>identity</tt>. +</p> +</li> +</ol> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Mark as <del>NAD Editorial</del><ins>Resolved</ins>, fixed by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#939">939</a>. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change definition of <tt>identity</tt> in 20.3.3 [forward], paragraph 2, to: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T> struct identity { + typedef T type; + + <ins>requires ReferentType<T></ins> + const T& operator()(const T& x) const; + }; +</pre></blockquote> +<p>...</p> +<blockquote><pre> <ins>requires ReferentType<T></ins> + const T& operator()(const T& x) const; +</pre></blockquote> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +The point here is to able to write <tt>T&</tt> given <tt>T</tt> and <tt>ReferentType</tt> is +precisely the concept that guarantees so, according to N2677 +(Foundational concepts). Because of this, it seems preferable than an +explicit check for <tt>cv void</tt> using <tt>SameType/remove_cv</tt> as it was suggested +in Sophia. In particular, Daniel remarked that there may be types other +than <tt>cv void</tt> which aren't referent types (<tt>int[]</tt>, perhaps?). +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="824"></a>824. rvalue ref issue with <tt>basic_string</tt> inserter</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.4.8.9 [string.io] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2008-04-10 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#string.io">issues</a> in [string.io].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In the current working paper, the <tt><string></tt> header synopsis at the end of +21.3 [string.classes] lists a single <tt>operator<<</tt> overload +for <tt>basic_string</tt>. +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class charT, class traits, class Allocator> + basic_ostream<charT, traits>& + operator<<(basic_ostream<charT, traits>&& os, + const basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>& str); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +The definition in 21.4.8.9 [string.io] lists two: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class charT, class traits, class Allocator> + basic_ostream<charT, traits>& + operator<<(basic_ostream<charT, traits>& os, + const basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>& str); + +template<class charT, class traits, class Allocator> + basic_ostream<charT, traits>& + operator<<(basic_ostream<charT, traits>&& os, + const basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>& str); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +I believe the synopsis in 21.3 [string.classes] is correct, and the first of the two +signatures in 21.4.8.9 [string.io] should be deleted. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Delete the first of the two signatures in 21.4.8.9 [string.io]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>template<class charT, class traits, class Allocator> + basic_ostream<charT, traits>& + operator<<(basic_ostream<charT, traits>& os, + const basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>& str);</del> + +template<class charT, class traits, class Allocator> + basic_ostream<charT, traits>& + operator<<(basic_ostream<charT, traits>&& os, + const basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>& str); +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="827"></a>827. <tt>constexpr shared_ptr::shared_ptr()?</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.10.2.1 [util.smartptr.shared.const] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Peter Dimov <b>Opened:</b> 2008-04-11 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-20</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#util.smartptr.shared.const">issues</a> in [util.smartptr.shared.const].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Would anyone object to making the default constructor of <tt>shared_ptr</tt> (and +<tt>weak_ptr</tt> and <tt>enable_shared_from_this</tt>) <tt>constexpr</tt>? This would enable +static initialization for <tt>shared_ptr</tt> variables, eliminating another +unfair advantage of raw pointers. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +It's not clear to us that you can initialize a pointer with the literal +0 in a constant expression. We need to ask CWG to make sure this works. +Bjarne has been appointed to do this. +</p> +<p> +Core got back to us and assured as that <tt>nullptr</tt> would do the job +nicely here. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-01 Alisdair adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I don't believe that <tt>constexpr</tt> will buy anything in this case. +<tt>shared_ptr/weak_ptr/enable_shared_from_this</tt> cannot be literal types as they +have a non-trivial copy constructor. As they do not produce literal types, +then the <tt>constexpr</tt> default constructor will <em>not</em> guarantee constant +initialization, and so not buy the hoped for optimization. +</p> +<p> +I recommend referring this back to Core to see if we can get static +initialization for types with <tt>constexpr</tt> constructors, even if they are not +literal types. Otherwise this should be closed as NAD. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-26 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +If Alisdair's 2009-05-01 comment is correct, wouldn't that also make +<tt>constexpr mutex()</tt> useless, because this class has a non-trivial +destructor? (<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#828">828</a>) +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-21 Alisdair adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +The feedback from core is that this and similar uses of <tt>constexpr</tt> +constructors to force static initialization should be supported. If +there are any problems with this in the working draught, we should file +core issues. +</p> + +<p> +Recommend we declare the default constructor <tt>constexpr</tt> as the issue suggests +(proposed wording added). +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<del>NAD Editorial</del><ins>Resolved</ins>. Solved by +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2994.html">N2994</a>. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 20.9.10.2 [util.smartptr.shared] and 20.9.10.2.1 [util.smartptr.shared.const]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>constexpr</ins> shared_ptr(); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Change 20.9.10.3 [util.smartptr.weak] and 20.9.10.3.1 [util.smartptr.weak.const]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>constexpr</ins> weak_ptr(); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Change 20.9.10.4 [util.smartptr.enab] (2 places): +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>constexpr</ins> enable_shared_from_this(); +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="829"></a>829. current_exception wording unclear about exception type</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.8.5 [propagation] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Beman Dawes <b>Opened:</b> 2008-04-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index-open.html#propagation">active issues</a> in [propagation].</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#propagation">issues</a> in [propagation].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>Consider this code:</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>exception_ptr xp;</pre> +<pre>try {do_something(); } + +catch (const runtime_error& ) {xp = current_exception();} + +... + +rethrow_exception(xp);</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Say <code>do_something()</code> throws an exception object of type <code> +range_error</code>. What is the type of the exception object thrown by <code> +rethrow_exception(xp)</code> above? It must have a type of <code>range_error</code>; +if it were of type <code>runtime_error</code> it still isn't possible to +propagate an exception and the exception_ptr/current_exception/rethrow_exception +machinery serves no useful purpose. +</p> + +<p> +Unfortunately, the current wording does not explicitly say that. Different +people read the current wording and come to different conclusions. While it may +be possible to deduce the correct type from the current wording, it would be +much clearer to come right out and explicitly say what the type of the referred +to exception is. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Peter adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I don't like the proposed resolution of 829. The normative text is +unambiguous that the <tt>exception_ptr</tt> refers to the <em>currently handled +exception</em>. This term has a standard meaning, see 15.3 [except.handle]/8; this is the +exception that <tt>throw;</tt> would rethrow, see 15.1 [except.throw]/7. +</p> +<p> +A better way to address this is to simply add the non-normative example +in question as a clarification. The term <i>currently handled exception</i> +should be italicized and cross-referenced. A [<i>Note:</i> the currently +handled exception is the exception that a throw expression without an +operand (15.1 [except.throw]/7) would rethrow. <i>--end note</i>] is also an option. +</p> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +After 18.8.5 [propagation] , paragraph 7, add the indicated text: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>exception_ptr current_exception();</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Returns:</i> <code>exception_ptr</code> object that refers +to the currently handled exception <ins>(15.3 [except.handle])</ins> or a copy of the currently handled +exception, or a null <code>exception_ptr</code> object if no exception is being handled. If +the function needs to allocate memory and the attempt fails, it returns an +<code>exception_ptr</code> object that refers to an instance of <code>bad_alloc</code>. +It is unspecified whether the return values of two successive calls to +<code>current_exception</code> refer to the same exception object. +[<i>Note:</i> that is, it +is unspecified whether <code>current_exception</code> +creates a new copy each time it is called. +<i>-- end note</i>] +</p> + +<p> +<i>Throws:</i> nothing. +</p> + +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="834"></a>834. Unique_ptr::pointer requirements underspecified</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.9.2 [unique.ptr.single] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2008-05-14 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-19</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#unique.ptr.single">issues</a> in [unique.ptr.single].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#673">673</a> (including recent updates by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#821">821</a>) proposes a useful +extension point for <tt>unique_ptr</tt> by granting support for an optional +<tt>deleter_type::pointer</tt> to act as pointer-like replacement for <tt>element_type*</tt> +(In the following: <tt>pointer</tt>). +</p> +<p> +Unfortunately no requirements are specified for the type <tt>pointer</tt> which has +impact on at least two key features of <tt>unique_ptr</tt>: +</p> + +<ol> +<li>Operational fail-safety.</li> +<li>(Well-)Definedness of expressions.</li> +</ol> + +<p> +<tt>Unique_ptr</tt> specification makes great efforts to require that essentially *all* +operations cannot throw and therefore adds proper wording to the affected +operations of the deleter as well. If user-provided <tt>pointer</tt>-emulating types +("smart pointers") will be allowed, either *all* throw-nothing clauses have to +be replaced by weaker "An exception is thrown only if <tt>pointer</tt>'s {op} throws +an exception"-clauses or it has to be said explicitly that all used +operations of +<tt>pointer</tt> are required *not* to throw. I understand the main focus of <tt>unique_ptr</tt> +to be as near as possible to the advantages of native pointers which cannot +fail and thus strongly favor the second choice. Also, the alternative position +would make it much harder to write safe and simple template code for +<tt>unique_ptr</tt>. Additionally, I assume that a general statement need to be given +that all of the expressions of <tt>pointer</tt> used to define semantics are required to +be well-formed and well-defined (also as back-end for <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#762">762</a>). +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Sophia Antipolis: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Howard: We maybe need a core concept <tt>PointerLike</tt>, but we don't need the +arithmetic (see <tt>shared_ptr</tt> vs. <tt>vector<T>::iterator</tt>. +</p> +<p> +Howard will go through and enumerate the individual requirements wrt. <tt>pointer</tt> for each member function. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10-15 Alisdair pulls from Ready: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I hate to pull an issue out of Ready status, but I don't think 834 is +fully baked yet. +</p> + +<p> +For reference the proposed resolution is to add the following words: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<tt>unique_ptr<T, D>::pointer</tt>'s operations shall be +well-formed, shall have well defined behavior, and shall not throw +exceptions. +</blockquote> + +<p> +This leaves me with a big question : which operations? +</p> + +<p> +Are all pointer operations required to be nothrow, including operations +that have nothing to do with interactions with <tt>unique_ptr</tt>? This was +much simpler with concepts where we could point to operations within a +certain concept, and so nail down the interactions. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10-15 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +I volunteer to prepare a more fine-grained solution, but I would like +to ask for feedback that helps me doing so. If this question is asked +early in the meeting I might be able to fix it within the week, but I +cannot promise that now. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Leave in open. Daniel to provide wording as already suggested. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-12-22 Daniel provided wording and rationale. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010 Pittsburgh: Moved to NAD Editorial. Rationale added below. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +The here proposed resolution has considerable overlap with the requirements that +are used in the allocator requirements. +</p> + +<p> +This might be a convincing argument to isolate the common subset into one +requirement. The reason I did not do that is basically because we might find out +that they are either over-constraining or under-constraining at this late point +of specification. Note also that as a result of the idea of a general +requirement set I added the requirement +</p> + +<blockquote> +A default-initialized object may have a singular value +</blockquote> + +<p> +even though this does not play a relevant role for <tt>unique_ptr</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +One further characteristics of the resolution is that availability of relational +operators of <tt>unique_ptr<T, D>::pointer</tt> is not part of the basic +requirements, which is in sync with the allocator requirements on pointer-like +(this means that <tt>unique_ptr</tt> can hold a <tt>void_pointer</tt> or +<tt>const_void_pointer</tt>). +</p> + +<p> +Solved by +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3073.html">N3073</a>. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<ol> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.9.9.2 [unique.ptr.single]/1 as indicated: <i>[The intent is to +replace the coupling between <tt>T*</tt> and the deleter's <tt>operator()</tt> +by a coupling between <tt>unique_ptr<T, D>::pointer</tt> and this +<tt>operator()</tt>]</i> +</p> + +<blockquote> +1 - The default type for the template parameter <tt>D</tt> is +<tt>default_delete</tt>. A client-supplied template argument <tt>D</tt> shall be +a function pointer or functor for which, given a value <tt>d</tt> of type +<tt>D</tt> and a <del>pointer</del> <ins>value</ins> <tt>ptr</tt> of type +<tt><del>T*</del> <ins>unique_ptr<T, D>::pointer</ins></tt>, the +expression <tt>d(ptr)</tt> is valid and has the effect of deallocating the +pointer as appropriate for that deleter. <tt>D</tt> may also be an +lvalue-reference to a deleter. +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.9.9.2 [unique.ptr.single]/3 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +3 - If the type <tt>remove_reference<D>::type::pointer</tt> exists, then +<tt>unique_ptr<T, D>::pointer</tt> shall be a synonym for +<tt>remove_reference<D>::type::pointer</tt>. Otherwise +<tt>unique_ptr<T, D>::pointer</tt> shall be a synonym for <tt>T*</tt>. The +type <tt>unique_ptr<T, D>::pointer</tt> shall <del>be</del> <ins>satisfy +the requirements of <tt>EqualityComparable</tt>, +<tt>DefaultConstructible</tt>,</ins> <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> <del>(Table 34) +and</del><ins>,</ins> <tt>CopyAssignable</tt> <del>(Table 36)</del><ins>, +<tt>Swappable</tt>, and <tt>Destructible</tt> (20.2.1 [utility.arg.requirements]). A default-initialized object may have a +singular value. A value-initialized object produces the null value of the type. +The null value shall be equivalent only to itself. An object of this type can be +copy-initialized with a value of type <tt>nullptr_t</tt>, compared for equality +with a value of type <tt>nullptr_t</tt>, and assigned a value of type +<tt>nullptr_t</tt>. The effect shall be as if a value-initialized object had +been used in place of the null pointer constant. An object <tt>p</tt> of this +type can be contextually converted to <tt>bool</tt>. The effect shall be as if +<tt>p != nullptr</tt> had been evaluated in place of <tt>p</tt>. No operation on +this type which is part of the above mentioned requirements shall exit via an +exception. +</ins> +</p> +<p><ins> +[<i>Note:</i> Given an allocator type <tt>X</tt> (20.2.5 [allocator.requirements]), the types <tt>X::pointer</tt>, +<tt>X::const_pointer</tt>, <tt>X::void_pointer</tt>, and +<tt>X::const_void_pointer</tt> may be used as <tt>unique_ptr<T, +D>::pointer</tt> — <i>end note</i>] +</ins></p> + +<p><ins> +In addition to being available via inclusion of the <tt><utility></tt> +header, the <tt>swap</tt> function template in 20.3.2 [utility.swap] is +also available within the definition of <tt>unique_ptr</tt>'s <tt>swap</tt> +function. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.9.9.2.1 [unique.ptr.single.ctor]/2+3 as indicated: <i>[The first +change ensures that we explicitly say, how the stored pointer is initialized. +This is important for a <tt>constexpr</tt> function, because this may make a +difference for user-defined pointer-like types]</i> +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>constexpr unique_ptr(); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p>...</p> +<p> +2 - <i>Effects:</i> Constructs a <tt>unique_ptr</tt> which owns nothing<ins>, +value-initializing the stored pointer</ins>. +</p> + +<p> +3 - <i>Postconditions:</i> <tt>get() == <del>0</del> <ins>nullptr</ins></tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.9.9.2.1 [unique.ptr.single.ctor]/6+7 as indicated: <i>[This is a +step-by-fix to ensure consistency to the changes of +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2976.html">N2976</a>]</i> +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>unique_ptr(pointer p); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p>...</p> +<p> +6 - <i>Effects:</i> Constructs a <tt>unique_ptr</tt> which owns <tt>p</tt><ins>, +initializing the stored pointer with <tt>p</tt></ins>. +</p> + +<p> +7 - <i>Postconditions:</i> <tt>get() == p</tt>. <tt>get_deleter()</tt> returns a +reference to a <del>default constructed</del> <ins>value-initialized</ins> +deleter <tt>D</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Insert a new effects clause in 20.9.9.2.1 [unique.ptr.single.ctor] just +before p. 14: <i>[The intent is to fix the current lack of specification in +which way the stored pointer is initialized]</i> +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>unique_ptr(pointer p, <i><del>implementation-defined</del> <ins>see below</ins></i> d1); +unique_ptr(pointer p, <i><del>implementation-defined</del> <ins>see below</ins></i> d2); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p>...</p> +<p><ins> +<i>Effects:</i> Constructs a <tt>unique_ptr</tt> which owns <tt>p</tt>, +initializing the stored pointer with <tt>p</tt> and the initializing the deleter +as described above. +</ins></p> + +<p> +14 - <i>Postconditions:</i> <tt>get() == p</tt>. <tt>get_deleter()</tt> returns a +reference to the internally stored deleter. If <tt>D</tt> is a reference type +then <tt>get_deleter()</tt> returns a reference to the lvalue <tt>d</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.9.9.2.1 [unique.ptr.single.ctor]/18+22 as indicated: <i>[The intent +is to clarify that the moved-from source must contain a null pointer, there is +no other choice left]</i> +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>unique_ptr(unique_ptr&& u); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +[..] +</p> + +<p> +18 - <i>Postconditions:</i> <tt>get() == value u.get()</tt> had before the +construction<ins> and <tt>u.get() == nullptr</tt></ins>. <tt>get_deleter()</tt> +returns a reference to the internally stored deleter which was constructed from +<tt>u.get_deleter()</tt>. If <tt>D</tt> is a reference type then +<tt>get_deleter()</tt> and <tt>u.get_deleter()</tt> both reference the same +lvalue deleter. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class U, class E> unique_ptr(unique_ptr<U, E>&& u); +</pre> + +<blockquote> + +<p> +[..] +</p> + +<p> +22 - <i>Postconditions:</i> <tt>get() == value u.get()</tt> had before the +construction, modulo any required offset adjustments resulting from the cast +from <tt>unique_ptr<U, E>::pointer</tt> to <tt>pointer</tt><ins> and +<tt>u.get() == nullptr</tt></ins>. <tt>get_deleter()</tt> returns a reference to +the internally stored deleter which was constructed from +<tt>u.get_deleter()</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.9.9.2.1 [unique.ptr.single.ctor]/20 as indicated: <i>[With the +possibility of user-defined pointer-like types the implication does only exist, +if those are built-in pointers. Note that this change should also be applied +with the acceptance of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#950">950</a>]</i> +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class U, class E> unique_ptr(unique_ptr<U, E>&& u); +</pre> +<blockquote> +20 - <i>Requires:</i> If <tt>D</tt> is not a reference type, construction of the +deleter <tt>D</tt> from an rvalue of type <tt>E</tt> shall be well formed and +shall not throw an exception. If <tt>D</tt> is a reference type, then <tt>E</tt> +shall be the same type as <tt>D</tt> (diagnostic required). <tt>unique_ptr<U, +E>::pointer</tt> shall be implicitly convertible to <tt>pointer</tt>. +<del>[<i>Note:</i> These requirements imply that <tt>T</tt> and <tt>U</tt> are +complete types. — <i>end note</i>]</del> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.9.9.2.2 [unique.ptr.single.dtor]/2 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>~unique_ptr(); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p>...</p> +<p> +2 - <i>Effects:</i> If <tt>get() == <del>0</del> <ins>nullptr</ins></tt> there +are no effects. Otherwise <tt>get_deleter()(get())</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.9.9.2.3 [unique.ptr.single.asgn]/3+8 as indicated: <i>[The intent is to +clarify that the moved-from source must contain a null pointer, there +is no other choice left]</i> +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>unique_ptr& operator=(unique_ptr&& u); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p>[..]</p> +<p> +3 - <i>Postconditions:</i> This <tt>unique_ptr</tt> now owns the pointer which <tt>u</tt> +owned, and <tt>u</tt> no longer owns it<ins>, <tt>u.get() == nullptr</tt></ins>. +[<i>Note:</i> If <tt>D</tt> is a reference type, then the referenced lvalue deleters +are move assigned. — <i>end note</i>] +</p> +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class U, class E> unique_ptr& operator=(unique_ptr<U, E>&& u); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p>[..]</p> + +<p> +8 - <i>Postconditions:</i> This <tt>unique_ptr</tt> now owns the pointer which +<tt>u</tt> owned, and <tt>u</tt> no longer owns it<ins>, <tt>u.get() == +nullptr</tt></ins>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.9.9.2.3 [unique.ptr.single.asgn]/6 as indicated: <i>[With the +possibility of user-defined pointer-like types the implication does only exist, +if those are built-in pointers. Note that this change should also be applied +with the acceptance of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#950">950</a>]</i> +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class U, class E> unique_ptr& operator=(unique_ptr<U, E>&& u); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p>[..]</p> +<p> +6 - <i>Requires:</i> Assignment of the deleter <tt>D</tt> from an rvalue +<tt>D</tt> shall not throw an exception. <tt>unique_ptr<U, +E>::pointer</tt> shall be implicitly convertible to <tt>pointer</tt>. +<del>[<i>Note:</i> These requirements imply that <tt>T</tt> and <tt>U</tt> are +complete types. — <i>end note</i>]</del> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.9.9.2.3 [unique.ptr.single.asgn] before p. 11 and p. 12 as +indicated: <i>[The first change is a simple typo fix]</i> +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>unique_ptr& operator=(nullptr_t<del>}</del><ins>)</ins>; +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +11 - <i>Effects:</i> <tt>reset()</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +12 - <i>Postcondition:</i> <tt>get() == <del>0</del> <ins>nullptr</ins></tt> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.9.9.2.4 [unique.ptr.single.observers]/1+4+12 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>typename add_lvalue_reference<T>::type operator*() const; +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +1 - <i>Requires:</i> <tt>get() != <del>0</del> <ins>nullptr</ins></tt>. <ins>The +variable definition <tt>add_lvalue_reference<T>::type t = *get()</tt> +shall be well formed, shall have well-defined behavior, and shall not exit via +an exception.</ins> +</p> +<p> +[..] +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<pre>pointer operator->() const; +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +4 - <i>Requires:</i> <tt>get() != <del>0</del> <ins>nullptr</ins></tt>. +</p> + +<p> +[..] +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<pre>explicit operator bool() const; +</pre> + +<blockquote> +12 - <i>Returns:</i> <tt>get() != <del>0</del><ins>nullptr</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.9.9.2.5 [unique.ptr.single.modifiers]/1 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>pointer release(); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +1 - <i>Postcondition:</i> <tt>get() == <del>0</del> <ins>nullptr</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.9.9.2.5 [unique.ptr.single.modifiers]/9 as indicated: <i>[The +intent is to ensure that potentially user-defined swaps are used. A side-step +fix and harmonization with the specification of the the deleter is realized. +Please note the additional requirement in bullet 2 of this proposed resolution +regarding the availability of the generic <tt>swap</tt> templates within the +member <tt>swap</tt> function.]</i> +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void swap(unique_ptr& u); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +8 - <i>Requires:</i> The deleter <tt>D</tt> shall be <tt>Swappable</tt> and +shall not throw an exception under <tt>swap</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +9 - <i>Effects:</i> The stored pointers of <tt><ins>*</ins>this</tt> and +<tt>u</tt> are exchanged <ins>by an unqualified call to non-member +<tt>swap</tt></ins>. The stored deleters are <del><tt>swap</tt>'d +(unqualified)</del> <ins>exchanged by an unqualified call to non-member +<tt>swap</tt></ins>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.9.9.3.2 [unique.ptr.runtime.observers]/1 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>T& operator[](size_t i) const; +</pre> +<blockquote> +<i>Requires:</i> <tt>i <</tt> the size of the array to which the stored +pointer points. <ins>The variable definition <tt>T& t = get()[i]</tt> shall +be well formed, shall have well-defined behavior, and shall not exit via an +exception.</ins> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.9.9.3.3 [unique.ptr.runtime.modifiers]/1 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void reset(pointer p = pointer()); +void reset(nullptr_t p); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +1 - <i>Effects:</i> If <tt>get() == <del>0</del> <ins>nullptr</ins></tt> there +are no effects. Otherwise <tt>get_deleter()(get())</tt>. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.9.9.4 [unique.ptr.special] as indicated: <i>[We don't add the +relational operators to the basic requirement set, therefore we need special +handling here]</i> +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template <class T1, class D1, class T2, class D2> + bool operator==(const unique_ptr<T1, D1>& x, const unique_ptr<T2, D2>& y); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins><i>Requires:</i> The variable definition <tt>bool b = x.get() == +y.get();</tt> shall be well formed, shall have well-defined behavior, and shall +not exit via an exception.</ins> +</p> + +<p> +2 - <i>Returns:</i> <tt>x.get() == y.get()</tt>. +</p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Throws:</i> nothing. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class T1, class D1, class T2, class D2> + bool operator!=(const unique_ptr<T1, D1>& x, const unique_ptr<T2, D2>& y); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins>Requires: The variable definition <tt>bool b = x.get() != y.get();</tt> +shall be well formed, shall have well-defined behavior, and shall not exit via +an exception.</ins> +</p> + +<p> +3 - <i>Returns:</i> <tt>x.get() != y.get()</tt>. +</p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Throws:</i> nothing. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class T1, class D1, class T2, class D2> + bool operator<(const unique_ptr<T1, D1>& x, const unique_ptr<T2, D2>& y); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins>Requires: The variable definition <tt>bool b = x.get() < y.get()</tt>; +shall be well formed, shall have well-defined behavior, and shall not exit via +an exception.</ins> +</p> + +<p> +4 - <i>Returns:</i> <tt>x.get() < y.get()</tt>. +</p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Throws:</i> nothing. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class T1, class D1, class T2, class D2> + bool operator<=(const unique_ptr<T1, D1>& x, const unique_ptr<T2, D2>& y); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins>Requires: The variable definition <tt>bool b = x.get() <= y.get();</tt> +shall be well formed, shall have well-defined behavior, and shall not exit via +an exception.</ins> +</p> + +<p> +5 - <i>Returns:</i> <tt>x.get() <= y.get()</tt>. +</p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Throws:</i> nothing. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class T1, class D1, class T2, class D2> + bool operator>(const unique_ptr<T1, D1>& x, const unique_ptr<T2, D2>& y); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins>Requires: The variable definition <tt>bool b = x.get() > y.get();</tt> +shall be well formed, shall have well-defined behavior, and shall not exit via +an exception.</ins> +</p> + +<p> +6 - <i>Returns:</i> <tt>x.get() > y.get()</tt>. +</p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Throws:</i> nothing. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class T1, class D1, class T2, class D2> + bool operator>=(const unique_ptr<T1, D1>& x, const unique_ptr<T2, D2>& y); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins>Requires: The variable definition <tt>bool b = x.get() >= y.get();</tt> +shall be well formed, shall have well-defined behavior, and shall not exit via +an exception.</ins> +</p> + +<p> +7 - <i>Returns:</i> <tt>x.get() >= y.get()</tt>. +</p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Throws:</i> nothing. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> +</li> + +</ol> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="835"></a>835. tying two streams together (correction to DR 581)</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.5.4.2 [basic.ios.members] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2008-05-17 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#basic.ios.members">issues</a> in [basic.ios.members].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + <p> + +The fix for +issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#581">581</a>, +now integrated into the working paper, overlooks a couple of minor +problems. + + </p> + <p> + +First, being an unformatted function once again, <code>flush()</code> +is required to create a sentry object whose constructor must, among +other things, flush the tied stream. When two streams are tied +together, either directly or through another intermediate stream +object, flushing one will also cause a call to <code>flush()</code> on +the other tied stream(s) and vice versa, ad infinitum. The program +below demonstrates the problem. + + </p> + <p> + +Second, as Bo Persson notes in his +comp.lang.c++.moderated <a href="http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.c++.moderated/tree/browse_frm/thread/f2187794e9cc036d/305df31dc583054a">post</a>, +for streams with the <code>unitbuf</code> flag set such +as <code>std::stderr</code>, the destructor of the sentry object will +again call <code>flush()</code>. This seems to create an infinite +recursion for <code>std::cerr << std::flush;</code> + + </p> + <blockquote> + <pre>#include <iostream> + +int main () +{ + std::cout.tie (&std::cerr); + std::cerr.tie (&std::cout); + std::cout << "cout\n"; + std::cerr << "cerr\n"; +} +</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +We agree with the proposed resolution. +Move to Review. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-26 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I think that the most recently suggested change in +27.7.2.4 [ostream::sentry] need some further word-smithing. As +written, it would make the behavior undefined, if under +conditions when <tt>pubsync()</tt> should be called, but when +in this scenario <tt>os.rdbuf()</tt> returns 0. +</p> +<p> +This case is explicitly handled in <tt>flush()</tt> and needs to be +taken care of. My suggested fix is: +</p> + +<blockquote> +If <tt>((os.flags() & ios_base::unitbuf) && !uncaught_exception()</tt> +<ins><tt>&& os.rdbuf() != 0</tt></ins>) is true, calls <del><tt>os.flush()</tt></del> +<ins><tt>os.rdbuf()->pubsync()</tt></ins>. +</blockquote> + +<p> +Two secondary questions are: +</p> + +<ol> +<li> +Should <tt>pubsync()</tt> be invoked in any case or shouldn't a +base requirement for this trial be that <tt>os.good() == true</tt> +as required in the original <tt>flush()</tt> case? +</li> +<li> +Since <tt>uncaught_exception()</tt> is explicitly tested, shouldn't +a return value of -1 of <tt>pubsync()</tt> produce <tt>setstate(badbit)</tt> +(which may throw <tt>ios_base::failure</tt>)? +</li> +</ol> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Daniel volunteered to modify the proposed resolution to address his two questions. +</p> +<p> +Move back to Open. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-26 Daniel provided wording. Moved to Review. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-10-13 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +This proposed wording is written to match the outcome +of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#397">397</a>. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Open. Martin to propose updated wording that will also resolve +issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#397">397</a> consistently. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-15 Martin provided wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010 Pittsburgh: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Ready for Pittsburgh. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<ol> +<li> +<p> +Just before 27.5.4.2 [basic.ios.members]/2 insert a new paragraph: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<ins><i>Requires:</i> If <tt>(tiestr != 0)</tt> is <tt>true</tt>, +<tt>tiestr</tt> must not be reachable by traversing the linked list of tied +stream objects starting from <tt>tiestr->tie()</tt>.</ins> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 27.7.2.4 [ostream::sentry]/4 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +If <tt>((os.flags() & ios_base::unitbuf) && !uncaught_exception() +<ins>&& os.good()</ins>)</tt> is <tt>true</tt>, calls +<del><tt>os.flush()</tt></del> <ins><tt>os.rdbuf()->pubsync()</tt>. If that +function returns -1 sets <tt>badbit</tt> in <tt>os.rdstate()</tt> without +propagating an exception</ins>. +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Add after 27.7.2.4 [ostream::sentry] p17, the following paragraph: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<ins><i>Throws:</i> Nothing.</ins> +</blockquote> + +</li> + +</ol> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="836"></a>836. + effects of <code>money_base::space</code> and + <code>money_base::none</code> on <code>money_get</code> + </h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.6.1.2 [locale.money.get.virtuals] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2008-05-17 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#locale.money.get.virtuals">issues</a> in [locale.money.get.virtuals].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#670">670</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + + <p> + +In paragraph 2, 22.4.6.1.2 [locale.money.get.virtuals] specifies the following: + + </p> + <blockquote> + +Where <code>space</code> or <code>none</code> appears in the format +pattern, except at the end, optional white space (as recognized +by <code>ct.is</code>) is consumed after any required space. + + </blockquote> + <p> + +This requirement can be (and has been) interpreted two mutually +exclusive ways by different readers. One possible interpretation +is that: + + </p> + <blockquote> + <ol> + <li> + +where <code>money_base::space</code> appears in the format, at least +one space is required, and + + </li> + <li> + +where <code>money_base::none</code> appears in the format, space is +allowed but not required. + + </li> + </ol> + </blockquote> + <p> + +The other is that: + + </p> + <blockquote> + +where either <code>money_base::space</code> or <code>money_base::none</code> appears in the format, white space is optional. + + </blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Martin will revise the proposed resolution. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +There is a noun missing from the proposed resolution. It's not clear +that the last sentence would be helpful, even if the word were not +missing: +</p> +<blockquote> +In either case, any required MISSINGWORD followed by all optional whitespace (as recognized by ct.is()) is consumed. +</blockquote> +<p> +Strike this sentence and move to Review. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Howard: done. +]</i></p> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + + <p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + <p> + +I propose to change the text to make it clear that the first +interpretation is intended, that is, to make following change to +22.4.6.1.2 [locale.money.get.virtuals], p2: + + </p> + + <blockquote> + +When <code><ins>money_base::</ins>space</code> +or <code><ins>money_base::</ins>none</code> appears <ins>as the last +element </ins>in the format pattern, <del>except at the end, optional +white space (as recognized by <code>ct.is</code>) is consumed after +any required space.</del> <ins>no white space is consumed. Otherwise, +where <code>money_base::space</code> appears in any of the initial +elements of the format pattern, at least one white space character is +required. Where <code>money_base::none</code> appears in any of the +initial elements of the format pattern, white space is allowed but not +required.</ins> +If <code>(str.flags() & str.showbase)</code> is <code>false</code>, ... + + </blockquote> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="838"></a>838. + can an <i>end-of-stream</i> iterator become a <i>non-end-of-stream</i> one? + </h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 24.6.1 [istream.iterator] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2008-05-17 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#istream.iterator">issues</a> in [istream.iterator].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + <p> + +From message c++std-lib-20003... + + </p> + <p> + +The description of <code>istream_iterator</code> in +24.6.1 [istream.iterator], p1 specifies that objects of the +class become the <i>end-of-stream</i> (EOS) iterators under the +following condition (see also issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#788">788</a> another problem +with this paragraph): + + </p> + <blockquote> + +If the end of stream is reached (<code>operator void*()</code> on the +stream returns <code>false</code>), the iterator becomes equal to +the <i>end-of-stream</i> iterator value. + + </blockquote> + <p> + +One possible implementation approach that has been used in practice is +for the iterator to set its <code>in_stream</code> pointer to 0 when +it reaches the end of the stream, just like the default ctor does on +initialization. The problem with this approach is that +the <i>Effects</i> clause for <code>operator++()</code> says the +iterator unconditionally extracts the next value from the stream by +evaluating <code>*in_stream >> value</code>, without checking +for <code>(in_stream == 0)</code>. + + </p> + <p> + +Conformance to the requirement outlined in the <i>Effects</i> clause +can easily be verified in programs by setting <code>eofbit</code> +or <code>failbit</code> in <code>exceptions()</code> of the associated +stream and attempting to iterate past the end of the stream: each +past-the-end access should trigger an exception. This suggests that +some other, more elaborate technique might be intended. + + </p> + <p> + +Another approach, one that allows <code>operator++()</code> to attempt +to extract the value even for EOS iterators (just as long +as <code>in_stream</code> is non-0) is for the iterator to maintain a +flag indicating whether it has reached the end of the stream. This +technique would satisfy the presumed requirement implied by +the <i>Effects</i> clause mentioned above, but it isn't supported by +the exposition-only members of the class (no such flag is shown). This +approach is also found in existing practice. + + </p> + <p> + +The inconsistency between existing implementations raises the question +of whether the intent of the specification is that a non-EOS iterator +that has reached the EOS become a non-EOS one again after the +stream's <code>eofbit</code> flag has been cleared? That is, are the +assertions in the program below expected to pass? + + </p> + <blockquote> + <pre> sstream strm ("1 "); + istream_iterator eos; + istream_iterator it (strm); + int i; + i = *it++ + assert (it == eos); + strm.clear (); + strm << "2 3 "; + assert (it != eos); + i = *++it; + assert (3 == i); + </pre> + </blockquote> + <p> + +Or is it intended that once an iterator becomes EOS it stays EOS until +the end of its lifetime? + + </p> + + <p><i>[ +San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +We like the direction of the proposed resolution. We're not sure about +the wording, and we need more time to reflect on it, +</p> +<p> +Move to Open. Detlef to rewrite the proposed resolution in such a way +that no reference is made to exposition only members of +<tt>istream_iterator</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + + <p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + <p> + +The discussion of this issue on the reflector suggests that the intent +of the standard is for an <code>istreambuf_iterator</code> that has +reached the EOS to remain in the EOS state until the end of its +lifetime. Implementations that permit EOS iterators to return to a +non-EOS state may only do so as an extension, and only as a result of +calling <code>istream_iterator</code> member functions on EOS +iterators whose behavior is in this case undefined. + + </p> + <p> + +To this end we propose to change 24.6.1 [istream.iterator], p1, +as follows: + + </p> + <blockquote> + +The result of operator-> on an end<ins>-</ins>of<ins>-</ins>stream +is not defined. For any other iterator value a <code>const T*</code> +is returned.<ins> Invoking <code>operator++()</code> on +an <i>end-of-stream</i> iterator is undefined.</ins> It is impossible +to store things into istream iterators... + + </blockquote> + <p> + +Add pre/postconditions to the member function descriptions of <code>istream_iterator</code> like so: + + </p> + <blockquote> + +<pre>istream_iterator();</pre> + +<i>Effects</i>: Constructs the <i>end-of-stream</i> iterator.<br> +<ins><i>Postcondition</i>: <code>in_stream == 0</code>.</ins> + +<pre>istream_iterator(istream_type &s);</pre> + +<i>Effects</i>: Initializes <code>in_stream</code> with &s. value +may be initialized during construction or the first time it is +referenced.<br> +<ins><i>Postcondition</i>: <code>in_stream == &s</code>.</ins> + +<pre>istream_iterator(const istream_iterator &x);</pre> + +<i>Effects</i>: Constructs a copy of <code>x</code>.<br> +<ins><i>Postcondition</i>: <code>in_stream == x.in_stream</code>.</ins> + +<pre>istream_iterator& operator++();</pre> + +<ins><i>Requires</i>: <code>in_stream != 0</code>.</ins><br> +<i>Effects</i>: <code>*in_stream >> value</code>. + +<pre>istream_iterator& operator++(int);</pre> + +<ins><i>Requires</i>: <code>in_stream != 0</code>.</ins><br> +<i>Effects</i>: + <blockquote><pre>istream_iterator tmp (*this); +*in_stream >> value; +return tmp; + </pre> + </blockquote> + </blockquote> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="842"></a>842. ConstructibleAsElement and bit containers</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2 [container.requirements], 23.4.2 [vector.bool], 20.5 [template.bitset] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2008-06-03 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#container.requirements">issues</a> in [container.requirements].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +23.2 [container.requirements]/p3 says: +</p> + +<blockquote> +Objects stored in these components shall be constructed using +<tt>construct_element</tt> (20.6.9). For each operation that inserts an +element of type <tt>T</tt> into a container (<tt>insert</tt>, +<tt>push_back</tt>, <tt>push_front</tt>, <tt>emplace</tt>, etc.) with +arguments <tt>args... T</tt> shall be <tt>ConstructibleAsElement</tt>, +as described in table 88. [<i>Note:</i> If the component is instantiated +with a scoped allocator of type <tt>A</tt> (i.e., an allocator for which +<tt>is_scoped_allocator<A>::value</tt> is <tt>true</tt>), then +<tt>construct_element</tt> may pass an inner allocator argument to +<tt>T</tt>'s constructor. <i>-- end note</i>] +</blockquote> + +<p> +However <tt>vector<bool, A></tt> (23.4.2 [vector.bool]) and <tt>bitset<N></tt> +(20.5 [template.bitset]) store bits, not <tt>bool</tt>s, and <tt>bitset<N></tt> +does not even have an allocator. But these containers are governed by this clause. Clearly this +is not implementable. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 23.2 [container.requirements]/p3: +</p> + +<blockquote> +Objects stored in these components shall be constructed using +<tt>construct_element</tt> (20.6.9)<ins>, unless otherwise specified</ins>. +For each operation that inserts an +element of type <tt>T</tt> into a container (<tt>insert</tt>, +<tt>push_back</tt>, <tt>push_front</tt>, <tt>emplace</tt>, etc.) with +arguments <tt>args... T</tt> shall be <tt>ConstructibleAsElement</tt>, +as described in table 88. [<i>Note:</i> If the component is instantiated +with a scoped allocator of type <tt>A</tt> (i.e., an allocator for which +<tt>is_scoped_allocator<A>::value</tt> is <tt>true</tt>), then +<tt>construct_element</tt> may pass an inner allocator argument to +<tt>T</tt>'s constructor. <i>-- end note</i>] +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 23.4.2 [vector.bool]/p2: +</p> + +<blockquote> +Unless described below, all operations have the same requirements and semantics as the primary <tt>vector</tt> template, +except that operations dealing with the <tt>bool</tt> value type map to bit values in the container storage<ins>, +and <tt>construct_element</tt> (23.2 [container.requirements]) is not used to construct these values</ins>. +</blockquote> + +<p> +Move 20.5 [template.bitset] to clause 20. +</p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="843"></a>843. Reference Closure</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> X [func.referenceclosure.cons] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Lawrence Crowl <b>Opened:</b> 2008-06-02 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The <tt>std::reference_closure</tt> type has a deleted copy assignment operator +under the theory that references cannot be assigned, and hence the +assignment of its reference member must necessarily be ill-formed. +</p> +<p> +However, other types, notably <tt>std::reference_wrapper</tt> and <tt>std::function</tt> +provide for the "copying of references", and thus the current definition +of <tt>std::reference_closure</tt> seems unnecessarily restrictive. In particular, +it should be possible to write generic functions using both <tt>std::function</tt> +and <tt>std::reference_closure</tt>, but this generality is much harder when +one such type does not support assignment. +</p> +<p> +The definition of <tt>reference_closure</tt> does not necessarily imply direct +implementation via reference types. Indeed, the <tt>reference_closure</tt> is +best implemented via a frame pointer, for which there is no standard +type. +</p> +<p> +The semantics of assignment are effectively obtained by use of the +default destructor and default copy assignment operator via +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>x.~reference_closure(); new (x) reference_closure(y); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +So the copy assignment operator generates no significant real burden +to the implementation. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In [func.referenceclosure] Class template reference_closure, +replace the <tt>=delete</tt> in the copy assignment operator in the synopsis +with <tt>=default</tt>. +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class R , class... ArgTypes > + class reference_closure<R (ArgTypes...)> { + public: + ... + reference_closure& operator=(const reference_closure&) = <del>delete</del> <ins>default</ins>; + ... +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +In X [func.referenceclosure.cons] Construct, copy, destroy, +add the member function description +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>reference_closure& operator=(const reference_closure& f) +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Postcondition:</i> <tt>*this</tt> is a copy of <tt>f</tt>. +</p> +<p> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt>*this</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="844"></a>844. <tt>complex pow</tt> return type is ambiguous</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.4.9 [cmplx.over] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2008-06-03 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#cmplx.over">issues</a> in [cmplx.over].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The current working draft is in an inconsistent state. +</p> + +<p> +26.4.8 [complex.transcendentals] says that: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<tt>pow(complex<float>(), int())</tt> returns a <tt>complex<float></tt>. +</blockquote> + +<p> +26.4.9 [cmplx.over] says that: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<tt>pow(complex<float>(), int())</tt> returns a <tt>complex<double></tt>. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Sophia Antipolis: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Since <tt>int</tt> promotes to <tt>double</tt>, and C99 doesn't have an <tt>int</tt>-based +overload for <tt>pow</tt>, the C99 result is <tt>complex<double></tt>, see also C99 +7.22, see also library issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#550">550</a>. +</p> +<p> +Special note: ask P.J. Plauger. +</p> +<blockquote> +Looks fine. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Strike this <tt>pow</tt> overload in 26.4.1 [complex.syn] and in 26.4.8 [complex.transcendentals]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>template<class T> complex<T> pow(const complex<T>& x, int y);</del> +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="845"></a>845. atomics cannot support aggregate initialization</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> X [atomics.types] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2008-06-03 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#atomics.types">issues</a> in [atomics.types].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The atomic classes (and class templates) are required to support aggregate +initialization (29.5.1 [atomics.types.integral]p2 / 29.5.2 [atomics.types.address]p1) +yet also have user declared constructors, so cannot be aggregates. +</p> +<p> +This problem might be solved with the introduction of the proposed +initialization syntax at Antipolis, but the wording above should be altered. +Either strike the sentence as redundant with new syntax, or refer to 'brace +initialization'. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Jens adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Note that +</p> +<blockquote><pre>atomic_itype a1 = { 5 }; +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +would be aggregate-initialization syntax (now coming under the disguise +of brace initialization), but would be ill-formed, because the corresponding +constructor for atomic_itype is explicit. This works, though: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>atomic_itype a2 { 6 }; +</pre></blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +The preferred approach to resolving this is to remove the explicit +specifiers from the atomic integral type constructors. +</p> +<p> +Lawrence will provide wording. +</p> +<p> +This issue is addressed in +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2783.html">N2783</a>. +</p> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +within the synopsis in 29.5.1 [atomics.types.integral] edit as follows. +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><code> +.... +typedef struct atomic_bool { +.... + constexpr <del>explicit</del> atomic_bool(bool); +.... +typedef struct atomic_<var>itype</var> { +.... + constexpr <del>explicit</del> atomic_<var>itype</var>(<var>integral</var>); +.... +</code></pre></blockquote> + +<p> +edit 29.5.1 [atomics.types.integral] paragraph 2 as follows. +</p> + +<blockquote> +The atomic integral types shall have standard layout. +They shall each have a trivial default constructor, +a constexpr <del>explicit</del> value constructor, +a deleted copy constructor, +a deleted copy assignment operator, +and a trivial destructor. +They shall each support aggregate initialization syntax. +</blockquote> + +<p> +within the synopsis of 29.5.2 [atomics.types.address] edit as follows. +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><code> +.... +typedef struct atomic_address { +.... + constexpr <del>explicit</del> atomic_address(void*); +.... +</code></pre></blockquote> + +<p> +edit 29.5.2 [atomics.types.address] paragraph 1 as follows. +</p> + +<blockquote> +The type <code>atomic_address</code> shall have standard layout. +It shall have a trivial default constructor, +a constexpr <del>explicit</del> value constructor, +a deleted copy constructor, +a deleted copy assignment operator, +and a trivial destructor. +It shall support aggregate initialization syntax. +</blockquote> + +<p> +within the synopsis of 29.5 [atomics.types.generic] edit as follows. +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><code> +.... +template <class T> struct atomic { +.... + constexpr <del>explicit</del> atomic(T); +.... +template <> struct atomic<<var>integral</var>> : atomic_<var>itype</var> { +.... + constexpr <del>explicit</del> atomic(<var>integral</var>); +.... +template <> struct atomic<T*> : atomic_address { +.... + constexpr <del>explicit</del> atomic(T*); +.... +</code></pre></blockquote> + +<p> +edit 29.5 [atomics.types.generic] paragraph 2 as follows. +</p> + +<blockquote> +Specializations of the <code>atomic</code> template +shall have a deleted copy constructor, +a deleted copy assignment operator, +and a constexpr <del>explicit</del> value constructor. +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="846"></a>846. No definition for constructor</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> X [atomics.types] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2008-06-03 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#atomics.types">issues</a> in [atomics.types].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The atomic classes and class templates (29.5.1 [atomics.types.integral] / +29.5.2 [atomics.types.address]) have a constexpr +constructor taking a value of the appropriate type for that atomic. +However, neither clause provides semantics or a definition for this +constructor. I'm not sure if the initialization is implied by use of +constexpr keyword (which restricts the form of a constructor) but even if +that is the case, I think it is worth spelling out explicitly as the +inference would be far too subtle in that case. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Lawrence will provide wording. +</p> +<p> +This issue is addressed in +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2783.html">N2783</a>. +</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +before the description of ...<code>is_lock_free</code>, +that is before 29.6 [atomics.types.operations] paragraph 4, +add the following description. +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre><code> +constexpr <var>A</var>::<var>A</var>(<var>C</var> desired); +</code></pre> +<dl> +<dt><i>Effects:</i></dt> +<dd> +Initializes the object with the value <code>desired</code>. +[<i>Note:</i> +Construction is not atomic. +—<i>end note</i>] +</dd> +</dl> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="847"></a>847. string exception safety guarantees</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.4.1 [string.require] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Hervé Brönnimann <b>Opened:</b> 2008-06-05 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#string.require">issues</a> in [string.require].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In March, on comp.lang.c++.moderated, I asked what were the +string exception safety guarantees are, because I cannot see +*any* in the working paper, and any implementation I know offers +the strong exception safety guarantee (string unchanged if a +member throws exception). The closest the current draft comes to +offering any guarantees is 21.4 [basic.string], para 3: +</p> + +<blockquote> +The class template <tt>basic_string</tt> conforms to the requirements +for a Sequence Container (23.1.1), for a Reversible Container (23.1), +and for an Allocator-aware container (91). The iterators supported by +<tt>basic_string</tt> are random access iterators (24.1.5). +</blockquote> + +<p> +However, the chapter 23 only says, on the topic of exceptions: 23.2 [container.requirements], +para 10: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Unless otherwise specified (see 23.2.2.3 and 23.2.6.4) all container types defined in this clause meet the following +additional requirements: +</p> + +<ul> +<li>if an exception is thrown by...</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + +<p> +I take it as saying that this paragraph has *no* implication on +<tt>std::basic_string</tt>, as <tt>basic_string</tt> isn't defined in Clause 23 and +this paragraph does not define a *requirement* of Sequence +nor Reversible Container, just of the models defined in Clause 23. +In addition, LWG Issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#718">718</a> proposes to remove 23.2 [container.requirements], para 3. +</p> + +<p> +Finally, the fact that no operation on Traits should throw +exceptions has no bearing, except to suggest (since the only +other throws should be allocation, <tt>out_of_range</tt>, or <tt>length_error</tt>) +that the strong exception guarantee can be achieved. +</p> + +<p> +The reaction in that group by Niels Dekker, Martin Sebor, and +Bo Persson, was all that this would be worth an LWG issue. +</p> + +<p> +A related issue is that <tt>erase()</tt> does not throw. This should be +stated somewhere (and again, I don't think that the 23.2 [container.requirements], para 1 +applies here). +</p> + +<p><i>[ +San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Implementors will study this to confirm that it is actually possible. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Daniel adds 2009-02-14: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +The proposed resolution of paper +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2815.html">N2815</a> +interacts with this issue (the paper does not refer to this issue). +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add a blanket statement in 21.4.1 [string.require]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +- if any member function or operator of <tt>basic_string<charT, traits, Allocator></tt> +throws, that function or operator has no effect. +</p> +<p> +- no <tt>erase()</tt> or <tt>pop_back()</tt> function throws. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +As far as I can tell, this is achieved by any implementation. If I made a +mistake and it is not possible to offer this guarantee, then +either state all the functions for which this is possible +(certainly at least <tt>operator+=</tt>, <tt>append</tt>, <tt>assign</tt>, and <tt>insert</tt>), +or add paragraphs to Effects clauses wherever appropriate. +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="848"></a>848. missing <tt>std::hash</tt> specializations for <tt>std::bitset/std::vector<bool></tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8.15 [unord.hash] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Thorsten Ottosen <b>Opened:</b> 2008-06-05 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#unord.hash">issues</a> in [unord.hash].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In the current working draft, <tt>std::hash<T></tt> is specialized for builtin +types and a few other types. Bitsets seems like one that is missing from +the list, not because it cannot not be done by the user, but because it +is hard or impossible to write an efficient implementation that works on +32bit/64bit chunks at a time. For example, <tt>std::bitset</tt> is too much +encapsulated in this respect. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add the following to the synopsis in 20.8 [function.objects]/2: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class Allocator> struct hash<std::vector<bool,Allocator>>; +template<size_t N> struct hash<std::bitset<N>>; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Modify the last sentence of 20.8.15 [unord.hash]/1 to end with: +</p> + +<blockquote> +... and <tt>std::string</tt>, <tt>std::u16string</tt>, <tt>std::u32string</tt>, <tt>std::wstring</tt>, +<tt>std::error_code</tt>, <tt>std::thread::id</tt>, <tt>std::bitset</tt>, <tt>and std::vector<bool></tt>. +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="850"></a>850. Should <tt>shrink_to_fit</tt> apply to <tt>std::deque</tt>?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.3.2.2 [deque.capacity] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Niels Dekker <b>Opened:</b> 2008-06-05 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#deque.capacity">issues</a> in [deque.capacity].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#755">755</a> added a <tt>shrink_to_fit</tt> function to <tt>std::vector</tt> and <tt>std::string</tt>. +It did not yet deal with <tt>std::deque</tt>, because of the fundamental +difference between <tt>std::deque</tt> and the other two container types. The +need for <tt>std::deque</tt> may seem less evident, because one might think that +for this container, the overhead is a small map, and some number of +blocks that's bounded by a small constant. +</p> +<p> +The container overhead can in fact be arbitrarily large (i.e. is not +necessarily O(N) where N is the number of elements currently held by the +<tt>deque</tt>). As Bill Plauger noted in a reflector message, unless the map of +block pointers is shrunk, it must hold at least maxN/B pointers where +maxN is the maximum of N over the lifetime of the <tt>deque</tt> since its +creation. This is independent of how the map is implemented +(<tt>vector</tt>-like circular buffer and all), and maxN bears no relation to N, +the number of elements it currently holds. +</p> +<p> +Hervé Brönnimann reports a situation where a <tt>deque</tt> of requests grew very +large due to some temporary backup (the front request hanging), and the +map of the <tt>deque</tt> grew quite large before getting back to normal. Just +to put some color on it, assuming a <tt>deque</tt> with 1K pointer elements in +steady regime, that held, at some point in its lifetime, maxN=10M +pointers, with one block holding 128 elements, the spine must be at +least (maxN / 128), in that case 100K. In that case, shrink-to-fit +would allow to reuse about 100K which would otherwise never be reclaimed +in the lifetime of the <tt>deque</tt>. +</p> +<p> +An added bonus would be that it *allows* implementations to hang on to +empty blocks at the end (but does not care if they do or not). A +<tt>shrink_to_fit</tt> would take care of both shrinks, and guarantee that at +most O(B) space is used in addition to the storage to hold the N +elements and the N/B block pointers. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +To Class template deque 23.3.2 [deque] synopsis, add: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>void shrink_to_fit(); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +To deque capacity 23.3.2.2 [deque.capacity], add: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>void shrink_to_fit(); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<i>Remarks:</i> <tt>shrink_to_fit</tt> is a non-binding request to reduce memory +use. [<i>Note:</i> The request is non-binding to allow latitude for +implementation-specific optimizations. -- <i>end note</i>] +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="852"></a>852. unordered containers <tt>begin(n)</tt> mistakenly <tt>const</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.7 [unord] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Robert Klarer <b>Opened:</b> 2008-06-12 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#unord">issues</a> in [unord].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In 3 of the four unordered containers the local <tt>begin</tt> member is mistakenly declared <tt>const</tt>: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>local_iterator begin(size_type n) const; +</pre></blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change the synopsis in 23.7.1 [unord.map], 23.7.2 [unord.multimap], and 23.7.4 [unord.multiset]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>local_iterator begin(size_type n)<del> const</del>; +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="853"></a>853. <tt>to_string</tt> needs updating with <tt>zero</tt> and <tt>one</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.5 [template.bitset] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2008-06-18 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#template.bitset">issues</a> in [template.bitset].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#396">396</a> adds defaulted arguments to the <tt>to_string</tt> member, but neglects to update +the three newer <tt>to_string</tt> overloads. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +post San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Daniel found problems with the wording and provided fixes. Moved from Ready +to Review. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Alisdair: suggest to not repeat the default arguments in B, C, D +(definition of to_string members) +</p> +<p> +Walter: This is not really a definition. +</p> +<p> +Consensus: Add note to the editor: Please apply editor's judgement +whether default arguments should be repeated for B, C, D changes. +</p> +<p> +Recommend Tentatively Ready. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-09: See alternative solution in issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1113">1113</a>. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<ol type="A"> +<li> +<p>replace in 20.5 [template.bitset]/1 (class <tt>bitset</tt>) +</p> +<blockquote><pre>template <class charT, class traits> + basic_string<charT, traits, allocator<charT> > + to_string(<ins>charT zero = charT('0'), charT one = charT('1')</ins>) const; +template <class charT> + basic_string<charT, char_traits<charT>, allocator<charT> > + to_string(<ins>charT zero = charT('0'), charT one = charT('1')</ins>) const; +basic_string<char, char_traits<char>, allocator<char> > + to_string(<ins>char zero = '0', char one = '1'</ins>) const; +</pre></blockquote> +</li> +<li> +<p> +replace in 20.5.2 [bitset.members]/37 +</p> +<blockquote><pre>template <class charT, class traits> + basic_string<charT, traits, allocator<charT> > + to_string(<ins>charT zero = charT('0'), charT one = charT('1')</ins>) const; +</pre> +<blockquote> +37 <i>Returns:</i> <tt>to_string<charT, traits, allocator<charT> >(<ins>zero, one</ins>)</tt>. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> +<li> +<p> +replace in 20.5.2 [bitset.members]/38 +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class charT> + basic_string<charT, char_traits<charT>, allocator<charT> > + to_string(<ins>charT zero = charT('0'), charT one = charT('1')</ins>) const; +</pre> +<blockquote> +38 <i>Returns:</i> <tt>to_string<charT, char_traits<charT>, allocator<charT> >(<ins>zero, one</ins>)</tt>. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +replace in 20.5.2 [bitset.members]/39 +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>basic_string<char, char_traits<char>, allocator<char> > + to_string(<ins>char zero = '0', char one = '1'</ins>) const; +</pre> +<blockquote> +39 <i>Returns:</i> <tt>to_string<char, char_traits<char>, allocator<char> >(<ins>zero, one</ins>)</tt>. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +</ol> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="854"></a>854. <tt>default_delete</tt> converting constructor underspecified</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.9.1.2 [unique.ptr.dltr.dflt] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2008-06-18 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#unique.ptr.dltr.dflt">issues</a> in [unique.ptr.dltr.dflt].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +No relationship between <tt>U</tt> and <tt>T</tt> in the converting constructor for <tt>default_delete</tt> template. +</p> +<p> +Requirements: <tt>U*</tt> is convertible to <tt>T*</tt> and <tt>has_virtual_destructor<T></tt>; +the latter should also become a concept. +</p> +<p> +Rules out cross-casting. +</p> +<p> +The requirements for <tt>unique_ptr</tt> conversions should be the same as those on the deleter. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Howard adds 2008-11-26: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I believe we need to be careful to not outlaw the following use case, and +I believe the current proposed wording +(<tt>requires Convertible<U*, T*> && HasVirtualDestructor<T></tt>) does so: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>#include <memory> + +int main() +{ + std::unique_ptr<int> p1(new int(1)); + std::unique_ptr<const int> p2(move(p1)); + int i = *p2; +<font color="#C80000">// *p2 = i; // should not compile</font> +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +I've removed "<tt>&& HasVirtualDestructor<T></tt>" from the +<tt>requires</tt> clause in the proposed wording. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Alisdair: This issue has to stay in review pending a paper constraining +<tt>unique_ptr</tt>. +</p> +<p> +Consensus: We agree with the resolution, but <tt>unique_ptr</tt> needs +to be constrained, too. +</p> +<p> +Recommend Keep in Review. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +Keep in Review status for the reasons cited. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +The proposed resolution uses concepts. Howard needs to rewrite the +proposed resolution. +</p> +<p> +Move back to Open. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-26 Howard provided rewritten proposed wording and moved to Review. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add after 20.9.9.1.2 [unique.ptr.dltr.dflt], p1: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class U> default_delete(const default_delete<U>& other); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +-1- <i>Effects:</i> ... +</p> +<p><ins> +<i>Remarks:</i> This constructor shall participate in overload resolution +if and only if <tt>U*</tt> is implicitly convertible to <tt>T*</tt>. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="856"></a>856. Removal of <tt>aligned_union</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.7.7.6 [meta.trans.other] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Jens Maurer <b>Opened:</b> 2008-06-12 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#meta.trans.other">issues</a> in [meta.trans.other].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +With the arrival of extended unions +(<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2544.pdf">N2544</a>), +there is no +known use of <tt>aligned_union</tt> that couldn't be handled by +the "extended unions" core-language facility. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Remove the following signature from 20.7.2 [meta.type.synop]: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>template <std::size_t Len, class... Types> struct aligned_union; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Remove the second row from table 51 in 20.7.7.6 [meta.trans.other], +starting with: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <std::size_t Len, +class... Types> +struct aligned_union; +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="857"></a>857. <tt>condition_variable::time_wait</tt> return <tt>bool</tt> error prone</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30.5.1 [thread.condition.condvar] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Beman Dawes <b>Opened:</b> 2008-06-13 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#thread.condition.condvar">issues</a> in [thread.condition.condvar].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The meaning of the <tt>bool</tt> returned by <tt>condition_variable::timed_wait</tt> is so +obscure that even the class' designer can't deduce it correctly. Several +people have independently stumbled on this issue. +</p> +<p> +It might be simpler to change the return type to a scoped enum: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>enum class timeout { not_reached, reached }; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +That's the same cost as returning a <tt>bool</tt>, but not subject to mistakes. Your example below would be: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>if (cv.wait_until(lk, time_limit) == timeout::reached ) + throw time_out(); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Beman to supply exact wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +There is concern that the enumeration names are just as confusing, if +not more so, as the bool. You might have awoken because of a signal or a +spurious wakeup, for example. +</p> +<p> +Group feels that this is a defect that needs fixing. +</p> +<p> +Group prefers returning an enum over a void return. +</p> +<p> +Howard to provide wording. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-06-14 Beman provided wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change Condition variables 30.5 [thread.condition], Header +condition_variable synopsis, as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>namespace std { + class condition_variable; + class condition_variable_any; + + <ins>enum class cv_status { no_timeout, timeout };</ins> +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Change Class condition_variable 30.5.1 [thread.condition.condvar] as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>class condition_variable { +public: + ... + template <class Clock, class Duration> + <del>bool</del> <ins>cv_status</ins> wait_until(unique_lock<mutex>& lock, + const chrono::time_point<Clock, Duration>& abs_time); + template <class Clock, class Duration, class Predicate> + bool wait_until(unique_lock<mutex>& lock, + const chrono::time_point<Clock, Duration>& abs_time, + Predicate pred); + + template <class Rep, class Period> + <del>bool</del> <ins>cv_status</ins> wait_for(unique_lock<mutex>& lock, + const chrono::duration<Rep, Period>& rel_time); + template <class Rep, class Period, class Predicate> + bool wait_for(unique_lock<mutex>& lock, + const chrono::duration<Rep, Period>& rel_time, + Predicate pred); + ... +}; + +... + +template <class Clock, class Duration> + <del>bool</del> <ins>cv_status</ins> wait_until(unique_lock<mutex>& lock, + const chrono::time_point<Clock, Duration>& abs_time); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +-15- <i>Precondition:</i> <tt>lock</tt> is locked by the calling thread, and either +</p> +<ul> +<li> +no other thread is waiting on this <tt>condition_variable</tt> object or +</li> +<li> +<tt>lock.mutex()</tt> returns the same value for each of the <tt>lock</tt> +arguments supplied by all concurrently waiting threads (via <tt>wait</tt>, +<tt>wait_for</tt> or <tt>wait_until</tt>.). +</li> +</ul> + +<p> +-16- <i>Effects:</i> +</p> + +<ul> +<li> +Atomically calls <tt>lock.unlock()</tt> and blocks on <tt>*this</tt>. +</li> +<li> +When unblocked, calls <tt>lock.lock()</tt> (possibly blocking on the lock) and returns. +</li> +<li> +The function will unblock when signaled by a call to <tt>notify_one()</tt>, +a call to <tt>notify_all()</tt>, <del>by +the current time exceeding <tt>abs_time</tt></del> <ins>if <tt>Clock::now() >= abs_time</tt></ins>, +or spuriously. +</li> +<li> +If the function exits via an exception, <tt>lock.unlock()</tt> shall be called prior +to exiting the function scope. +</li> +</ul> + +<p> +-17- <i>Postcondition:</i> <tt>lock</tt> is locked by the calling thread. +</p> + +<p> +-18- <i>Returns:</i> <del><tt>Clock::now() < abs_time</tt></del> +<ins><tt>cv_status::timeout</tt> if the function unblocked because <tt>abs_time</tt> +was reached, otherwise <tt>cv_status::no_timeout</tt></ins>. +</p> + +<p> +-19- <i>Throws:</i> <tt>std::system_error</tt> when the effects or postcondition +cannot be achieved. +</p> + +<p> +-20- <i>Error conditions:</i> +</p> + +<ul> +<li> +<tt>operation_not_permitted</tt> — if the thread does not own the lock. +</li> +<li> +equivalent error condition from <tt>lock.lock()</tt> or <tt>lock.unlock()</tt>. +</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class Rep, class Period> + <del>bool</del> <ins>cv_status</ins> wait_for(unique_lock<mutex>& lock, + const chrono::duration<Rep, Period>& rel_time); + +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +-21- <i><del>Effects</del> <ins>Returns</ins>:</i> +</p> +<blockquote><pre>wait_until(lock, chrono::monotonic_clock::now() + rel_time) +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +<del>-22- <i>Returns:</i> <tt>false</tt> if the call is returning because the time +duration specified by <tt>rel_time</tt> has elapsed, +otherwise <tt>true</tt>.</del> +</p> + +<p><i>[ +This part of the wording may conflict with <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#859">859</a> in detail, but does +not do so in spirit. If both issues are accepted, there is a logical merge. +]</i></p> + +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class Clock, class Duration, class Predicate> + bool wait_until(unique_lock<mutex>& lock, + const chrono::time_point<Clock, Duration>& abs_time, + Predicate pred); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-23- <i>Effects:</i> +</p> +<blockquote><pre>while (!pred()) + if (<del>!</del>wait_until(lock, abs_time) <ins>== cv_status::timeout</ins>) + return pred(); +return true; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +-24- <i>Returns:</i> <tt>pred()</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +-25- [<i>Note:</i> +The returned value indicates whether the predicate evaluates to +<tt>true</tt> regardless of whether the timeout was triggered. +— <i>end note</i>]. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change Class condition_variable_any 30.5.2 [thread.condition.condvarany] as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>class condition_variable_any { +public: + ... + template <class Lock, class Clock, class Duration> + <del>bool</del> <ins>cv_status</ins> wait_until(Lock& lock, + const chrono::time_point<Clock, Duration>& abs_time); + template <class Lock, class Clock, class Duration, class Predicate> + bool wait_until(Lock& lock, + const chrono::time_point<Clock, Duration>& abs_time, + Predicate pred); + + template <class Lock, class Rep, class Period> + <del>bool</del> <ins>cv_status</ins> wait_for(Lock& lock, + const chrono::duration<Rep, Period>& rel_time); + template <class Lock, class Rep, class Period, class Predicate> + bool wait_for(Lock& lock, + const chrono::duration<Rep, Period>& rel_time, + Predicate pred); + ... +}; + +... + +template <class Lock, class Clock, class Duration> + <del>bool</del> <ins>cv_status</ins> wait_until(Lock& lock, + const chrono::time_point<Clock, Duration>& abs_time); +</pre> + +<blockquote> + +<p> +-13- <i>Effects:</i> +</p> + +<ul> +<li> +Atomically calls <tt>lock.unlock()</tt> and blocks on <tt>*this</tt>. +</li> +<li> +When unblocked, calls <tt>lock.lock()</tt> (possibly blocking on the lock) and returns. +</li> +<li> +The function will unblock when signaled by a call to <tt>notify_one()</tt>, +a call to <tt>notify_all()</tt>, <del>by +the current time exceeding <tt>abs_time</tt></del> <ins>if <tt>Clock::now() >= abs_time</tt></ins>, +or spuriously. +</li> +<li> +If the function exits via an exception, <tt>lock.unlock()</tt> shall be called prior +to exiting the function scope. +</li> +</ul> + +<p> +-14- <i>Postcondition:</i> <tt>lock</tt> is locked by the calling thread. +</p> + +<p> +-15- <i>Returns:</i> <del><tt>Clock::now() < abs_time</tt></del> +<ins><tt>cv_status::timeout</tt> if the function unblocked because <tt>abs_time</tt> +was reached, otherwise <tt>cv_status::no_timeout</tt></ins>. +</p> + +<p> +-16- <i>Throws:</i> <tt>std::system_error</tt> when the effects or postcondition +cannot be achieved. +</p> + +<p> +-17- <i>Error conditions:</i> +</p> + +<ul> +<li> +equivalent error condition from <tt>lock.lock()</tt> or <tt>lock.unlock()</tt>. +</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class Lock, class Rep, class Period> + <del>bool</del> <ins>cv_status</ins> wait_for(Lock& lock, + const chrono::duration<Rep, Period>& rel_time); + +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-18- <i><del>Effects</del> <ins>Returns</ins>:</i> +</p> +<blockquote><pre>wait_until(lock, chrono::monotonic_clock::now() + rel_time) +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +<del>-19- <i>Returns:</i> <tt>false</tt> if the call is returning because the time +duration specified by <tt>rel_time</tt> has elapsed, +otherwise <tt>true</tt>.</del> +</p> + +<p><i>[ +This part of the wording may conflict with <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#859">859</a> in detail, but does +not do so in spirit. If both issues are accepted, there is a logical merge. +]</i></p> + + +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class Lock, class Clock, class Duration, class Predicate> + bool wait_until(Lock& lock, + const chrono::time_point<Clock, Duration>& <del>rel_time</del> <ins>abs_time</ins>, + Predicate pred); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-20- <i>Effects:</i> +</p> +<blockquote><pre>while (!pred()) + if (<del>!</del>wait_until(lock, abs_time) <ins>== cv_status::timeout</ins>) + return pred(); +return true; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +-21- <i>Returns:</i> <tt>pred()</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +-22- [<i>Note:</i> +The returned value indicates whether the predicate evaluates to +<tt>true</tt> regardless of whether the timeout was triggered. +— <i>end note</i>]. +</p> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="858"></a>858. Wording for Minimal Support for Garbage Collection</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.11 [util.dynamic.safety] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Pete Becker <b>Opened:</b> 2008-06-21 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#util.dynamic.safety">issues</a> in [util.dynamic.safety].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The first sentence of the Effects clause for <tt>undeclare_reachable</tt> seems +to be missing some words. I can't parse +</p> +<blockquote> +... for all non-null <tt>p</tt> referencing the argument is no longer declared reachable... +</blockquote> +<p> +I take it the intent is that <tt>undeclare_reachable</tt> should be called only +when there has been a corresponding call to <tt>declare_reachable</tt>. In +particular, although the wording seems to allow it, I assume that code +shouldn't call <tt>declare_reachable</tt> once then call <tt>undeclare_reachable</tt> +twice. +</p> +<p> +I don't know what "shall be live" in the Requires clause means. +</p> +<p> +In the final Note for <tt>undeclare_reachable</tt>, what does "cannot be +deallocated" mean? Is this different from "will not be able to collect"? +</p> + +<p> +For the wording on nesting of <tt>declare_reachable</tt> and +<tt>undeclare_reachable</tt>, the words for locking and unlocking recursive +mutexes probably are a good model. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Nick: what does "shall be live" mean? +</p> +<p> +Hans: I can provide an appropriate cross-reference to the Project Editor +to clarify the intent. +</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 20.9.11 [util.dynamic.safety] +(<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2670.htm">N2670</a>, +Minimal Support for Garbage Collection) +</p> +<p> +Add at the beginning, before paragraph 39 +</p> + +<blockquote> +A complete object is <i>declared reachable</i> while the number of calls +to <tt>declare_reachable</tt> with an argument referencing the object exceeds the +number of <tt>undeclare_reachable</tt> calls with pointers to the same complete +object. +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change paragraph 42 (Requires clause for <tt>undeclare_reachable</tt>) +</p> + +<blockquote> +If <tt>p</tt> is not null, <del><tt>declare_reachable(p)</tt> was previously called</del> +<ins>the complete object referenced by <tt>p</tt> shall have +been previously declared reachable</ins>, and shall +be live <ins>(3.8 [basic.life])</ins> from the time of the call until the last <tt>undeclare_reachable(p)</tt> +call on the object. +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change the first sentence in paragraph 44 (Effects clause for +<tt>undeclare_reachable</tt>): +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Effects:</i> +<del>Once the number of calls to +<tt>undeclare_reachable(p)</tt> equals the number of calls to +<tt>declare_reachable(p)</tt> +for all non-null <tt>p</tt> referencing +the argument is no longer declared reachable. When this happens, +pointers to the object referenced by p may not be subsequently +dereferenced.</del> +<ins> +After a call to <tt>undeclare_reachable(p)</tt>, if <tt>p</tt> is not null and the object <tt>q</tt> +referenced by <tt>p</tt> is no longer declared reachable, then +dereferencing any pointer to <tt>q</tt> that is not safely derived +results in undefined behavior. +</ins> ... +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change the final note: +</p> +<p> +[<i>Note:</i> It is expected that calls to <tt>declare_reachable(p)</tt> +will consume a small amount of memory<ins>, in addition to that occupied +by the referenced object, </ins> until the matching call to +<tt>undeclare_reachable(p)</tt> is encountered. <del>In addition, the +referenced object cannot be deallocated during this period, and garbage +collecting implementations will not be able to collect the object while +it is declared reachable.</del> Long running programs should arrange +that calls <ins>for short-lived objects</ins> are matched. <i>--end +note</i>] +</p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="859"></a>859. Monotonic Clock is Conditionally Supported?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30.5 [thread.condition] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Pete Becker <b>Opened:</b> 2008-06-23 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#thread.condition">issues</a> in [thread.condition].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p>Related to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#958">958</a>, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#959">959</a>.</p> + +<p> +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2661.html">N2661</a> +says that there is a class named <tt>monotonic_clock</tt>. It also says that this +name may be a synonym for <tt>system_clock</tt>, and that it's conditionally +supported. So the actual requirement is that it can be monotonic or not, +and you can tell by looking at <tt>is_monotonic</tt>, or it might not exist at +all (since it's conditionally supported). Okay, maybe too much +flexibility, but so be it. +</p> +<p> +A problem comes up in the threading specification, where several +variants of <tt>wait_for</tt> explicitly use <tt>monotonic_clock::now()</tt>. What is the +meaning of an effects clause that says +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>wait_until(lock, chrono::monotonic_clock::now() + rel_time) +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +when <tt>monotonic_clock</tt> is not required to exist? +</p> + +<p><i>[ +San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Nick: maybe instead of saying that chrono::monotonic_clock is +conditionally supported, we could say that it's always there, but not +necessarily supported.. +</p> +<p> +Beman: I'd prefer a typedef that identifies the best clock to use for +wait_for locks. +</p> +<p> +Tom: combine the two concepts; create a duration clock type, but keep +the is_monotonic test. +</p> +<p> +Howard: if we create a duration_clock type, is it a typedef or an +entirely true type? +</p> +<p> +There was broad preference for a typedef. +</p> +<p> +Move to Open. Howard to provide wording to add a typedef for +duration_clock and to replace all uses of monotonic_clock in function +calls and signatures with duration_clock. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Howard notes post-San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +After further thought I do not believe that creating a <tt>duration_clock typedef</tt> +is the best way to proceed. An implementation may not need to use a +<tt>time_point</tt> to implement the <tt>wait_for</tt> functions. +</p> + +<p> +For example, on POSIX systems <tt>sleep_for</tt> can be implemented in terms of +<tt>nanosleep</tt> which takes only a duration in terms of nanoseconds. The current +working paper does not describe <tt>sleep_for</tt> in terms of <tt>sleep_until</tt>. +And paragraph 2 of 30.2.4 [thread.req.timing] has the words strongly encouraging +implementations to use monotonic clocks for <tt>sleep_for</tt>: +</p> + +<blockquote> +2 The member functions whose names end in <tt>_for</tt> take an argument that +specifies a relative time. Implementations should use a monotonic clock to +measure time for these functions. +</blockquote> + +<p> +I believe the approach taken in describing the effects of <tt>sleep_for</tt> +and <tt>try_lock_for</tt> is also appropriate for <tt>wait_for</tt>. I.e. these +are not described in terms of their <tt>_until</tt> variants. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Beman will send some suggested wording changes to Howard. +</p> +<p> +Move to Ready. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-21 Beman added the requested wording changes to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#962">962</a>. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 30.5.1 [thread.condition.condvar], p21-22: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template <class Rep, class Period> + bool wait_for(unique_lock<mutex>& lock, + const chrono::duration<Rep, Period>& rel_time); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p><ins> +<i>Precondition:</i> <tt>lock</tt> is locked by the calling thread, and either +</ins></p> +<ul> +<li><ins>no other thread is waiting on this <tt>condition_variable</tt> object or</ins></li> +<li><ins><tt>lock.mutex()</tt> returns the same value for each of the <tt>lock</tt> +arguments supplied by all concurrently waiting threads (via <tt>wait</tt>, +<tt>wait_for</tt> or <tt>wait_until</tt>).</ins></li> +</ul> +<p> +21 <i>Effects:</i> +</p> +<blockquote><pre><del>wait_until(lock, chrono::monotonic_clock::now() + rel_time)</del> +</pre></blockquote> +<ul> +<li><ins> +Atomically calls <tt>lock.unlock()</tt> and blocks on <tt>*this</tt>. +</ins></li> + +<li><ins> +When unblocked, calls <tt>lock.lock()</tt> (possibly blocking on the lock) and returns. +</ins></li> + +<li><ins> +The function will unblock when signaled by a call to <tt>notify_one()</tt>, a call +to <tt>notify_all()</tt>, by +the elapsed time <tt>rel_time</tt> passing (30.2.4 [thread.req.timing]), +or spuriously. +</ins></li> + +<li><ins> +If the function exits via an exception, <tt>lock.unlock()</tt> shall be called +prior to exiting the function scope. +</ins></li> +</ul> + +<p><ins> +<i>Postcondition:</i> <tt>lock</tt> is locked by the calling thread. +</ins></p> + + +<p> +22 <i>Returns:</i> <tt>false</tt> if the call is returning because the time +duration specified by <tt>rel_time</tt> has elapsed, otherwise <tt>true</tt>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +This part of the wording may conflict with <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#857">857</a> in detail, but does +not do so in spirit. If both issues are accepted, there is a logical merge. +]</i></p> + + +<p><ins> +<i>Throws:</i> <tt>std::system_error</tt> when the effects or postcondition cannot be achieved. +</ins></p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Error conditions:</i> +</ins></p> + +<ul> +<li><ins> +<tt>operation_not_permitted</tt> -- if the thread does not own the lock. +</ins></li> +<li><ins> +equivalent error condition from <tt>lock.lock()</tt> or <tt>lock.unlock()</tt>. +</ins></li> +</ul> + +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 30.5.1 [thread.condition.condvar], p26-p29: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template <class Rep, class Period, class Predicate> + bool wait_for(unique_lock<mutex>& lock, + const chrono::duration<Rep, Period>& rel_time, + Predicate pred); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p><ins> +<i>Precondition:</i> <tt>lock</tt> is locked by the calling thread, and either +</ins></p> +<ul> +<li><ins>no other thread is waiting on this <tt>condition_variable</tt> object or</ins></li> +<li><ins><tt>lock.mutex()</tt> returns the same value for each of the <tt>lock</tt> +arguments supplied by all concurrently waiting threads (via <tt>wait</tt>, +<tt>wait_for</tt> or <tt>wait_until</tt>).</ins></li> +</ul> +<p> +<i>26 Effects:</i> +</p> +<blockquote><pre><del>wait_until(lock, chrono::monotonic_clock::now() + rel_time, std::move(pred))</del> +</pre> +<ul> +<li><ins> +Executes a loop: Within the loop the function first evaluates <tt>pred()</tt> +and exits the loop if the result of <tt>pred()</tt> is <tt>true</tt>. +</ins></li> +<li><ins> +Atomically calls <tt>lock.unlock()</tt> +and blocks on <tt>*this</tt>. +</ins></li> +<li><ins> +When unblocked, calls <tt>lock.lock()</tt> (possibly blocking on the lock). +</ins></li> +<li><ins> +The function will unblock when signaled by a call to <tt>notify_one()</tt>, a +call to <tt>notify_all()</tt>, by the elapsed time <tt>rel_time</tt> passing (30.1.4 +[thread.req.timing]), or spuriously. +</ins></li> +<li><ins> +If the function exits via an exception, <tt>lock.unlock()</tt> shall be called +prior to exiting the function scope. +</ins></li> +<li><ins> +The loop terminates when <tt>pred()</tt> returns <tt>true</tt> or when the time +duration specified by <tt>rel_time</tt> has elapsed. +</ins></li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + +<p> +27 [<i>Note:</i> There is no blocking if <tt>pred()</tt> is initially <tt>true</tt>, +even if the timeout has already expired. <i>-- end note</i>] +</p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Postcondition:</i> <tt>lock</tt> is locked by the calling thread. +</ins></p> + +<p> +28 <i>Returns:</i> <tt>pred()</tt> +</p> + +<p> +29 [<i>Note:</i> The returned value indicates whether the predicate evaluates to +<tt>true</tt> regardless of whether the timeout was triggered. <i>-- end note</i>] +</p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Throws:</i> <tt>std::system_error</tt> when the effects or postcondition cannot be achieved. +</ins></p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Error conditions:</i> +</ins></p> + +<ul> +<li><ins> +<tt>operation_not_permitted</tt> -- if the thread does not own the lock. +</ins></li> +<li><ins> +equivalent error condition from <tt>lock.lock()</tt> or <tt>lock.unlock()</tt>. +</ins></li> +</ul> + +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 30.5.2 [thread.condition.condvarany], p18-19: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template <class Lock, class Rep, class Period> + bool wait_for(Lock& lock, const chrono::duration<Rep, Period>& rel_time); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +18 <i>Effects:</i> +</p> +<blockquote><pre><del>wait_until(lock, chrono::monotonic_clock::now() + rel_time)</del> +</pre></blockquote> + +<ul> +<li><ins> +Atomically calls <tt>lock.unlock()</tt> and blocks on <tt>*this</tt>. +</ins></li> + +<li><ins> +When unblocked, calls <tt>lock.lock()</tt> (possibly blocking on the lock) and returns. +</ins></li> + +<li><ins> +The function will unblock when signaled by a call to <tt>notify_one()</tt>, a call to +<tt>notify_all()</tt>, by +the elapsed time <tt>rel_time</tt> passing (30.2.4 [thread.req.timing]), +or spuriously. +</ins></li> + +<li><ins> +If the function exits via an exception, <tt>lock.unlock()</tt> shall be called +prior to exiting the function scope. +</ins></li> +</ul> + +<p><ins> +<i>Postcondition:</i> <tt>lock</tt> is locked by the calling thread. +</ins></p> + +<p> +19 <i>Returns:</i> <tt>false</tt> if the call is returning because the time duration +specified by <tt>rel_time</tt> has elapsed, otherwise <tt>true</tt>. +</p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Throws:</i> <tt>std::system_error</tt> when the returned value, effects, +or postcondition cannot be achieved. +</ins></p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Error conditions:</i> +</ins></p> + +<ul> +<li><ins> +equivalent error condition from <tt>lock.lock()</tt> or <tt>lock.unlock()</tt>. +</ins></li> +</ul> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 30.5.2 [thread.condition.condvarany], p23-p26: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template <class Lock, class Rep, class Period, class Predicate> + bool wait_for(Lock& lock, const chrono::duration<Rep, Period>& rel_time, Predicate pred); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p><ins> +<i>Precondition:</i> <tt>lock</tt> is locked by the calling thread, and either +</ins></p> +<ul> +<li><ins>no other thread is waiting on this <tt>condition_variable</tt> object or</ins></li> +<li><ins><tt>lock.mutex()</tt> returns the same value for each of the <tt>lock</tt> +arguments supplied by all concurrently waiting threads (via <tt>wait</tt>, +<tt>wait_for</tt> or <tt>wait_until</tt>).</ins></li> +</ul> +<p> +<i>23 Effects:</i> +</p> +<blockquote><pre><del>wait_until(lock, chrono::monotonic_clock::now() + rel_time, std::move(pred))</del> +</pre> +<ul> +<li><ins> +Executes a loop: Within the loop the function first evaluates <tt>pred()</tt> +and exits the loop if the result of <tt>pred()</tt> is <tt>true</tt>. +</ins></li> +<li><ins> +Atomically calls <tt>lock.unlock()</tt> +and blocks on <tt>*this</tt>. +</ins></li> +<li><ins> +When unblocked, calls <tt>lock.lock()</tt> (possibly blocking on the lock). +</ins></li> +<li><ins> +The function will unblock when signaled by a call to <tt>notify_one()</tt>, a +call to <tt>notify_all()</tt>, by the elapsed time <tt>rel_time</tt> passing (30.1.4 +[thread.req.timing]), or spuriously. +</ins></li> +<li><ins> +If the function exits via an exception, <tt>lock.unlock()</tt> shall be called +prior to exiting the function scope. +</ins></li> +<li><ins> +The loop terminates when <tt>pred()</tt> returns <tt>true</tt> or when the time +duration specified by <tt>rel_time</tt> has elapsed. +</ins></li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + +<p> +24 [<i>Note:</i> There is no blocking if <tt>pred()</tt> is initially <tt>true</tt>, +even if the timeout has already expired. <i>-- end note</i>] +</p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Postcondition:</i> <tt>lock</tt> is locked by the calling thread. +</ins></p> + +<p> +25 <i>Returns:</i> <tt>pred()</tt> +</p> + +<p> +26 [<i>Note:</i> The returned value indicates whether the predicate evaluates to +<tt>true</tt> regardless of whether the timeout was triggered. <i>-- end note</i>] +</p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Throws:</i> <tt>std::system_error</tt> when the effects or postcondition cannot be achieved. +</ins></p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Error conditions:</i> +</ins></p> + +<ul> +<li><ins> +<tt>operation_not_permitted</tt> -- if the thread does not own the lock. +</ins></li> +<li><ins> +equivalent error condition from <tt>lock.lock()</tt> or <tt>lock.unlock()</tt>. +</ins></li> +</ul> + +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="860"></a>860. Floating-Point State</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26 [numerics] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Lawrence Crowl <b>Opened:</b> 2008-06-23 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#numerics">issues</a> in [numerics].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +There are a number of functions that affect the floating point state. +These function need to be thread-safe, but I'm unsure of the right +approach in the standard, as we inherit them from C. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Nick: I think we already say that these functions do not introduce data +races; see 17.6.5.6/20 +</p> +<p> +Pete: there's more to it than not introducing data races; are these +states maintained per thread? +</p> +<p> +Howard: 21.5/14 says that strtok and strerror are not required to avoid +data races, and 20.9/2 says the same about asctime, gmtime, ctime, and +gmtime. +</p> +<p> +Nick: POSIX has a list of not-safe functions. All other functions are +implicitly thread safe. +</p> +<p> +Lawrence is to form a group between meetings to attack this issue. Nick +and Tom volunteered to work with Lawrence. +</p> +<p> +Move to Open. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Hans: Sane oses seem ok. Sensible thing is implementable and makes sense. +</p> +<p> +Nick: Default wording seems to cover this? Hole in POSIX, these +functions need to be added to list of thread-unsafe functions. +</p> +<p> +Lawrence: Not sufficient, not "thread-safe" per our definition, but +think of state as a thread-local variable. Need something like "these +functions only affect state in the current thread." +</p> +<p> +Hans: Suggest the following wording: "The floating point environment is +maintained per-thread." +</p> +<p> +Walter: Any other examples of state being thread safe that are not +already covered elsewhere? +</p> +<p> +Have thread unsafe functions paper which needs to be updated. Should +just fold in 26.3 [cfenv] functions. +</p> +<p> +Recommend Open. Lawrence instead suggests leaving it open until we have +suitable wording that may or may not include the thread local +commentary. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-09-23 Hans provided wording. +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +If I understand the history correctly, Nick, as the Posix liaison, +should probably get a veto on this, since I think it came from Posix (?) +via WG14 and should probably really be addressed there (?). But I think +we are basically in agreement that there is no other sane way to do +this, and hence we don't have to worry too much about stepping on toes. +As far as I can tell, this same issue also exists in the latest Posix +standard (?). +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add at the end of 26.3.1 [cfenv.syn]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +2 The header defines all functions, types, and macros the same as C99 7.6. +</p> + +<p><ins> +A separate floating point environment shall be maintained for each +thread. Each function accesses the environment corresponding to its +calling thread. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="861"></a>861. Incomplete specification of EqualityComparable for std::forward_list</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2 [container.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2008-06-24 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#container.requirements">issues</a> in [container.requirements].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Table 89, Container requirements, defines <tt>operator==</tt> in terms of the container +member function <tt>size()</tt> and the algorithm <tt>std::equal</tt>: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<tt>==</tt> is an equivalence relation. <tt>a.size() == b.size() && +equal(a.begin(), a.end(), b.begin()</tt> +</blockquote> + +<p> +The new container <tt>forward_list</tt> does not provide a <tt>size</tt> member function +by design but does provide <tt>operator==</tt> and <tt>operator!=</tt> without specifying it's semantic. +</p> +<p> +Other parts of the (sequence) container requirements do also depend on +<tt>size()</tt>, e.g. <tt>empty()</tt> +or <tt>clear()</tt>, but this issue explicitly attempts to solve the missing +<tt>EqualityComparable</tt> specification, +because of the special design choices of <tt>forward_list</tt>. +</p> +<p> +I propose to apply one of the following resolutions, which are described as: +</p> + +<ol type="A"> +<li> +Provide a definition, which is optimal for this special container without +previous size test. This choice prevents two <tt>O(N)</tt> calls of <tt>std::distance()</tt> +with the corresponding container ranges and instead uses a special +<tt>equals</tt> implementation which takes two container ranges instead of 1 1/2. +</li> +<li> +The simple fix where the usual test is adapted such that <tt>size()</tt> is replaced +by <tt>distance</tt> with corresponding performance disadvantages. +</li> +</ol> +<p> +Both proposal choices are discussed, the preferred choice of the author is +to apply (A). +</p> + +<p><i>[ +San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +There's an Option C: change the requirements table to use distance(). +</p> +<p> +LWG found Option C acceptable. +</p> +<p> +Martin will draft the wording for Option C. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +post San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Martin provided wording for Option C. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Other operational semantics (see, for example, Tables 82 and 83) are +written in terms of a container's size() member. Daniel to update +proposed resolution C. +</p> +<p><i>[ +Howard: Commented out options A and B. +]</i></p> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-26 Daniel updated proposed resolution C. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Mark NAD Editorial. Addressed by +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2986.pdf">N2986</a>. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Reopened. +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2986.pdf">N2986</a> +was rejected in full committee on procedural grounds. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-01-30 Howard updated Table numbers. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010 Pittsburgh: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Ready for Pittsburgh. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + + +<p> +Option (C): +</p> +<blockquote> + +<ol> +<li> +<p> +In 23.2.1 [container.requirements.general] change Table 90 -- Container requirements as indicated: +</p> + +<ol type="a"> +<li> +<p> +Change the text in the Assertion/note column in the row for "<tt>X u</tt>;" +as follows: +</p> + +<blockquote> +post: <tt>u.<del>size() == 0</del><ins>empty() == true</ins></tt> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change the text in the Assertion/note column in the row for "<tt>X();</tt>" +as follows: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<tt>X().<del>size() == 0</del><ins>empty() == true</ins></tt> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change the text in the Operational Semantics column in the row for +"<tt>a == b</tt>" as follows: +</p> +<blockquote> +<tt>==</tt> is an equivalence relation. +<tt><del>a.size()</del><ins>distance(a.begin(), a.end())</ins> == + <del>b.size()</del><ins>distance(b.begin(), b.end())</ins> && +equal(a.begin(), a.end(), b.begin())</tt> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Add text in the Ass./Note/pre-/post-condition column in the row for +"<tt>a == b</tt>" as follows: +</p> +<blockquote><ins> +<i>Requires:</i> <tt>T</tt> is <tt>EqualityComparable</tt> +</ins></blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change the text in the Operational Semantics column in the row for +"<tt>a.size()</tt>" as follows: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<tt><del>a.end() - a.begin()</del><ins>distance(a.begin(), a.end())</ins></tt> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change the text in the Operational Semantics column in the row for +"<tt>a.max_size()</tt>" as follows: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<tt><del>size()</del><ins>distance(begin(), end())</ins></tt> of the largest +possible container +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change the text in the Operational Semantics column in the row for +"<tt>a.empty()</tt>" as follows: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<tt><del>a.size() == 0</del><ins>a.begin() == a.end()</ins></tt> +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +In 23.2.1 [container.requirements.general] change Table 93 -- Allocator-aware container requirements as indicated: +</p> + +<ol type="a"> +<li> +<p> +Change the text in the Assertion/note column in the row for "<tt>X() / +X u;</tt>" as follows: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Requires:</i> <tt>A</tt> is <tt>DefaultConstructible</tt> post: <tt><del>u.size() == +0</del><ins>u.empty() == true</ins></tt>, <tt>get_allocator() == A()</tt> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change the text in the Assertion/note column in the row for "<tt>X(m) / +X u(m);</tt>" as follows: +</p> + +<blockquote> +post: <tt><del>u.size() == 0</del><ins>u.empty() == true</ins>, +get_allocator() == m</tt> +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +In 23.2.3 [sequence.reqmts] change Table 94 -- Sequence container requirements as indicated: +</p> + +<ol type="a"> +<li> +<p> +Change the text in the Assertion/note column in the row for "<tt>X(n, +t) / X a(n, t)</tt>" as follows: +</p> + +<blockquote> +post: <tt><del>size()</del><ins>distance(begin(), end())</ins> == n [..]</tt> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change the text in the Assertion/note column in the row for "<tt>X(i, +j) / X a(i, j)</tt>" as follows: +</p> + +<blockquote> +[..] post: <del><tt>size() ==</tt> distance between <tt>i</tt> and +<tt>j</tt></del><ins><tt>distance(begin(), end()) == distance(i, j)</tt></ins> [..] +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change the text in the Assertion/note column in the row for +"<tt>a.clear()</tt>" as follows: +</p> +<blockquote> +<tt><ins>a.</ins>erase(<ins>a.</ins>begin(), <ins>a.</ins>end())</tt> post: +<tt><del>size() == 0</del><ins>a.empty() == true</ins></tt> +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +In 23.2.4 [associative.reqmts] change Table 96 -- Associative container requirements as indicated: +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Not every occurrence of <tt>size()</tt> was replaced, because all current +associative containers +have a <tt>size</tt>. The following changes ensure consistency regarding the +semantics of "<tt>erase</tt>" +for all tables and adds some missing objects +]</i></p> + + +<ol type="a"> + +<li> +<p> +Change the text in the Complexity column in the row for <tt>X(i,j,c)/X +a(i,j,c);</tt> as follows: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<tt>N</tt> log <tt>N</tt> in general (<tt>N</tt> <ins><tt> == distance(i, +j)</tt></ins><del>is the distance from <tt>i</tt> to <tt>j</tt></del>); ... +</blockquote> + +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change the text in the Complexity column in the row for +"<tt>a.insert(i, j)</tt>" as follows: +</p> +<blockquote> +<tt>N log(<ins>a.</ins>size() + N)</tt> <del>(<tt>N</tt> is the distance from <tt>i</tt> to +<tt>j</tt>)</del><ins> where <tt>N == distance(i, j)</tt></ins> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change the text in the Complexity column in the row for +"<tt>a.erase(k)</tt>" as follows: +</p> +<blockquote> +<tt>log(<ins>a.</ins>size()) + <ins>a.</ins>count(k)</tt> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change the text in the Complexity column in the row for +"<tt>a.erase(q1, q2)</tt>" as follows: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<tt>log(<ins>a.</ins>size()) + N</tt> where <tt>N</tt> <del>is the distance from <tt>q1</tt> +to <tt>q2</tt></del> + <ins><tt>== distance(q1, q2)</tt></ins>. +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change the text in the Assertion/note column in the row for +"<tt>a.clear()</tt>" as follows: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<tt><ins>a.</ins>erase(a.begin(),a.end())</tt> post: <tt><del>size() == +0</del><ins>a.empty() == true</ins></tt> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change the text in the Complexity column in the row for "<tt>a.clear()</tt>" +as follows: +</p> + +<blockquote> +linear in <tt><ins>a.</ins>size()</tt> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change the text in the Complexity column in the row for +"<tt>a.count(k)</tt>" as follows: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<tt>log(<ins>a.</ins>size()) + <ins>a.</ins>count(k)</tt> +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +In 23.2.5 [unord.req] change Table 98 -- Unordered associative container requirements as indicated: +</p> +<p><i>[ +The same rational as for Table 96 applies here +]</i></p> + + +<ol type="a"> +<li> +<p> +Change the text in the Assertion/note column in the row for +"<tt>a.clear()</tt>" as follows: +</p> + +<blockquote> +[..] Post: <tt>a.<del>size() == 0</del><ins>empty() == true</ins></tt> +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> +</li> +</ol> + + +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="865"></a>865. More algorithms that throw away information</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.3.6 [alg.fill], 25.3.7 [alg.generate] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2008-07-13 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In regard to library defect <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#488">488</a> I found some more algorithms which +unnecessarily throw away information. These are typically algorithms, +which sequentially write into an <tt>OutputIterator</tt>, but do not return the +final value of this output iterator. These cases are: +</p> + +<ol> +<li> +<pre>template<class OutputIterator, class Size, class T> +void fill_n(OutputIterator first, Size n, const T& value);</pre></li> + +<li> +<pre>template<class OutputIterator, class Size, class Generator> +void generate_n(OutputIterator first, Size n, Generator gen);</pre></li> +</ol> +<p> +In both cases the minimum requirements on the iterator are +<tt>OutputIterator</tt>, which means according to the requirements of +24.2.4 [output.iterators]/2 that only single-pass iterations are guaranteed. +So, if users of <tt>fill_n</tt> and <tt>generate_n</tt> have *only* an <tt>OutputIterator</tt> +available, they have no chance to continue pushing further values +into it, which seems to be a severe limitation to me. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit Daniel "conceptualized" the wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Alisdair likes the idea, but has concerns about the specific wording +about the returns clauses. +</p> +<p> +Alan notes this is a feature request. +</p> +<p> +Bill notes we have made similar changes to other algorithms. +</p> +<p> +Move to Open. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +We have a consensus for moving forward on this issue, but Daniel needs +to deconceptify it. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-25 Daniel provided non-concepts wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<ol> +<li> +<p> +Replace the current declaration of <tt>fill_n</tt> in 25 [algorithms]/2, header +<tt><algorithm></tt> synopsis and in 25.3.6 [alg.fill] by +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class OutputIterator, class Size, class T> + <del>void</del><ins>OutputIterator</ins> fill_n(OutputIterator first, Size n, const T& value); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Just after the effects clause add a new returns clause saying: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<ins><i>Returns:</i> For <tt>fill_n</tt> and positive <tt>n</tt>, returns <tt>first + n</tt>. Otherwise +returns <tt>first</tt> for <tt>fill_n</tt>.</ins> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Replace the current declaration of <tt>generate_n</tt> in 25 [algorithms]/2, +header <tt><algorithm></tt> synopsis and in 25.3.7 [alg.generate] by +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class OutputIterator, class Size, class Generator> + <del>void</del><ins>OutputIterator</ins> generate_n(OutputIterator first, Size n, Generator gen); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Just after the effects clause add a new returns clause saying: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<ins>For <tt>generate_n</tt> and positive <tt>n</tt>, returns <tt>first + n</tt>. Otherwise +returns <tt>first</tt> for <tt>generate_n</tt>.</ins> +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="866"></a>866. Qualification of placement new-expressions</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.8 [specialized.algorithms], 20.9.10.2.6 [util.smartptr.shared.create] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alberto Ganesh Barbati <b>Opened:</b> 2008-07-14 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#specialized.algorithms">issues</a> in [specialized.algorithms].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +LWG issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#402">402</a> replaced "<tt>new</tt>" with "<tt>::new</tt>" in the placement +new-expression in 20.9.5.1 [allocator.members]. I believe the rationale +given in <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#402">402</a> applies also to the following other contexts: +</p> +<ul> +<li> +<p> +in 20.9.8 [specialized.algorithms], all four algorithms <tt>unitialized_copy</tt>, +<tt>unitialized_copy_n</tt>, <tt>unitialized_fill</tt> and <tt>unitialized_fill_n</tt> use +the unqualified placement new-expression in some variation of the form: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>new (static_cast<void*>(&*result)) typename iterator_traits<ForwardIterator>::value_type(*first); +</pre></blockquote> +</li> +<li> +<p> +in 20.9.10.2.6 [util.smartptr.shared.create] there is a reference to the unqualified placement new-expression: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>new (pv) T(std::forward<Args>(args)...), +</pre></blockquote> +</li> +</ul> +<p> +I suggest to add qualification in all those places. As far as I know, +these are all the remaining places in the whole library that explicitly +use a placement new-expression. Should other uses come out, they should +be qualified as well. +</p> +<p> +As an aside, a qualified placement new-expression does not need +additional requirements to be compiled in a constrained context. By +adding qualification, the <tt>HasPlacementNew</tt> concept introduced recently in +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2677.pdf">N2677 (Foundational Concepts)</a> +would no longer be needed by library and +should therefore be removed. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Detlef: If we move this to Ready, it's likely that we'll forget about +the side comment about the <tt>HasPlacementNew</tt> concept. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +post San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Daniel: <tt>HasPlacementNew</tt> has been removed from +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2774.pdf">N2774 (Foundational Concepts)</a>. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Replace "<tt>new</tt>" with "<tt>::new</tt>" in: +</p> +<ul> +<li> +20.9.8.2 [uninitialized.copy], paragraphs 1 and 3 +</li> +<li> +20.9.8.3 [uninitialized.fill] paragraph 1 +</li> +<li> +20.9.8.4 [uninitialized.fill.n] paragraph 1 +</li> +<li> +20.9.10.2.6 [util.smartptr.shared.create] once in paragraph 1 and twice in paragraph 2. +</li> +</ul> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="868"></a>868. default construction and value-initialization</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23 [containers] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alberto Ganesh Barbati <b>Opened:</b> 2008-07-22 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-24</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#containers">issues</a> in [containers].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The term "default constructed" is often used in wording that predates +the introduction of the concept of value-initialization. In a few such +places the concept of value-initialization is more correct than the +current wording (for example when the type involved can be a built-in) +so a replacement is in order. Two of such places are already covered by +issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#867">867</a>. This issue deliberately addresses the hopefully +non-controversial changes in the attempt of being approved more quickly. +A few other occurrences (for example in <tt>std::tuple</tt>, +<tt>std::reverse_iterator</tt> and <tt>std::move_iterator</tt>) are left to separate +issues. For <tt>std::reverse_iterator</tt>, see also issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#408">408</a>. This issue is +related with issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#724">724</a>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +The list provided in the proposed resolution is not complete. James +Dennett will review the library and provide a complete list and will +double-check the vocabulary. +</p> +<p> +This issue relates to Issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#886">886</a> tuple construction +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +The proposed resolution is incomplete. +</p> +<p> +Move to Tentatively NAD Future. Howard will contact Ganesh for wording. +If wording is forthcoming, Howard will move it back to Review. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-18 Ganesh updated the proposed wording. +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Howard: Moved back to Review. Note that 20.2.1 [utility.arg.requirements] +refers to a section that is not in the current working paper, but does refer to +a section that we expect to reappear after the de-concepts merge. This was a +point of confusion we did not recognize when we reviewed this issue in Frankfurt. +</p> +<p> +Howard: Ganesh also includes a survey of places in the WP surveyed for changes +of this nature and purposefully <em>not</em> treated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Places where changes are <u>not</u> being +proposed +</p> +<p> +In the following paragraphs, we are not proposing changes because +it's not clear whether we actually prefer value-initialization over +default-initialization (now partially covered by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1012">1012</a>): +</p> +<ul> + <li><p>20.9.9.2.1 [unique.ptr.single.ctor] para 3 e 7</p></li> + <li><p>24.5.1.3.1 [reverse.iter.cons] para 1</p></li> + <li><p>24.5.3.3.1 [move.iter.op.const] para 1</p></li> +</ul> +<p>In the following paragraphs, the expression "default +constructed" need not be changed, because the relevant type does +not depend on a template parameter and has a user-provided +constructor:</p> +<ul> + <li><p> [func.referenceclosure.invoke] para 12, type: + reference_closure</p></li> + <li><p>30.3.1.2 [thread.thread.constr] para 30, type: thread</p></li> + <li><p>30.3.1.5 [thread.thread.member] para 52, type: thread_id</p></li> + <li><p>30.3.2 [thread.thread.this], para 1, type: thread_id</p></li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-08-18 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I have no objections against the currently suggested changes, but I +also cross-checked +with the list regarding intentionally excluded changes, and from this +I miss the discussion +of +</p> + +<ol> +<li> +<p> +21.4.1 [string.require]/2: +</p> + +<blockquote> +"[..] The <tt>Allocator</tt> object used shall be a copy of the <tt>Allocator></tt> +object passed to the <tt>basic_string</tt> object's +constructor or, if the constructor does not take an <tt>Allocator</tt> +argument, a copy of a default-constructed +<tt>Allocator</tt> object." +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2723.pdf">N2723</a>, +26.5.1.4 [rand.req.eng], Table 109, expression "<tt>T()</tt>": +</p> +<blockquote> +Pre-/post-condition: "Creates an engine with the same initial state as +all other default-constructed engines of type <tt>X</tt>." +</blockquote> + +<p> +as well as in 26.5.5 [rand.predef]/1-9 (<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2914.pdf">N2914</a>), 26.5.7.1 [rand.util.seedseq]/3, 27.7.1.1.1 [istream.cons]/3, 27.7.2.2 [ostream.cons]/9 (<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2914.pdf">N2914</a>), 28.13 [re.grammar]/2, 30.3.1.4 [thread.thread.assign]/1 (<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2914.pdf">N2914</a>), +</p> +<p><i>[ +Candidates for the "the expression "default constructed" need not be +changed" list +]</i></p> + + +<p> +I'm fine, if these would be added to the intentionally exclusion list, +but mentioning them makes it +easier for other potential reviewers to decide on the relevance or +not-relevance of them for this issue. +</p> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +I suggest to remove the reference of [func.referenceclosure.invoke] +in the "it's not clear" list, because +this component does no longer exist. +</p> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +I also suggest to add a short comment that all paragraphs in the +resolution whether they refer to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2723.pdf">N2723</a> or to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2914.pdf">N2914</a> numbering, because e.g. "Change 23.3.2.1 [deque.cons] para 5" is an <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2723.pdf">N2723</a> coordinate, while "Change 23.3.2.2 [deque.capacity] para 1" is an <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2914.pdf">N2914</a> coordinate. Even better would be to use one default document +for the numbering (probably <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2914.pdf">N2914</a>) and mention special cases (e.g. "Change 20.2.1 [utility.arg.requirements] para 2" as referring to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2723.pdf">N2723</a> numbering). +</p> +</li> +</ol> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-08-18 Alisdair adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I strongly believe the term "default constructed" should not appear in +the library clauses unless we very clearly define a meaning for it, and +I am not sure what that would be. +</p> + +<p> +In those cases where we do not want to replace "default constructed" +with "vale initialized" we should be using "default initialized". If we +have a term that could mean either, we reduce portability of programs. +</p> + +<p> +I have not done an exhaustive review to clarify if that is a vendor +freedom we have reason to support (e.g. value-init in debug, +default-init in release) so I may yet be convinced that LWG has reason +to define this new term of art, but generally C++ initialization is +confusing enough without supporting further ill-defined terms. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010 Pittsburgh: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to review in order to enable conflict resolution with <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#704">704</a>. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-03-26 Daniel harmonized the wording with the upcoming FCD. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><i>[ +2010 Rapperswil: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 20.2.1 [utility.arg.requirements] para 2: +</p> + +<blockquote> +2 In general, a default constructor is +not required. Certain container class member function signatures +specify <del>the default constructor</del><ins>T()</ins> +as a default argument. T() shall be a well-defined expression (8.5) +if one of those signatures is called using the default argument +(8.3.6). +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 23.3.2.1 [deque.cons] para 3: +</p> + +<blockquote> +3 <i>Effects:</i> Constructs a deque with n +<del>default constructed</del><ins>value-initialized</ins> +elements. +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 23.3.2.2 [deque.capacity] para 1: +</p> + +<blockquote> +1 <i>Effects:</i> If sz < size(), equivalent +to erase(begin() + sz, end());. If size() < sz, appends sz - +size() <del>default +constructed</del><ins>value-initialized</ins> +elements to the sequence. +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 23.3.3.1 [forwardlist.cons] para 3: +</p> + +<blockquote> +3 <i>Effects:</i> Constructs a forward_list object with n <del>default +constructed</del><ins>value-initialized</ins> +elements. +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 23.3.3.4 [forwardlist.modifiers] para 22: +</p> + +<blockquote> +22 <i>Effects:</i> [...] For the first signature +the inserted elements are <del>default +constructed</del><ins>value-initialized</ins>, +and for the second signature they are copies of c. +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 23.3.4.1 [list.cons] para 3: +</p> + +<blockquote> +3 <i>Effects:</i> Constructs a list with n <del>default +constructed</del><ins>value-initialized</ins> +elements. +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 23.3.4.2 [list.capacity] para 1: +</p> + +<blockquote> +1 <i>Effects:</i> If sz < size(), equivalent +to list<T>::iterator it = begin(); advance(it, sz); erase(it, +end());. If size() < sz, appends sz - size() <del>default +constructed</del><ins>value-initialized</ins> +elements to the sequence. +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 23.4.1.1 [vector.cons] para 3: +</p> + +<blockquote> +3 <i>Effects:</i> Constructs a vector with n +<del>default constructed</del><ins>value-initialized</ins> +elements. +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 23.4.1.2 [vector.capacity] para 9: +</p> + +<blockquote> +9 <i>Effects:</i> If sz < size(), equivalent +to erase(begin() + sz, end());. If size() < sz, appends sz - +size() <del>default +constructed</del><ins>value-initialized</ins> +elements to the sequence. +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="869"></a>869. Bucket (local) iterators and iterating past end</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2.5 [unord.req] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Sohail Somani <b>Opened:</b> 2008-07-22 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index-open.html#unord.req">active issues</a> in [unord.req].</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#unord.req">issues</a> in [unord.req].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Is there any language in the current draft specifying the behaviour of the following snippet? +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>unordered_set<int> s; +unordered_set<int>::local_iterator it = s.end(0); + +// Iterate past end - the unspecified part +it++; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +I don't think there is anything about <tt>s.end(n)</tt> being considered an +iterator for the past-the-end value though (I think) it should be. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +We believe that this is not a substantive change, but the proposed +change to the wording is clearer than what we have now. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Recommend Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change Table 97 "Unordered associative container requirements" in 23.2.5 [unord.req]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 97: Unordered associative container requirements</caption> +<tbody><tr> +<th>expression</th><th>return type</th><th>assertion/note pre/post-condition</th><th>complexity</th> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><tt>b.begin(n)</tt></td> +<td><tt>local_iterator</tt><br><tt>const_local_iterator</tt> for const <tt>b</tt>.</td> +<td>Pre: n shall be in the range [0,b.bucket_count()). <del>Note: [b.begin(n), b.end(n)) is a +valid range containing all of the elements in the n<sup>th</sup> bucket.</del> +<ins><tt>b.begin(n)</tt> returns an iterator referring to the first element in the bucket. +If the bucket is empty, then <tt>b.begin(n) == b.end(n)</tt>.</ins></td> +<td>Constant</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><tt>b.end(n)</tt></td> +<td><tt>local_iterator</tt><br><tt>const_local_iterator</tt> for const <tt>b</tt>.</td> +<td>Pre: n shall be in the range <tt>[0, b.bucket_count())</tt>. +<ins><tt>b.end(n)</tt> returns an iterator which is the past-the-end value for the bucket.</ins></td> +<td>Constant</td> +</tr> +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="870"></a>870. Do unordered containers not support function pointers for predicate/hasher?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2.5 [unord.req] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2008-08-17 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index-open.html#unord.req">active issues</a> in [unord.req].</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#unord.req">issues</a> in [unord.req].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Good ol' associative containers allow both function pointers and +function objects as feasible +comparators, as described in 23.2.4 [associative.reqmts]/2: +</p> + +<blockquote> +Each associative container is parameterized on <tt>Key</tt> and an ordering +relation <tt>Compare</tt> that +induces a strict weak ordering (25.3) on elements of Key. [..]. The +object of type <tt>Compare</tt> is +called the comparison object of a container. This comparison object +may be a pointer to +function or an object of a type with an appropriate function call operator.[..] +</blockquote> + +<p> +The corresponding wording for unordered containers is not so clear, +but I read it to disallow +function pointers for the hasher and I miss a clear statement for the +equality predicate, see +23.2.5 [unord.req]/3+4+5: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Each unordered associative container is parameterized by <tt>Key</tt>, by a +function object <tt>Hash</tt> that +acts as a hash function for values of type <tt>Key</tt>, and by a binary +predicate <tt>Pred</tt> that induces an +equivalence relation on values of type <tt>Key</tt>.[..] +</p> +<p> +A hash function is a function object that takes a single argument of +type <tt>Key</tt> and returns a +value of type <tt>std::size_t</tt>. +</p> +<p> +Two values <tt>k1</tt> and <tt>k2</tt> of type <tt>Key</tt> are considered equal if the +container's equality function object +returns <tt>true</tt> when passed those values.[..] +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +and table 97 says in the column "assertion...post-condition" for the +expression X::hasher: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<tt>Hash</tt> shall be a unary function object type such that the expression +<tt>hf(k)</tt> has type <tt>std::size_t</tt>. +</blockquote> + +<p> +Note that 20.8 [function.objects]/1 defines as "Function objects are +objects with an <tt>operator()</tt> defined.[..]" +</p> +<p> +Does this restriction exist by design or is it an oversight? If an +oversight, I suggest that to apply +the following +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-28 Reopened by Alisdair. No longer solved by concepts. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Ask Daniel to provide proposed wording that: makes it explicit that +function pointers are function objects at the beginning of 20.8 [function.objects]; fixes the "requirements" for typedefs in +20.8.4 [refwrap] to instead state that the function objects +defined in that clause have these typedefs, but not that these typedefs +are requirements on function objects; remove the wording that explicitly +calls out that associative container comparators may be function +pointers. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-12-19 Daniel updates wording and rationale. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-11 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> + +<p> +The below provided wording also affects some part of the library which is +involved with <em>callable types</em> (20.8.1 [func.def]/3). Reason for +this is that <em>callable objects</em> do have a lot in common with <em>function +objects</em>. A simple formula seems to be: +</p> + +<blockquote> +callable objects = function objects + pointers to member +</blockquote> + +<p> +The latter group is excluded from function objects because of the +expression-based usage of <em>function objects</em> in the algorithm clause, +which is incompatible with the notation to dereference pointers to member +without a concept map available in the language. +</p> + +<p> +This analysis showed some currently existing normative definition differences +between the above subset of callable objects and function objects which seem to +be unintended: Backed by the Santa Cruz outcome function objects should include +both function pointers and "object[s] with an operator() defined". This clearly +excludes class types with a conversion function to a function pointer or all +similar conversion function situations described in 13.3 [over.match]/2 +b. 2. In contrast to this, the wording for callable types seems to be less +constrained (20.8.1 [func.def]/3): +</p> + +<blockquote> +A callable type is a [..] class type whose objects can appear immediately to the +left of a function call operator. +</blockquote> + +<p> +The rationale given in <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2004/n1673.html#fn2">N1673</a> +and a recent private communication with Peter Dimov revealed that the intention +of this wording was to cover the above mentioned class types with conversion +functions as well. To me the current wording of callable types can be read +either way and I suggest to make the intention more explicit by replacing +</p> + +<blockquote> +[..] class type whose objects can appear immediately to the left of a function +call operator +</blockquote> + +by + +<blockquote> +[..] class type whose objects can appear as the leftmost subexpression of a +function call expression 5.2.2 [expr.call]. +</blockquote> + +<p> +and to use the same definition for the class type part of <em>function +objects</em>, because there is no reason to exclude class types with a +conversion function to e.g. pointer to function from being used in algorithms. +</p> + +<p> +Now this last term "function objects" itself brings us to a third unsatisfactory +state: The term is used both for objects (e.g. "Function objects are +objects[..]" in 20.8 [function.objects]/1) and for types (e.g. "Each +unordered associative container is parameterized [..] by a function object Hash +that acts as a hash function [..]" in 23.2.5 [unord.req]/3). This +impreciseness should be fixed and I suggest to introduce the term <em>function +object type</em> as the counter part to <em>callable type</em>. This word seems +to be a quite natural choice, because the library already uses it here and there +(e.g. "Hash shall be a unary function object type such that the expression +<tt>hf(k)</tt> has type <tt>std::size_t</tt>." in Table 98, "<tt>X::hasher</tt>" +or "Requires: <tt>T</tt> shall be a function object type [..]" in 20.8.14.2.5 [func.wrap.func.targ]/3). +</p> + +<p> +Finally I would like to add that part of the issue 870 discussion related to the +requirements for typedefs in 20.8.4 [refwrap] during the Santa Cruz +meeting is now handled by the new issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1290">1290</a>. +</p> + +<p> +Obsolete rationale: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p><i>[ +San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +This is fixed by +<a href="" ref="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2776.pdf">N2776</a>. +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<ol> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.8 [function.objects]/1 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +1 <del>Function objects are objects with an <tt>operator()</tt> +defined.</del> <ins>An object type (3.9 [basic.types]) that can be the +type of the <em>postfix-expression</em> in a function call (5.2.2 [expr.call], 13.3.1.1 [over.match.call]) is called a <em>function +object type</em><sup>*</sup>. A <em>function object</em> is an object of a +<em>function object type</em>.</ins> In the places where one would expect to +pass a pointer to a function to an algorithmic template (Clause 25 [algorithms]), the interface is specified to accept <del>an object with +an <tt>operator()</tt> defined</del><ins>a function object</ins>. This not only +makes algorithmic templates work with pointers to functions, but also enables +them to work with arbitrary function objects. +</p> +<blockquote><ins> +* Such a type is either a function pointer or a class type which often has a +member <tt>operator()</tt>, but in some cases it can omit that member and +provide a conversion to a pointer to function. +</ins></blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.8.1 [func.def]/3 as indicated: <i>[The intent is to make the +commonality of callable types and function object +types more explicit and to get rid of wording redundancies]</i> +</p> + +<blockquote> +3 A <i>callable type</i> is <del>a pointer to function,</del> a pointer to +member <del>function, a pointer to member data,</del> or a <del>class type whose +objects can appear immediately to the left of a function call operator</del> +<ins><em>function object type</em> (20.8 [function.objects])</ins>. +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.8.10 [bind]/1 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +1 The function template <tt>bind</tt> returns an object that binds a +<del>function</del> <ins>callable</ins> object passed as an argument to +additional arguments. +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.8.10.1 [func.bind]/1 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +1 This subclause describes a uniform mechanism for binding arguments of +<del>function</del> <ins>callable</ins> objects. +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.8.14 [func.wrap]/1 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +1 This subclause describes a polymorphic wrapper class that encapsulates +arbitrary <del>function</del> <ins>callable</ins> objects. +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.8.14.2 [func.wrap.func]/2 as indicated <i>[The reason for this +change is that 20.8.14.2 [func.wrap.func]/1 clearly says that all callable +types may be wrapped by <tt>std::function</tt> and current implementations +indeed do provide support for pointer to members as well. One further suggested +improvement is to set the below definition of Callable in italics]</i>: +</p> + +<blockquote> +2 A <del>function</del><ins>callable</ins> object <tt>f</tt> of type <tt>F</tt> +is <del>Callable</del> <ins><em>Callable</em></ins> for argument types +<del><tt>T1, T2, ..., TN</tt> in</del> <tt>ArgTypes</tt> and <del>a</del> return +type <tt>R</tt><del>,</del> if<del>, given lvalues <tt>t1, t2, ..., tN</tt> of +types <tt>T1, T2, ..., TN</tt>, respectively,</del> <ins>the expression</ins> +<tt><i>INVOKE</i>(f, <ins>declval<ArgTypes>()..., R</ins><del>t1, t2, ..., +tN</del>)</tt><ins>, considered as an unevaluated operand (5 [expr]),</ins> is well formed (20.7.2)<del> and, if <tt>R</tt> is not +<tt>void</tt>, convertible to <tt>R</tt></del>. +</blockquote> +</li> + + + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.8.14.2.1 [func.wrap.func.con]/7 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>function(const function& f); +template <class A> function(allocator_arg_t, const A& a, const function& f); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p>...</p> +<p> +7 <i>Throws:</i> shall not throw exceptions if <tt>f</tt>'s target is a function +pointer or a <del>function</del> <ins>callable</ins> object passed via +<tt>reference_wrapper</tt>. Otherwise, may throw <tt>bad_alloc</tt> or any +exception thrown by the copy constructor of the stored <del>function</del> +<ins>callable</ins> object. [<i>Note:</i> Implementations are encouraged to +avoid the use of dynamically allocated memory for small <del>function</del> +<ins>callable</ins> objects, e.g., where <tt>f</tt>'s target is an object +holding only a pointer or reference to an object and a member function pointer. +— <i>end note</i>] +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.8.14.2.1 [func.wrap.func.con]/11 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class F> function(F f); +template <class F, class A> function(allocator_arg_t, const A& a, F f); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p>...</p> +<p> +11 [..] [<i>Note:</i> implementations are encouraged to avoid the use of dynamically +allocated memory for small <del>function</del> <ins>callable</ins> objects, for +example, where <tt>f</tt>'s target is an object holding only a pointer or +reference to an object and a member function pointer. — <i>end note</i>] +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.8.14.2.4 [func.wrap.func.inv]/3 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>R operator()(ArgTypes... args) const +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p>...</p> +<p> +3 <i>Throws:</i> <tt>bad_function_call</tt> if <tt>!*this</tt>; otherwise, any +exception thrown by the wrapped <del>function</del> <ins>callable</ins> object. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.8.14.2.5 [func.wrap.func.targ]/3 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<typename T> T* target(); +template<typename T> const T* target() const; +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p>...</p> +<p> +3 <i>Requires:</i> <tt>T</tt> shall be a <del>function object</del> type that is +Callable (20.8.14.2 [func.wrap.func]) for parameter types <tt>ArgTypes</tt> +and return type <tt>R</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 23.2.4 [associative.reqmts]/2 as indicated: <i>[The suggested +removal seems harmless, because 25.4 [alg.sorting]1 already clarifies +that <tt>Compare</tt> is a function object type. Nevertheless it is recommended, +because the explicit naming of "pointer to function" is misleading]</i> +</p> + +<blockquote> +2 Each associative container is parameterized on <tt>Key</tt> and an ordering +relation <tt>Compare</tt> that induces a strict weak ordering (25.4 [alg.sorting]) on elements of <tt>Key</tt>. In addition, <tt>map</tt> +and <tt>multimap</tt> associate an arbitrary type <tt>T</tt> with the +<tt>Key</tt>. The object of type <tt>Compare</tt> is called the comparison +object of a container. <del>This comparison object may be a pointer to function +or an object of a type with an appropriate function call operator.</del> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 23.2.5 [unord.req]/3 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +3 Each unordered associative container is parameterized by <tt>Key</tt>, by a +function object <ins>type</ins> <tt>Hash</tt> that acts as a hash function for +values of type <tt>Key</tt>, and by a binary predicate <tt>Pred</tt> that +induces an equivalence relation on values of type Key. [..] +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 25.1 [algorithms.general]/7 as indicated: <i>[The intent is to +bring this part in sync with 20.8 [function.objects]]</i> +</p> + +<blockquote> +7 The <tt>Predicate</tt> parameter is used whenever an algorithm expects a +function object <ins>(20.8 [function.objects])</ins> that when applied +to the result of dereferencing the corresponding iterator returns a value +testable as <tt>true</tt>. In other words, if an algorithm takes <tt>Predicate +pred</tt> as its argument and <tt>first</tt> as its iterator argument, it should +work correctly in the construct <tt>if (pred(*first)){...}</tt>. The function +object <tt>pred</tt> shall not apply any nonconstant function through the +dereferenced iterator. <del>This function object may be a pointer to function, +or an object of a type with an appropriate function call operator.</del> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.9.9.2 [unique.ptr.single]/1 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +1 The default type for the template parameter <tt>D</tt> is +<tt>default_delete</tt>. A client-supplied template argument <tt>D</tt> shall be +a function <del>pointer or functor</del> <ins>object type</ins> for which, given +a value <tt>d</tt> of type <tt>D</tt> and a pointer <tt>ptr</tt> of type +<tt>T*</tt>, the expression <tt>d(ptr)</tt> is valid and has the effect of +deallocating the pointer as appropriate for that deleter. <tt>D</tt> may also be +an lvalue-reference to a deleter. +</blockquote> +</li> + +</ol> + + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="871"></a>871. Iota's requirements on T are too strong</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.7.5 [numeric.iota] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2008-08-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +According to the recent WP +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2691.pdf">N2691</a>, +26.7.5 [numeric.iota]/1, the requires clause +of <tt>std::iota</tt> says: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<tt>T</tt> shall meet the requirements of <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> and <tt>Assignable</tt> types, and +shall be convertible to <tt>ForwardIterator</tt>'s value type.[..] +</blockquote> + +<p> +Neither <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> nor <tt>Assignable</tt> is needed, instead <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> +seems to be the correct choice. I guess the current wording resulted as an +artifact from comparing it with similar numerical algorithms like <tt>accumulate</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +Note: If this function will be conceptualized, the here proposed +<tt>MoveConstructible</tt> +requirement can be removed, because this is an implied requirement of +function arguments, see +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2710.pdf">N2710</a>/[temp.req.impl]/3, last bullet. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +post San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Issue pulled by author prior to review. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-30 Daniel reopened: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +with the absence of concepts, this issue (closed) is valid again and I +suggest to reopen it. +I also revised by proposed resolution based on N2723 wording: +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Change 'convertible' to 'assignable', Move To Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change the first sentence of 26.7.5 [numeric.iota]/1: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Requires:</i> <tt>T</tt> shall <del>meet the requirements of <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> and +<tt>Assignable</tt> types, and shall</del> be +assignable to <tt>ForwardIterator</tt>'s value type. [..] +</blockquote> + + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="872"></a>872. <tt>move_iterator::operator[]</tt> has wrong return type</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 24.5.3.3.12 [move.iter.op.index] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Doug Gregor <b>Opened:</b> 2008-08-21 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +<tt>move_iterator</tt>'s <tt>operator[]</tt> is declared as: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>reference operator[](difference_type n) const; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +This has the same problem that <tt>reverse_iterator</tt>'s <tt>operator[]</tt> used to +have: if the underlying iterator's <tt>operator[]</tt> returns a proxy, the +implicit conversion to <tt>value_type&&</tt> could end up referencing a temporary +that has already been destroyed. This is essentially the same issue that +we dealt with for <tt>reverse_iterator</tt> in DR <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#386">386</a>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-28 Reopened by Alisdair. No longer solved by concepts. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-08-15 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +I recommend closing this as a duplicate of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1051">1051</a> which addresses +this issue for both <tt>move_iterator</tt> and <tt>reverse_iterator</tt>. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. Note that if <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1051">1051</a> is reopened, it may yield a +better resolution, but <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1051">1051</a> is currently marked NAD. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 24.5.3.1 [move.iterator] and 24.5.3.3.12 [move.iter.op.index], change the declaration of +<tt>move_iterator</tt>'s <tt>operator[]</tt> to: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>reference</del> <ins><i>unspecified</i></ins> operator[](difference_type n) const; +</pre></blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p><i>[ +San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +NAD Editorial, see +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2777.pdf">N2777</a>. +</blockquote> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="876"></a>876. <tt>basic_string</tt> access operations should give stronger guarantees</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.4 [basic.string] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2008-08-22 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#basic.string">issues</a> in [basic.string].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +During the Sophia Antipolis meeting it was decided to split-off some +parts of the +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2647.html">n2647</a> +("Concurrency modifications for <tt>basic_string</tt>") +proposal into a separate issue, because these weren't actually +concurrency-related. The here proposed changes refer to the recent +update document +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2668.htm">n2668</a> +and attempt to take advantage of the +stricter structural requirements. +</p> +<p> +Indeed there exists some leeway for more guarantees that would be +very useful for programmers, especially if interaction with transactionary +or exception-unaware C API code is important. This would also allow +compilers to take advantage of more performance optimizations, because +more functions can have throw() specifications. This proposal uses the +form of "Throws: Nothing" clauses to reach the same effect, because +there already exists a different issue in progress to clean-up the current +existing "schizophrenia" of the standard in this regard. +</p> +<p> +Due to earlier support for copy-on-write, we find the following +unnecessary limitations for C++0x: +</p> + +<ol> +<li> +Missing no-throw guarantees: <tt>data()</tt> and <tt>c_str()</tt> simply return +a pointer to their guts, which is a non-failure operation. This should +be spelled out. It is also noteworthy to mention that the same +guarantees should also be given by the size query functions, +because the combination of pointer to content and the length is +typically needed during interaction with low-level API. +</li> +<li> +Missing complexity guarantees: <tt>data()</tt> and <tt>c_str()</tt> simply return +a pointer to their guts, which is guaranteed O(1). This should be +spelled out. +</li> +<li> +Missing reading access to the terminating character: Only the +const overload of <tt>operator[]</tt> allows reading access to the terminator +char. For more intuitive usage of strings, reading access to this +position should be extended to the non-const case. In contrast +to C++03 this reading access should now be homogeneously +an lvalue access. +</li> +</ol> + +<p> +The proposed resolution is split into a main part (A) and a +secondary part (B) (earlier called "Adjunct Adjunct Proposal"). +(B) extends (A) by also making access to index position +size() of the at() overloads a no-throw operation. This was +separated, because this part is theoretically observable in +specifically designed test programs. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +We oppose part 1 of the issue but hope to address <tt>size()</tt> in +issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#877">877</a>. +</p> +<p> +We do not support part B. 4 of the issue because of the breaking API change. +</p> +<p> +We support part A. 2 of the issue. +</p> +<p> +On support part A. 3 of the issue: +</p> +<blockquote> +Pete's broader comment: now that we know that basic_string will be a +block of contiguous memory, we should just rewrite its specification +with that in mind. The expression of the specification will be simpler +and probably more correct as a result. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Move proposed resolution A to Ready. +</p> +<p><i>[ +Howard: Commented out part B. +]</i></p> + +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<ol type="A"> +<li> +<ol> +<li> +<p>In 21.4.4 [string.capacity], just after p. 1 add a new paragraph: +</p> +<blockquote> +<i>Throws:</i> Nothing. +</blockquote> + +</li> +<li> +<p> +In 21.4.5 [string.access] <em>replace</em> p. 1 by the following <em>4</em> paragraghs: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Requires:</i> <tt>pos ≤ size()</tt>. +</p> +<p> +<i>Returns:</i> If <tt>pos < size()</tt>, returns <tt>*(begin() + pos)</tt>. Otherwise, returns +a reference to a <tt>charT()</tt> that shall not be modified. +</p> +<p> +<i>Throws:</i> Nothing. +</p> +<p> +<i>Complexity:</i> Constant time. +</p> +</blockquote> + +</li> +<li> +<p> +In 21.4.7.1 [string.accessors] replace the now <em>common</em> returns +clause of <tt>c_str()</tt> and <tt>data()</tt> by the following <em>three</em> paragraphs: +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Returns:</i> A pointer <tt>p</tt> such that <tt>p+i == &operator[](i)</tt> for each <tt>i</tt> +in <tt>[0, size()]</tt>. +</p> +<p> +<i>Throws:</i> Nothing. +</p> +<p> +<i>Complexity:</i> Constant time. +</p> +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> +</li> + +</ol> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="878"></a>878. <tt>forward_list</tt> preconditions</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.3.3 [forwardlist] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2008-08-23 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#forwardlist">issues</a> in [forwardlist].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + <p> + +<tt>forward_list</tt> member functions that take +a <tt>forward_list::iterator</tt> (denoted <tt>position</tt> in the +function signatures) argument have the following precondition: + + </p> + <blockquote> + +<i>Requires:</i> <tt>position</tt> is dereferenceable or equal +to <tt>before_begin()</tt>. + + </blockquote> + <p> + +I believe what's actually intended is this: + + </p> + <blockquote> + +<i>Requires:</i> <tt>position</tt> is in the range +[<tt>before_begin()</tt>, <tt>end()</tt>). + + </blockquote> + <p> + +That is, when it's dereferenceable, <tt>position</tt> must point +into <tt>*this</tt>, not just any <tt>forward_list</tt> object. + + </p> + +<p><i>[ +San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Robert suggested alternate proposed wording which had large support. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Walter: "position is before_begin() or a dereferenceable": add "is" after the "or" +</p> +<p> +With that minor update, Recommend Tentatively Ready. +</p> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + <p> + +Change the <i>Requires</i> clauses + [forwardlist] , p21, p24, p26, p29, and, +23.3.3.5 [forwardlist.ops], p39, p43, p47 +as follows: + + </p> + <blockquote> + +<i>Requires:</i> <tt>position</tt> is <ins><tt>before_begin()</tt> or is a</ins> +dereferenceable +<ins>iterator in the range <tt>[begin(), end())</tt></ins> +<del>or equal to <tt>before_begin()</tt></del>. ... + + </blockquote> + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="881"></a>881. shared_ptr conversion issue</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.10.2.1 [util.smartptr.shared.const] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Peter Dimov <b>Opened:</b> 2008-08-30 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#util.smartptr.shared.const">issues</a> in [util.smartptr.shared.const].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +We've changed <tt>shared_ptr<Y></tt> to not convert to <tt>shared_ptr<T></tt> when <tt>Y*</tt> +doesn't convert to <tt>T*</tt> by resolving issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#687">687</a>. This only fixed the +converting copy constructor though. +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2351.htm">N2351</a> +later added move support, and +the converting move constructor is not constrained. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +We might be able to move this to NAD, Editorial once shared_ptr is +conceptualized, but we want to revisit this issue to make sure. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Moved to Ready. +</p> +<p> +This issue now represents the favored format for specifying constrained templates. +</p> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +We need to change the Requires clause of the move constructor: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>shared_ptr(shared_ptr&& r); +template<class Y> shared_ptr(shared_ptr<Y>&& r); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<i><del>Requires</del> <ins>Remarks</ins>:</i> <del>For the second constructor <tt>Y*</tt> shall be +convertible to <tt>T*</tt>.</del> +<ins> +The second constructor shall not participate in overload resolution +unless <tt>Y*</tt> is convertible to <tt>T*</tt>. +</ins> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +in order to actually make the example in <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#687">687</a> compile +(it now resolves to the move constructor). +</p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="882"></a>882. <tt>duration</tt> non-member arithmetic requirements</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.11.3.5 [time.duration.nonmember] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#CD1">CD1</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2008-09-08 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#time.duration.nonmember">issues</a> in [time.duration.nonmember].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#CD1">CD1</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2661.htm">N2661</a> +specified the following requirements for the non-member <tt>duration</tt> +arithmetic: +</p> + +<blockquote> + +<pre>template <class Rep1, class Period, class Rep2> + duration<typename common_type<Rep1, Rep2>::type, Period> + operator*(const duration<Rep1, Period>& d, const Rep2& s); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<i>Requires:</i> Let <tt>CR</tt> represent the <tt>common_type</tt> of <tt>Rep1</tt> and +<tt>Rep2</tt>. Both <tt>Rep1</tt> and <tt>Rep2</tt> shall be implicitly convertible +to CR, diagnostic required. +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class Rep1, class Period, class Rep2> + duration<typename common_type<Rep1, Rep2>::type, Period> + operator*(const Rep1& s, const duration<Rep2, Period>& d); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<i>Requires:</i> Let <tt>CR</tt> represent the <tt>common_type</tt> of +<tt>Rep1</tt> and <tt>Rep2</tt>. Both <tt>Rep1</tt> and <tt>Rep2</tt> +shall be implicitly convertible to <tt>CR</tt>, diagnostic required. +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class Rep1, class Period, class Rep2> + duration<typename common_type<Rep1, Rep2>::type, Period> + operator/(const duration<Rep1, Period>& d, const Rep2& s); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<i>Requires:</i> Let <tt>CR</tt> represent the <tt>common_type</tt> of +<tt>Rep1</tt> and <tt>Rep2</tt>. Both <tt>Rep1</tt> and <tt>Rep2</tt> shall be +implicitly convertible to <tt>CR</tt>, and <tt>Rep2</tt> shall not be an +instantiation of <tt>duration</tt>, diagnostic required. +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +During transcription into the working paper, the requirements clauses on these +three functions was changed to: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Requires:</i> <tt>CR(Rep1, Rep2)</tt> shall exist. Diagnostic required. +</blockquote> + +<p> +This is a non editorial change with respect to +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2661.htm">N2661</a> +as user written representations which are used in <tt>duration</tt> need not be +implicitly convertible to or from arithmetic types in order to interoperate with +<tt>duration</tt>s based on arithmetic types. An explicit conversion will do +fine for most expressions as long as there exists a <tt>common_type</tt> specialization +relating the user written representation and the arithmetic type. For example: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>class saturate +{ +public: + explicit saturate(long long i); + ... +}; + +namespace std { + +template <> +struct common_type<saturate, long long> +{ + typedef saturate type; +}; + +template <> +struct common_type<long long, saturate> +{ + typedef saturate type; +}; + +} // std + +millisecond ms(3); // integral-based duration +duration<saturate, milli> my_ms = ms; // ok, even with explicit conversions +my_ms = my_ms + ms; // ok, even with explicit conversions +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +However, when dealing with multiplication of a duration and its representation, +implicit convertibility is required between the rhs and the lhs's representation +for the member <tt>*=</tt> operator: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class Rep, class Period = ratio<1>> +class duration { +public: + ... + duration& operator*=(const rep& rhs); + ... +}; +... +ms *= 2; // ok, 2 is implicitly convertible to long long +my_ms *= saturate(2); // ok, rhs is lhs's representation +my_ms *= 2; // error, 2 is not implicitly convertible to saturate +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +The last line does not (and should not) compile. And we want non-member multiplication +to have the same behavior as member arithmetic: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>my_ms = my_ms * saturate(2); // ok, rhs is lhs's representation +my_ms = my_ms * 2; // <em>should be</em> error, 2 is not implicitly convertible to saturate +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +The requirements clauses of +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2661.htm">N2661</a> +make the last line an error as expected. However the latest working draft at +this time +(<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2723.pdf">N2723</a>) +allows the last line to compile. +</p> + +<p> +All that being said, there does appear to be an error in these requirements clauses +as specified by +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2661.htm">N2661</a>. +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Requires:</i> ... <em>Both</em> <tt>Rep1</tt> and <tt>Rep2</tt> shall be implicitly convertible +to CR, diagnostic required. +</blockquote> + +<p> +It is not necessary for both <tt>Rep</tt>s to be <i>implicitly</i> convertible to +the <tt>CR</tt>. It is only necessary for the rhs <tt>Rep</tt> to be implicitly +convertible to the <tt>CR</tt>. The <tt>Rep</tt> within the <tt>duration</tt> +should be allowed to only be explicitly convertible to the <tt>CR</tt>. The +explicit-conversion-requirement is covered under 20.11.3.7 [time.duration.cast]. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change the requirements clauses under 20.11.3.5 [time.duration.nonmember]: +</p> + +<blockquote> + +<pre>template <class Rep1, class Period, class Rep2> + duration<typename common_type<Rep1, Rep2>::type, Period> + operator*(const duration<Rep1, Period>& d, const Rep2& s); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<i>Requires:</i> <del><tt>CR(Rep1, Rep2)</tt> shall exist.</del> +<ins><tt>Rep2</tt> shall be implicitly convertible to <tt>CR(Rep1, Rep2)</tt>.</ins> +Diagnostic required. +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class Rep1, class Period, class Rep2> + duration<typename common_type<Rep1, Rep2>::type, Period> + operator*(const Rep1& s, const duration<Rep2, Period>& d); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<i>Require<ins>s</ins><del>d behavior</del>:</i> <del><tt>CR(Rep1, Rep2)</tt> shall exist.</del> +<ins><tt>Rep1</tt> shall be implicitly convertible to <tt>CR(Rep1, Rep2)</tt>.</ins> +Diagnostic required. +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class Rep1, class Period, class Rep2> + duration<typename common_type<Rep1, Rep2>::type, Period> + operator/(const duration<Rep1, Period>& d, const Rep2& s); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<i>Requires:</i> <del><tt>CR(Rep1, Rep2)</tt> shall exist</del> +<ins><tt>Rep2</tt> shall be implicitly convertible to <tt>CR(Rep1, Rep2)</tt></ins> +and <tt>Rep2</tt> shall not +be an instantiation of <tt>duration</tt>. Diagnostic required. +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="883"></a>883. swap circular definition</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23 [containers] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2008-09-10 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#containers">issues</a> in [containers].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p> +Note in particular that Table 90 "Container Requirements" gives +semantics of <tt>a.swap(b)</tt> as <tt>swap(a,b)</tt>, yet for all +containers we define <tt>swap(a,b)</tt> to call <tt>a.swap(b)</tt> - a +circular definition. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Robert to propose a resolution along the lines of "Postcondition: "a = +b, b = a" This will be a little tricky for the hash containers, since +they don't have <tt>operator==</tt>. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit Anthony Williams provided proposed wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Ready with minor edits (which have been made). +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In table 80 in section 23.2.1 [container.requirements.general], +replace the postcondition of <tt>a.swap(b)</tt> with the following: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 80 -- Container requirements</caption> +<tbody><tr> +<th>Expression</th> +<th>Return type</th> +<th>Operational semantics</th> +<th>Assertion/note pre-/post-conidtion</th> +<th>Complexity</th> +</tr> +<tr> +<td>...</td> +<td>...</td> +<td>...</td> +<td>...</td> +<td>...</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><tt>a.swap(b);</tt></td> +<td><tt>void</tt></td> +<td> </td> +<td><del><tt>swap(a,b)</tt></del> +<ins>Exchange the contents of <tt>a</tt> and <tt>b</tt>.</ins></td> +<td>(Note A)</td> +</tr> +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Remove the reference to swap from the paragraph following the table. +</p> + +<blockquote> +Notes: the algorithms <del><tt>swap()</tt>, </del><tt>equal()</tt> and +<tt>lexicographical_compare()</tt> are defined in Clause 25. ... +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="884"></a>884. shared_ptr swap</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.10.2.4 [util.smartptr.shared.mod] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Jonathan Wakely <b>Opened:</b> 2008-09-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-20</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<blockquote><pre>#include <memory> +#include <cassert> + +struct A { }; +struct B : A { }; + +int main() +{ + std::shared_ptr<A> pa(new A); + std::shared_ptr<B> pb(new B); + std::swap<A>(pa, pb); // N.B. no argument deduction + assert( pa.get() == pb.get() ); + return 0; +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Is this behaviour correct (I believe it is) and if so, is it +unavoidable, or not worth worrying about? +</p> + +<p> +This calls the lvalue/rvalue swap overload for <tt>shared_ptr</tt>: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class T> void swap( shared_ptr<T> & a, shared_ptr<T> && b ); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +silently converting the second argument from <tt>shared_ptr<B></tt> to +<tt>shared_ptr<A></tt> and binding the rvalue ref to the produced temporary. +</p> + +<p> +This is not, in my opinion, a <tt>shared_ptr</tt> problem; it is a general issue +with the rvalue swap overloads. Do we want to prevent this code from +compiling? If so, how? +</p> + +<p> +Perhaps we should limit rvalue args to swap to those types that would +benefit from the "swap trick". Or, since we now have <tt>shrink_to_fit()</tt>, just +eliminate the rvalue swap overloads altogether. The original motivation +was: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>vector<A> v = ...; +... +swap(v, vector<A>(v)); +</pre></blockquote> + +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2004/n1690.html#Improved%20swap%20Interface">N1690</a>. + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +We agree with the proposed resolution. +Move to <del>NAD Editorial</del><ins>Resolved</ins>. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Recommend <del>NAD Editorial</del><ins>Resolved</ins>, fixed by +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2844.html">N2844</a>. +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="885"></a>885. pair assignment</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.3.5 [pairs] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2008-09-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#pairs">issues</a> in [pairs].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<blockquote><pre>20.2.3 pairs +Missing assignemnt operator: +template<class U , class V> + requires CopyAssignable<T1, U> && CopyAssignable<T2, V> + pair& operator=(pair<U , V> const & p ); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Well, that's interesting. This assignment operator isn't in the +current working paper, either. Perhaps we deemed it acceptable to +build a temporary of type <tt>pair</tt> from <tt>pair<U, V></tt>, then move-assign +from that temporary? +</p> +<p> +It sounds more like an issue waiting to be opened, unless you want to plug +it now. As written we risk moving from lvalues. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Would be NAD if better ctors fixed it. +</p> +<p> +Related to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#811">811</a>. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +post San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Possibly NAD Editorial, solved by +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2770.pdf">N2770</a>. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-25 Alisdair adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#885">885</a> was something I reported while reviewing the library concepts +documents ahead of San Francisco. The missing operator was added as part of +the paper adopted at that meeting +(<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2770.pdf">N2770</a>) +and I can confirm this operator is +present in the current working paper. I recommend NAD. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +We agree with the intent, but we need to wait for the dust to settle on concepts. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-03-11 Stefanus provided wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010 Pittsburgh: Moved to Ready for Pittsburgh. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add the following declaration 20.3.5.2 [pairs.pair], before the +declaration of <tt>pair& operator=(pair&& p);</tt>: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class U, class V> pair& operator=(const pair<U, V>& p); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Add the following description to 20.3.5.2 [pairs.pair] after paragraph 11 (before +the description of <tt>pair& operator=(pair&& p);)</tt>: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class U, class V> pair& operator=(const pair<U, V>& p); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Requires:</i> <tt>T1</tt> shall satisfy the requirements of +<tt>CopyAssignable</tt> from <tt>U</tt>. <tt>T2</tt> shall +satisfy the requirements of <tt>CopyAssignable</tt> from <tt>V</tt>. +</p> +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Assigns <tt>p.first</tt> to <tt>first</tt> and +<tt>p.second</tt> to <tt>second</tt>. +</p> +<p> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt>*this</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="886"></a>886. tuple construction</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.4.2.1 [tuple.cnstr] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2008-09-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#tuple.cnstr">issues</a> in [tuple.cnstr].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +20.4.2.1 [tuple.cnstr]: +</p> +<blockquote> +<i>Effects:</i> Default initializes each element. +</blockquote> + +<p> +Could be clarified to state each "non-trivial" element. Otherwise +we have a conflict with Core deinfition of default initialization - +trivial types do not get initialized (rather than initialization +having no effect) +</p> + +<p> +I'm going to punt on this one, because it's not an issue that's +related to concepts. I suggest bringing it to Howard's attention on +the reflector. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Text in draft doesn't mean anything, changing to "non-trivial" makes it +meaningful. +</p> +<p> +We prefer "value initializes". Present implementations use +value-initialization. Users who don't want value initialization have +alternatives. +</p> +<p> +Request resolution text from Alisdair. +</p> + +<p> +This issue relates to Issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#868">868</a> default construction and value-initialization. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-04 Alisdair provided wording and adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Note: This <em>IS</em> a change of semantic from TR1, although one the room agreed +with during the discussion. To preserve TR1 semantics, this would have been +worded: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>requires DefaultConstructible<Types>... tuple(); +</pre> +<blockquote> +-2- <i>Effects:</i> Default-initializes each non-trivial element. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change p2 in Construction 20.4.2.1 [tuple.cnstr]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>requires DefaultConstructible<Types>... tuple(); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +-2- <i>Effects:</i> <del>Default</del> <ins>Value-</ins>initializes each element. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="888"></a>888. this_thread::yield too strong</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30.3.2 [thread.thread.this] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Lawrence Crowl <b>Opened:</b> 2008-09-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index-open.html#thread.thread.this">active issues</a> in [thread.thread.this].</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#thread.thread.this">issues</a> in [thread.thread.this].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +I never thought I'd say this, but <tt>this_thread::yield</tt> seems to be too +strong in specification. The issue is that some systems distinguish +between yielding to another thread in the same process and yielding +to another process. Given that the C++ standard only talks about +a single program, one can infer that the specification allows yielding +only to another thread within the same program. Posix has no +facility for that behavior. Can you please file an issue to weaken +the wording. Perhaps "Offers the operating system the opportunity +to reschedule." +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Recommend move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 30.3.2 [thread.thread.this]/3: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>void this_thread::yield(); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<i>Effects:</i> Offers the <del>operating system</del> <ins>implementation</ins> +the opportunity to <ins>re</ins>schedule. +<del>another thread.</del> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="890"></a>890. Improving <tt><system_error></tt> initialization</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 19.5.1 [syserr.errcat] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Beman Dawes <b>Opened:</b> 2008-09-14 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The <tt>static const error_category</tt> objects <tt>generic_category</tt> and +<tt>system_category</tt> in header <tt><system_error></tt> are currently declared: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>const error_category& get_generic_category(); +const error_category& get_system_category(); + +static const error_category& generic_category = get_generic_category(); +static const error_category& system_category = get_system_category(); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +This formulation has several problems: +</p> + +<ul> +<li> +Implementation details are exposed, since initialization is specified in +the interface. This over-constrains implementations without offsetting +user benefits. The form of initialization specified may be less than +maximally efficient on some platforms. +</li> +<li> +Use of the objects is more expensive in terms of number of machine level +instructions. See <i>Implementation experience</i> below. +</li> +<li> +Depending on the compiler, some cost may be incurred by each translation unit +that includes the header, even if the objects are not used. This is a +common scenario in user code, since the header is included by other +standard library headers. It should be mentioned that at least one +compilers is able to optimize this cost away, however. +</li> +</ul> + +<p> +IO streams uses a somewhat different formulation for iostream_category, but +still suffer much the same problems. +</p> + +<p> +The original plan was to eliminate these problems by applying the C++0x +<tt>constexpr</tt> feature. See LWG issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#832">832</a>. However, that approach turned out +to be unimplementable, since it would require a <tt>constexpr</tt> object of a +class with virtual functions, and that is not allowed by the core +language. +</p> + +<p> +The proposed resolution was developed as an alternative. It mitigates the above +problems by removing initialization from the visible interface, allowing +implementations flexibility. +</p> + +<p> +<b>Implementation experience:</b> +</p> + +<p> +Prototype implementations of the current WP interface and proposed +resolution interface were tested with recent Codegear, GCC, Intel, and Microsoft +compilers on Windows. The code generated by the Microsoft compiler was studied +at length; the WP and proposal versions generated very similar code. For both versions +the compiler did make use of static +initialization; apparently the compiler applied an implicit <tt>constexpr</tt> +where useful, even in cases where <tt>constexpr</tt> would not be permitted by +the language! +</p> + +<p> +<b>Acknowledgements:</b> +</p> + +<p> +Martin Sebor, Chris Kohlhoff, and John Lakos provided useful ideas and comments on initialization issues. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Martin: prefers not to create more file-scope static objects, and would +like to see <tt>get_*</tt> functions instead. +</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><i>[Pre-Summit:]</i></p> + +<blockquote> + + +<p> +Beman: The proposed resolution has been reworked to remove the file-scope +static objects, per Martin's suggestions. The <tt>get_</tt> prefix has been +eliminated from the function names as no longer necessary and to conform with +standard library naming practice. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Agreement that this is wise and essential, text provided works and has +been implemented. Seems to be widespread consensus. Move to Tentative Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p>Change 17.6.4.14 [value.error.codes] Value of error codes as indicated:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>Certain functions in the C++ standard library report errors via a + <tt>std::error_code</tt> (19.4.2.2) object. That object's <tt>category()</tt> member shall + return <del>a reference to</del> <code>std::system_category</code><tt><ins><code>()</code></ins></tt> for errors originating from the + operating system, or a reference to an implementation-defined error_category + object for errors originating elsewhere. The implementation shall define the + possible values of value() for each of these error categories. [<i>Example:</i> For + operating systems that are based on POSIX, implementations are encouraged to + define the <code>std::system_category</code><tt><ins><code>()</code></ins></tt> values as identical to the POSIX <tt>errno</tt> values, + with additional values as defined by the operating system's documentation. + Implementations for operating systems that are not based on POSIX are + encouraged to define values identical to the operating system's values. For + errors that do not originate from the operating system, the implementation may + provide enums for the associated values --<i>end example</i>]</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 19.5.1.1 [syserr.errcat.overview] Class <tt>error_category</tt> overview +<tt>error_category</tt> synopsis as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>const error_category& <del>get_</del>generic_category(); +const error_category& <del>get_</del>system_category(); + +<del>static storage-class-specifier const error_category& generic_category = get_generic_category(); +static storage-class-specifier const error_category& system_category = get_system_category();</del> +</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 19.5.1.5 [syserr.errcat.objects] Error category objects as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>const error_category& <del>get_</del>generic_category(); +</pre> + +<blockquote> + +<p> +<i>Returns:</i> A reference to an object of a type derived from class <tt>error_category</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +<i>Remarks:</i> The object's <tt>default_error_condition</tt> and <tt>equivalent</tt> virtual +functions shall behave as specified for the class <tt>error_category</tt>. The +object's <tt>name</tt> virtual function shall return a pointer to the string +<tt>"GENERIC"</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<pre>const error_category& <del>get_</del>system_category(); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Returns:</i> A reference to an object of a type derived from class <tt>error_category</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +<i>Remarks:</i> The object's <tt>equivalent</tt> virtual functions shall behave as +specified for class <tt>error_category</tt>. The object's <tt>name</tt> virtual function +shall return a pointer to the string <tt>"system"</tt>. The object's +<tt>default_error_condition</tt> virtual function shall behave as follows: +</p> +<blockquote> +If the argument <tt>ev</tt> corresponds to a POSIX <tt>errno</tt> value <tt>posv</tt>, the function +shall return <tt>error_condition(posv, generic_category<ins>()</ins>)</tt>. Otherwise, the +function shall return <tt>error_condition(ev, system_category<ins>()</ins>)</tt>. What +constitutes correspondence for any given operating system is +unspecified. [<i>Note:</i> The number of potential system error codes is large +and unbounded, and some may not correspond to any POSIX <tt>errno</tt> value. +Thus implementations are given latitude in determining correspondence. +<i>-- end note</i>] +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p>Change 19.5.2.2 [syserr.errcode.constructors] Class error_code constructors +as indicated:</p> +<blockquote> + <pre>error_code();</pre> + <blockquote> + <p><i>Effects:</i> Constructs an object of type error_code.</p> + <p><i>Postconditions:</i> <code>val_ == 0 </code>and <code>cat_ == &system_category</code><tt><ins>()</ins></tt>.</p> + </blockquote> +</blockquote> +<p>Change 19.5.2.3 [syserr.errcode.modifiers] Class error_code modifiers as +indicated:</p> +<blockquote> + <pre>void clear();</pre> + <blockquote> + <p>Postconditions: <code>value() == 0</code> and <code>category() == + system_category</code><tt><ins>()</ins></tt>.</p> + </blockquote> +</blockquote> +<p>Change 19.5.2.5 [syserr.errcode.nonmembers] Class error_code non-member +functions as indicated:</p> +<blockquote> + <pre>error_code make_error_code(errc e);</pre> + <blockquote> + <p><i>Returns:</i> <code>error_code(static_cast<int>(e), generic_category</code><tt><ins>()</ins></tt><code>)</code>.</p> + </blockquote> +</blockquote> +<p>Change 19.5.3.2 [syserr.errcondition.constructors] Class error_condition +constructors as indicated:</p> +<blockquote> + <pre>error_condition();</pre> + <blockquote> + <p><i>Effects:</i> Constructs an object of type <code>error_condition</code>.</p> + <p><i>Postconditions:</i> <code>val_ == 0</code> and <code>cat_ == &generic_category</code><tt><ins>()</ins></tt>.</p> + </blockquote> +</blockquote> +<p>Change 19.5.3.3 [syserr.errcondition.modifiers] Class error_condition +modifiers as indicated:</p> +<blockquote> + <pre>void clear();</pre> + <blockquote> + <p><i>Postconditions:</i> <code>value() == 0</code> and <code>category() == + generic_category</code><tt><ins>()</ins></tt>.</p> + </blockquote> +</blockquote> +<p>Change 19.5.3.5 [syserr.errcondition.nonmembers] Class error_condition +non-member functions as indicated:</p> +<blockquote> + <pre>error_condition make_error_condition(errc e);</pre> + <blockquote> + <p><i>Returns:</i> <tt>error_condition(static_cast<int>(e), generic_category<ins>()</ins>)</tt>.</p> + </blockquote> +</blockquote> + <p>Change 27.5 [iostreams.base] Iostreams base classes, Header <ios> + synopsis as indicated:</p> +<blockquote> + <pre>concept_map ErrorCodeEnum<io_errc> { }; +error_code make_error_code(io_errc e); +error_condition make_error_condition(io_errc e); +<del>storage-class-specifier</del> const error_category& iostream_category<ins>()</ins>;</pre> +</blockquote> +<p>Change 27.5.2.1.1 [ios::failure] Class ios_base::failure, paragraph 2 as +indicated:</p> +<blockquote> +<p>When throwing ios_base::failure exceptions, implementations should provide +values of ec that identify the specific reason for the failure. [ Note: Errors +arising from the operating system would typically be reported as <tt> +system_category</tt><tt><ins>()</ins></tt> errors with an error value of the +error number reported by the operating system. Errors arising from within the +stream library would typically be reported as <tt>error_code(io_errc::stream, +iostream_category<ins>()</ins>)</tt>. --end note ]</p> +</blockquote> +<p>Change 27.5.5.5 [error.reporting] Error reporting as indicated:</p> +<blockquote> + <pre>error_code make_error_code(io_errc e);</pre> + <blockquote> + <p><i>Returns:</i> <code>error_code(static_cast<int>(e), iostream_category</code><ins>()</ins><code>)</code>.</p> + </blockquote> + <pre>error_condition make_error_condition(io_errc e);</pre> + <blockquote> + <p><i>Returns:</i> <code>error_condition(static_cast<int>(e), + iostream_category</code><ins>()</ins><code>)</code>.</p> + </blockquote> + <pre><del>storage-class-specifier</del> const error_category& iostream_category<ins>()</ins>;</pre> + <blockquote> + <del><p>The implementation shall initialize iostream_category. Its storage-class-specifier + may be static or extern. It is unspecified whether initialization is static + or dynamic (3.6.2). If initialization is dynamic, it shall occur before + completion of the dynamic initialization of the first translation unit + dynamically initialized that includes header <system_error>.</p></del> +<p> +<ins><i>Returns:</i> A reference to an object of a type derived from class <tt>error_category</tt>.</ins> +</p> +<p><i>Remarks:</i> The object's default_error_condition and equivalent virtual functions shall +behave as specified for the class error_category. The object's name virtual +function shall return a pointer to the string "iostream".</p> + </blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="891"></a>891. std::thread, std::call_once issue</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30.3.1.2 [thread.thread.constr], 30.4.4.2 [thread.once.callonce] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Peter Dimov <b>Opened:</b> 2008-09-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#thread.thread.constr">issues</a> in [thread.thread.constr].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +I notice that the vararg overloads of <tt>std::thread</tt> and <tt>std::call_once</tt> +(N2723 30.3.1.2 [thread.thread.constr] and 30.4.4.2 [thread.once.callonce]) are no longer specified in terms of +<tt>std::bind</tt>; instead, some of the <tt>std::bind</tt> wording has been inlined into +the specification. +</p> +<p> +There are two problems with this. +</p> +<p> +First, the specification (and implementation) in terms of <tt>std::bind</tt> allows, for example: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>std::thread th( f, 1, std::bind( g ) ); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +which executes <tt>f( 1, g() )</tt> in a thread. This can be useful. The +"inlined" formulation changes it to execute <tt>f( 1, bind(g) )</tt> in a thread. +</p> +<p> +Second, assuming that we don't want the above, the specification has copied the wording +</p> + +<blockquote> +<tt>INVOKE(func, w1, w2, ..., wN)</tt> (20.6.2) shall be a valid +expression for some values <tt>w1, w2, ..., wN</tt> +</blockquote> + +<p> +but this is not needed since we know that our argument list is args; it should simply be +</p> + +<blockquote> +<tt>INVOKE(func, args...)</tt> (20.6.2) shall be a valid expression +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to open. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit Anthony provided proposed wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Leave Open. Await decision for thread variadic constructor. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +See proposed wording for <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#929">929</a> for this, for the formulation +on how to solve this. <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#929">929</a> modifies the thread constructor to +have "pass by value" behavior with pass by reference efficiency through the use +of the <tt>decay</tt> trait. This same formula would be useful for <tt>call_once</tt>. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-11 Anthony updates wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-12 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 postive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Modify 30.4.4.2 [thread.once.callonce] p1-p2 with the following: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template<class Callable, class ...Args> + void call_once(once_flag& flag, Callable<ins>&&</ins> func, Args&&... args);</pre> +<blockquote> + +<p><ins> +Given a function as follows: +</ins></p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins> +template<typename T> typename decay<T>::type decay_copy(T&& v) + { return std::forward<T>(v); } +</ins></pre></blockquote> + +<p> +1 <i>Requires:</i> <del>The template parameters</del> <tt>Callable</tt> and each +<tt>Ti</tt> in <tt>Args</tt> shall <del>be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> if an +lvalue and otherwise</del> <ins>satisfy the</ins> +<tt>MoveConstructible</tt> <ins>requirements</ins>. +<tt><i>INVOKE</i>(<ins>decay_copy(std::forward<Callable>(</ins>func<ins>)</ins>, +<del>w1, w2, ..., wN</del> +<ins>decay_copy(std::forward<Args>(args))...</ins>)</tt> (20.8.2 [func.require]) shall be a valid expression<del> for some values <tt>w1, +w2, ..., wN</tt>, where <tt>N == sizeof...(Args)</tt></del>. +</p> + +<p> +2 <i>Effects:</i> Calls to <tt>call_once</tt> on the same <tt>once_flag</tt> +object are serialized. If there has been a prior effective call to +<tt>call_once</tt> on the same <tt>once_flag</tt> object, the call to +<tt>call_once</tt> returns without invoking <tt>func</tt>. If there has been no +prior effective call to <tt>call_once</tt> on the same <tt>once_flag</tt> +object, <del>the argument <tt>func</tt> (or a copy thereof) is called as if by +invoking <tt>func(args)</tt></del> +<ins><tt><i>INVOKE</i>(decay_copy(std::forward<Callable>(func)), +decay_copy(std::forward<Args>(args))...)</tt> is executed</ins>. The call +to <tt>call_once</tt> is effective if and only if <del><tt>func(args)</tt></del> +<ins><tt><i>INVOKE</i>(decay_copy(std::forward<Callable>(func)), +decay_copy(std::forward<Args>(args))...)</tt></ins> returns without +throwing an exception. If an exception is thrown it is propagated to the caller. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="893"></a>893. std::mutex issue</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30.4.1.2.1 [thread.mutex.class] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Peter Dimov <b>Opened:</b> 2008-09-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#thread.mutex.class">issues</a> in [thread.mutex.class].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#905">905</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +30.4.1.2.1 [thread.mutex.class]/27 (in +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2723.pdf">N2723</a>) +says that the behavior is undefined if: +</p> +<ul> +<li>a thread that owns a <tt>mutex</tt> object calls <tt>lock()</tt> or +<tt>try_lock()</tt> on that object</li> +</ul> +<p> +I don't believe that this is right. Calling <tt>lock()</tt> or <tt>try_lock()</tt> on a +locked <tt>mutex</tt> is well defined in the general case. <tt>try_lock()</tt> is required +to fail and return <tt>false</tt>. <tt>lock()</tt> is required to either throw an +exception (and is allowed to do so if it detects deadlock) or to block +until the <tt>mutex</tt> is free. These general requirements apply regardless of +the current owner of the <tt>mutex</tt>; they should apply even if it's owned by +the current thread. +</p> +<p> +Making double <tt>lock()</tt> undefined behavior probably can be justified (even +though I'd still disagree with the justification), but <tt>try_lock()</tt> on a +locked <tt>mutex</tt> must fail. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Summit: +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Move to open. Proposed resolution: +</p> +<ul> +<li> +In 30.4.1 [thread.mutex.requirements] paragraph 12, change the error +condition for <tt>resource_deadlock_would_occur</tt> to: "if the implementation +detects that a deadlock would occur" +</li> +<li> +Strike 30.4.1.2.1 [thread.mutex.class] paragraph 3 bullet 2 "a thread that owns a mutex object +calls <tt>lock()</tt> or <tt>try_lock()</tt> on that object, or" +</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Review. Alisdair to provide note. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-31 Alisdair provided note. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Ready. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-18 Peter Opens: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I don't believe that the proposed note: +</p> + +<blockquote> +[<i>Note:</i> a program may deadlock if the thread that owns a <tt>mutex</tt> +object calls <tt>lock()</tt> or <tt>try_lock()</tt> on that object. If the program can +detect the deadlock, a <tt>resource_deadlock_would_occur</tt> error condition may +be observed. — <i>end note</i>] +</blockquote> + +<p> +is entirely correct. "or <tt>try_lock()</tt>" should be removed, because +<tt>try_lock</tt> is non-blocking and doesn't deadlock; it just returns +<tt>false</tt> when it fails to lock the mutex. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Howard: I've set to Open and updated the wording per Peter's suggestion. +]</i></p> + + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-18 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 30.4.1 [thread.mutex.requirements] paragraph 12 change: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<ul> +<li>...</li> +<li> +<tt>resource_deadlock_would_occur</tt> -- if the <del>current thread already owns the mutex and is able +to detect it</del> <ins>implementation detects that a deadlock would occur</ins>. +</li> +<li>...</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Strike 30.4.1.2.1 [thread.mutex.class] paragraph 3 bullet 2: +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +-3- The behavior of a program is undefined if: +</p> +<ul> +<li>...</li> +<li> +<del>a thread that owns a <tt>mutex</tt> object calls <tt>lock()</tt> or <tt>try_lock()</tt> on that object, or</del> +</li> +<li>...</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Add the following note after p3 30.4.1.2.1 [thread.mutex.class] +</p> + +<blockquote> +[<i>Note:</i> a program may deadlock if the thread that owns a <tt>mutex</tt> +object calls <tt>lock()</tt> on that object. If the implementation can detect the +deadlock, a <tt>resource_deadlock_would_occur</tt> error condition may be +observed. — <i>end note</i>] +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="894"></a>894. longjmp and destructors</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.10 [support.runtime] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Lawrence Crowl, Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2008-09-17 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#support.runtime">issues</a> in [support.runtime].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The interaction between <tt>longjmp</tt> and exceptions seems unnecessarily +restrictive and not in keeping with existing practice. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Edit paragraph 4 of 18.10 [support.runtime] as follows: +</p> + +<blockquote> +The function signature <tt>longjmp(jmp_buf jbuf, int val)</tt> has more +restricted behavior in this International Standard. A +<tt>setjmp/longjmp</tt> call pair has undefined behavior if replacing the +<tt>setjmp</tt> and <tt>longjmp</tt> by <tt>catch</tt> and +<tt>throw</tt> would <del>destroy</del> +<ins>invoke any non-trivial destructors for</ins> +any automatic objects. +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="896"></a>896. Library thread safety issue</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.10.2 [util.smartptr.shared] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Hans Boehm <b>Opened:</b> 2008-09-16 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#util.smartptr.shared">issues</a> in [util.smartptr.shared].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +It is unclear whether <tt>shared_ptr</tt> is thread-safe in the sense that +multiple threads may simultaneously copy a <tt>shared_ptr</tt>. However this +is a critical piece of information for the client, and it has significant +impact on usability for many applications. (Detlef Vollman thinks it +is currently clear that it is not thread-safe. Hans Boehm thinks +it currently requires thread safety, since the <tt>use_count</tt> is not an +explicit field, and constructors and assignment take a const reference +to an existing <tt>shared_ptr</tt>.) +</p> + +<p> +Pro thread-safety: +</p> +<p> +Many multi-threaded usages are impossible. A thread-safe version can +be used to destroy an object when the last thread drops it, something +that is often required, and for which we have no other easy mechanism. +</p> +<p> +Against thread-safety: +</p> +<p> +The thread-safe version is well-known to be far more expensive, even +if used by a single thread. Many applications, including all single-threaded +ones, do not care. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +San Francisco: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Beman: this is a complicated issue, and would like to move this to Open +and await comment from Peter Dimov; we need very careful and complete +rationale for any decision we make; let's go slow +</p> +<p> +Detlef: I think that <tt>shared_ptr</tt> should not be thread-safe. +</p> +<p> +Hans: When you create a thread with a lambda, it in some cases makes it +very difficult for the lambda to reference anything in the heap. It's +currently ambiguous as to whether you can use a <tt>shared_ptr</tt> to get at an +object. +</p> +<p> +Leave in Open. Detlef will submit an alternative proposed resolution +that makes <tt>shared_ptr</tt> explicitly unsafe. +</p> +<p> +A third option is to support both threadsafe and non-safe share_ptrs, +and to let the programmer decide which behavior they want. +</p> + +<p> +Beman: Peter, do you support the PR? +</p> + +<p> +Peter: +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +Yes, I support the proposed resolution, and I certainly oppose any +attempts to <tt>make shared_ptr</tt> thread-unsafe. +</p> +<p> +I'd mildly prefer if +</p> +<blockquote> +[<i>Note:</i> This is true in spite of that fact that such functions often +modify <tt>use_count()</tt> <i>--end note</i>] +</blockquote> +<p> +is changed to +</p> +<blockquote> +[<i>Note:</i> This is true in spite of that fact that such functions often +cause a change in <tt>use_count()</tt> <i>--end note</i>] +</blockquote> +<p> +(or something along these lines) to emphasise that <tt>use_count()</tt> is not, +conceptually, a variable, but a return value. +</p> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Vote: Do we want one thread-safe shared pointer or two? If two, one +would allow concurrent construction and destruction of shared pointers, +and one would not be thread-safe. If one, then it would be thread-safe. +</p> +<p> +No concensus on that vote. +</p> +<p> +Hans to improve wording in consultation with Pete. Leave Open. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. Ask Editor to clear up wording a little when integrating to +make it clear that the portion after the first comma only applies for +the presence of data races. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10-24 Hans adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I think we need to pull 896 back from ready, unfortunately. My wording +doesn't say the right thing. +</p> + +<p> +I suspect we really want to say something along the lines of: +</p> + +<blockquote> +For purposes of determining the presence of a data race, member +functions access and modify only the <tt>shared_ptr</tt> and +<tt>weak_ptr</tt> objects themselves and not objects they refer to. +Changes in <tt>use_count()</tt> do not reflect modifications that can +introduce data races. +</blockquote> + +<p> +But I think this needs further discussion by experts to make sure this +is right. +</p> + +<p> +Detlef and I agree continue to disagree on the resolution, but I think +we agree that it would be good to try to expedite this so that it can be +in CD2, since it's likely to generate NB comments no matter what we do. +And lack of clarity of intent is probably the worst option. I think it +would be good to look at this between meetings. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-01-20 Howard: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I've moved Hans' suggested wording above into the proposed resolution section +and preserved the previous wording here: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Make it explicitly thread-safe, in this weak sense, as I believe was intended: +</p> +<p> +Insert in 20.9.10.2 [util.smartptr.shared], before p5: +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +For purposes of determining the presence of a data race, +member functions do not modify <tt>const shared_ptr</tt> and +const <tt>weak_ptr</tt> arguments, nor any objects they +refer to. [<i>Note:</i> This is true in spite of that fact that such functions often +cause a change in <tt>use_count()</tt> <i>--end note</i>] +</p> +</blockquote> +<p> +On looking at the text, I'm not sure we need a similar disclaimer +anywhere else, since nothing else has the problem with the modified +<tt>use_count()</tt>. I think Howard arrived at a similar conclusion. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010 Pittsburgh: Moved to Ready for Pittsburgh +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +Insert a new paragraph at the end of 20.9.10.2 [util.smartptr.shared]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +For purposes of determining the presence of a data race, member functions access +and modify only the <tt>shared_ptr</tt> and <tt>weak_ptr</tt> objects themselves +and not objects they refer to. Changes in <tt>use_count()</tt> do not reflect +modifications that can introduce data races. +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="898"></a>898. Small contradiction in n2723 to forward to committee</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.3.3.5 [forwardlist.ops] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Arch Robison <b>Opened:</b> 2008-09-08 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#forwardlist.ops">issues</a> in [forwardlist.ops].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +I ran across a small contradiction in working draft n2723. +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +23.3.3 [forwardlist]p2: A <tt>forward_list</tt> satisfies all of the +requirements of a container (table 90), except that the <tt>size()</tt> member +function is not provided. +</p> +<p> +23.3.3.5 [forwardlist.ops]p57: <i>Complexity:</i> At most <tt>size() + x.size() - 1</tt> +comparisons. +</p> +</blockquote> +<p> +Presumably 23.3.3.5 [forwardlist.ops]p57 needs to be rephrased to not use +<tt>size()</tt>, or note that it is used there only for sake of notational convenience. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-03-29 Beman provided proposed wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +We agree with the proposed resolution. +</p> +<p> +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p><i>Change 23.3.3.5 [forwardlist.ops], +forward_list operations, paragraph 19, merge complexity as indicated: +</i></p> +<blockquote><i>Complexity:</i> At most <tt><del>size() + x.size()</del> +<ins>distance(begin(), end()) + distance(x.begin(), x.end())</ins> - 1</tt> +comparisons. +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="899"></a>899. Adjusting <tt>shared_ptr</tt> for <tt>nullptr_t</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.10.2.2 [util.smartptr.shared.dest] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Peter Dimov <b>Opened:</b> 2008-09-18 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#util.smartptr.shared.dest">issues</a> in [util.smartptr.shared.dest].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +James Dennett, message c++std-lib-22442: +</p> +<blockquote> +The wording below addresses one case of this, but opening an +issue to address the need to sanity check uses of the term "pointer" +in 20.9.10.2 [util.smartptr.shared] would be a good thing. +</blockquote> +<p> +There's one more reference, in <tt>~shared_ptr;</tt> we can apply your suggested change to it, too. That is: +</p> +<p> +Change 20.9.10.2.2 [util.smartptr.shared.dest]/1 second bullet from: +</p> +<blockquote> +Otherwise, if *this owns a pointer p and a deleter d, d(p) is called. +</blockquote> +<p> +to: +</p> +<blockquote> +Otherwise, if *this owns an object p and a deleter d, d(p) is called. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Recommend Review. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Peter Dimov notes the analogous change has already been made +to "the new nullptr_t taking constructors +in 20.9.10.2.1 [util.smartptr.shared.const] p9-13." +</p> +<p> +We agree with the proposed resolution. +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 20.9.10.2.2 [util.smartptr.shared.dest]/1 second bullet: +</p> +<blockquote> +<ul> +<li>...</li> +<li> +Otherwise, if <tt>*this</tt> <i>owns</i> <del>a pointer</del> +<ins>an object</ins> <tt>p</tt> and a +deleter <tt>d</tt>, <tt>d(p)</tt> is called. +</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="900"></a>900. stream move-assignment</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.9.1.8 [ifstream.assign] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Niels Dekker <b>Opened:</b> 2008-09-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +It +appears that we have an issue similar to issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#675">675</a> regarding the move-assignment of +stream types. For example, when assigning to an <tt>std::ifstream</tt>, +<tt>ifstream1</tt>, it seems preferable to close the file originally held by +<tt>ifstream1</tt>: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>ifstream1 = std::move(ifstream2); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +The current Draft +(<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2723.pdf">N2723</a>) +specifies that the move-assignment of +stream types like <tt>ifstream</tt> has the same effect as a swap: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Assign and swap 27.9.1.8 [ifstream.assign] +</p> +<pre>basic_ifstream& operator=(basic_ifstream&& rhs); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<i>Effects:</i> <tt>swap(rhs)</tt>. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Howard agrees with the analysis and the direction proposed. +</p> +<p> +Move to Open pending specific wording to be supplied by Howard. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Howard is going to write wording. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-26 Howard provided wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-09-13 Niels adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Note: The proposed change of 27.9.1.3 [filebuf.assign]/1 depends on the +resolution of LWG <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1204">1204</a>, which allows implementations to assume that +<tt>*this</tt> and <tt>rhs</tt> refer to different objects. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Leave as Open. Too closely related to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#911">911</a> to move on at this time. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010 Pittsburgh: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Ready for Pittsburgh. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +Change 27.8.1.2 [stringbuf.assign]/1: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>basic_stringbuf& operator=(basic_stringbuf&& rhs); +</pre> +<blockquote> +-1- <i>Effects:</i> <del><tt>swap(rhs)</tt>.</del> +<ins>After the move assignment <tt>*this</tt> reflects the same observable +state it would have if it had been move constructed from <tt>rhs</tt> +(27.8.1.1 [stringbuf.cons]). +</ins> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 27.8.2.2 [istringstream.assign]/1: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>basic_istringstream& operator=(basic_istringstream&& rhs); +</pre> +<blockquote> +-1- <i>Effects:</i> <del><tt>swap(rhs)</tt>.</del> +<ins>Move assigns the base and members of <tt>*this</tt> with the respective +base and members of <tt>rhs</tt>. +</ins> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 27.8.3.2 [ostringstream.assign]/1: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>basic_ostringstream& operator=(basic_ostringstream&& rhs); +</pre> +<blockquote> +-1- <i>Effects:</i> <del><tt>swap(rhs)</tt>.</del> +<ins>Move assigns the base and members of <tt>*this</tt> with the respective +base and members of <tt>rhs</tt>. +</ins> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 27.8.5.1 [stringstream.assign]/1: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>basic_stringstream& operator=(basic_stringstream&& rhs); +</pre> +<blockquote> +-1- <i>Effects:</i> <del><tt>swap(rhs)</tt>.</del> +<ins>Move assigns the base and members of <tt>*this</tt> with the respective +base and members of <tt>rhs</tt>. +</ins> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 27.9.1.3 [filebuf.assign]/1: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>basic_filebuf& operator=(basic_filebuf&& rhs); +</pre> +<blockquote> +-1- <i>Effects:</i> <del><tt>swap(rhs)</tt>.</del> +<ins>Begins by calling <tt>this->close()</tt>. +After the move assignment <tt>*this</tt> reflects the same observable +state it would have if it had been move constructed from <tt>rhs</tt> +(27.9.1.2 [filebuf.cons]). +</ins> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 27.9.1.8 [ifstream.assign]/1: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>basic_ifstream& operator=(basic_ifstream&& rhs); +</pre> +<blockquote> +-1- <i>Effects:</i> <del><tt>swap(rhs)</tt>.</del> +<ins>Move assigns the base and members of <tt>*this</tt> with the respective +base and members of <tt>rhs</tt>.</ins> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 27.9.1.12 [ofstream.assign]/1: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>basic_ofstream& operator=(basic_ofstream&& rhs); +</pre> +<blockquote> +-1- <i>Effects:</i> <del><tt>swap(rhs)</tt>.</del> +<ins>Move assigns the base and members of <tt>*this</tt> with the respective +base and members of <tt>rhs</tt>.</ins> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 27.9.1.16 [fstream.assign]/1: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>basic_fstream& operator=(basic_fstream&& rhs); +</pre> +<blockquote> +-1- <i>Effects:</i> <del><tt>swap(rhs)</tt>.</del> +<ins>Move assigns the base and members of <tt>*this</tt> with the respective +base and members of <tt>rhs</tt>.</ins> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="904"></a>904. result_of argument types</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> X [func.ret] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Jonathan Wakely <b>Opened:</b> 2008-09-10 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#func.ret">issues</a> in [func.ret].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The WP and TR1 have the same text regarding the argument types of a +<tt>result_of</tt> expression: +</p> +<blockquote> +The values <tt>ti</tt> are lvalues when the corresponding type <tt>Ti</tt> is a +reference type, and rvalues otherwise. +</blockquote> +<p> +I read this to mean that this compiles: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>typedef int (*func)(int&); +result_of<func(int&&)>::type i = 0; +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +even though this doesn't: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>int f(int&); +f( std::move(0) ); +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +Should the text be updated to say "when <tt>Ti</tt> is an lvalue-reference +type" or am I missing something? +</p> +<p> +I later came up with this self-contained example which won't compile, +but I think it should: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>struct X { + void operator()(int&); + int operator()(int&&); +} x; + +std::result_of< X(int&&) >::type i = x(std::move(0)); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Recommend Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change X [func.ret], p1: +</p> + +<blockquote> +... The values <tt>ti</tt> are lvalues +when the corresponding type <tt>Ti</tt> is a<ins>n</ins> <ins>lvalue-</ins>reference type, +and rvalues otherwise. +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="907"></a>907. Bitset's immutable element retrieval is inconsistently defined</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.5.2 [bitset.members] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2008-09-26 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#bitset.members">issues</a> in [bitset.members].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The current standard 14882::2003(E) as well as the current draft +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2723.pdf">N2723</a> +have in common a contradiction of the operational semantics +of member function test 20.5.2 [bitset.members]/56-58 and the immutable +member <tt>operator[]</tt> overload 20.5.2 [bitset.members]/64-66 (all references +are defined in terms of +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2723.pdf">N2723</a>): +</p> + +<ol> +<li><pre>bool test(size_t pos) const; +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Requires:</i> <tt>pos</tt> is valid +</p> +<p> +<i>Throws:</i> <tt>out_of_range</tt> if <tt>pos</tt> does not correspond +to a valid bit position. +</p> +<p> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt>true</tt> if the bit at position <tt>pos</tt> in <tt>*this</tt> +has the value one. +</p> +</blockquote> +</li> +<li><pre>constexpr bool operator[](size_t pos) const; +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Requires:</i> <tt>pos</tt> shall be valid. +</p> +<p> +<i>Throws:</i> nothing. +</p> +<p> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt>test(pos)</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + +<p> +Three interpretations: +</p> + +<ol type="A"> +<li> +The <tt>operator[]</tt> overload is indeed allowed to throw an exception +(via <tt>test()</tt>, if <tt>pos</tt> corresponds to an invalid bit position) which does +not leave the call frame. In this case this function cannot be a +<tt>constexpr</tt> function, because <tt>test()</tt> is not, due to +5.19 [expr.const]/2, last bullet. +</li> +<li> +The intend was not to throw an exception in <tt>test</tt> in case of an +invalid bit position. There is only little evidence for this interpretation. +</li> +<li> +The intend was that <tt>operator[]</tt> should not throw any exception, +but that <tt>test</tt> has the contract to do so, if the provided bit position +is invalid. +</li> +</ol> + +<p> +The problem became worse, because issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#720">720</a> +recently voted into WP argued that member <tt>test</tt> logically must be +a <tt>constexpr</tt> function, because it was used to define the semantics +of another <tt>constexpr</tt> function (the <tt>operator[]</tt> overload). +</p> + +<p> +Three alternatives are proposed, corresponding to the three bullets +(A), (B), and (C), the author suggests to follow proposal (C). +</p> + +<b> +Proposed alternatives: +</b> + +<ol type="A"> +<li> +<p> +Remove the <tt>constexpr</tt> specifier in front of <tt>operator[]</tt> overload and +undo that of member <tt>test</tt> (assuming <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#720">720</a> is accepted) in both the +class declaration 20.5 [template.bitset]/1 and in the member description +before 20.5.2 [bitset.members]/56 and before /64 to read: +</p> +<blockquote><pre><del>constexpr</del> bool test(size_t pos) const; +.. +<del>constexpr</del> bool operator[](size_t pos) const; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Change the throws clause of p. 65 to read: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Throws:</i> <del>nothing</del> +<ins><tt>out_of_range</tt> if <tt>pos</tt> does not correspond to a valid bit +position</ins>. +</blockquote> +</li> +<li> +<p> +Replace the throws clause p. 57 to read: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Throws:</i> <del><tt>out_of_range</tt> if <tt>pos</tt> does not correspond to a valid bit +position</del> <ins>nothing</ins>. +</blockquote> +</li> +<li> +<p> +Undo the addition of the <tt>constexpr</tt> specifier to the <tt>test</tt> member +function in both class declaration 20.5 [template.bitset]/1 and in the +member description before 20.5.2 [bitset.members]/56, assuming that <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#720">720</a> +was applied. +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>constexpr</del> bool test(size_t pos) const; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Change the returns clause p. 66 to read: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Returns:</i> <del><tt>test(pos)</tt></del> <ins><tt>true</tt> if the bit at position <tt>pos</tt> in <tt>*this</tt> +has the value one, otherwise <tt>false</tt></ins>. +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Lawrence: proposed resolutions A, B, C are mutually exclusive. +</p> +<p> +Recommend Review with option C. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +We agree with the proposed resolution. +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<ol type="A" ,="" start="3"> +<li> +<p> +Undo the addition of the <tt>constexpr</tt> specifier to the <tt>test</tt> member +function in both class declaration 20.5 [template.bitset]/1 and in the +member description before 20.5.2 [bitset.members]/56, assuming that <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#720">720</a> +was applied. +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>constexpr</del> bool test(size_t pos) const; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Change the returns clause p. 66 to read: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Returns:</i> <del><tt>test(pos)</tt></del> <ins><tt>true</tt> if the bit at position <tt>pos</tt> in <tt>*this</tt> +has the value one, otherwise <tt>false</tt></ins>. +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="909"></a>909. <tt>regex_token_iterator</tt> should use <tt>initializer_list</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 28.12.2 [re.tokiter] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2008-09-26 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#re.tokiter">issues</a> in [re.tokiter].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p><b>Addresses UK 319</b></p> +<p> +Construction of a <tt>regex_token_iterator</tt> (28.12.2 [re.tokiter]/6+) usually +requires the provision of a sequence of integer values, which +can currently be done via a <tt>std::vector<int></tt> or +a C array of <tt>int</tt>. Since the introduction of <tt>initializer_list</tt> in the +standard it seems much more reasonable to provide a +corresponding constructor that accepts an <tt>initializer_list<int></tt> +instead. This could be done as a pure addition or one could +even consider replacement. The author suggests the +replacement strategy (A), but provides an alternative additive +proposal (B) as a fall-back, because of the handiness of this +range type: +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +We strongly recommend alternative B of the proposed resolution +in order that existing code not be broken. +With that understanding, move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + +<p><b>Original proposed wording:</b></p> + +<ol type="A"> +<li><br> +<ol> +<li> +<p> +In 28.12.2 [re.tokiter]/6 and the list 28.12.2.1 [re.tokiter.cnstr]/10-11 change the +constructor declaration: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>template <std::size_t N></del> +regex_token_iterator(BidirectionalIterator a, BidirectionalIterator b, + const regex_type& re, + <del>const int (&submatches)[N]</del> <ins>initializer_list<int> submatches</ins>, + regex_constants::match_flag_type m = + regex_constants::match_default); +</pre></blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +In 28.12.2.1 [re.tokiter.cnstr]/12 change the last sentence +</p> + +<blockquote> +The third constructor initializes the member <tt>subs</tt> to hold +a copy of the sequence of integer values pointed to by the +iterator range <tt>[<del>&</del>submatches<ins>.begin()</ins>, +<del>&</del>submatches<ins>.end()</ins> <del>+ N</del>)</tt>. +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> +</li> + +<li><br> +<ol> +<li> +<p> +In 28.12.2 [re.tokiter]/6 and the list 28.12.2.1 [re.tokiter.cnstr]/10-11 <em>insert</em> the +following constructor declaration between the already existing ones +accepting a <tt>std::vector</tt> and a C array of <tt>int</tt>, resp.: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>regex_token_iterator(BidirectionalIterator a, BidirectionalIterator b, + const regex_type& re, + initializer_list<int> submatches, + regex_constants::match_flag_type m = + regex_constants::match_default); +</pre></blockquote> +</li> +<li> +<p> +In 28.12.2.1 [re.tokiter.cnstr]/12 change the last sentence +</p> + +<blockquote> +The third <ins>and fourth</ins> constructor initialize<del>s</del> the member <tt>subs</tt> +to hold a copy of the sequence of integer values pointed to +by the iterator range <tt>[&submatches,&submatches + N)</tt> +<ins>and <tt>[submatches.begin(),submatches.end())</tt>, respectively</ins>. +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> +</li> + +</ol> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<ol type="A" start="2"> + +<li><br> +<ol> +<li> +<p> +In 28.12.2 [re.tokiter]/6 and the list 28.12.2.1 [re.tokiter.cnstr]/10-11 <em>insert</em> the +following constructor declaration between the already existing ones +accepting a <tt>std::vector</tt> and a C array of <tt>int</tt>, resp.: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>regex_token_iterator(BidirectionalIterator a, BidirectionalIterator b, + const regex_type& re, + initializer_list<int> submatches, + regex_constants::match_flag_type m = + regex_constants::match_default); +</pre></blockquote> +</li> +<li> +<p> +In 28.12.2.1 [re.tokiter.cnstr]/12 change the last sentence +</p> + +<blockquote> +The third <ins>and fourth</ins> constructor initialize<del>s</del> the member <tt>subs</tt> +to hold a copy of the sequence of integer values pointed to +by the iterator range <tt>[&submatches,&submatches + N)</tt> +<ins>and <tt>[submatches.begin(),submatches.end())</tt>, respectively</ins>. +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> +</li> + +</ol> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="911"></a>911. I/O streams and <tt>move/swap</tt> semantic</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.1 [input.streams], 27.7.2 [output.streams] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alberto Ganesh Barbati <b>Opened:</b> 2008-09-29 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Class template <tt>basic_istream</tt>, <tt>basic_ostream</tt> and <tt>basic_iostream</tt> +implements public move constructors, move assignment operators and <tt>swap</tt> +method and free functions. This might induce both the user and the +compiler to think that those types are <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>, <tt>MoveAssignable</tt> +and <tt>Swappable</tt>. However, those class templates fail to fulfill the user +expectations. For example: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>std::ostream os(std::ofstream("file.txt")); +assert(os.rdbuf() == 0); // buffer object is not moved to os, file.txt has been closed + +std::vector<std::ostream> v; +v.push_back(std::ofstream("file.txt")); +v.reserve(100); // causes reallocation +assert(v[0].rdbuf() == 0); // file.txt has been closed! + +std::ostream&& os1 = std::ofstream("file1.txt"); +os1 = std::ofstream("file2.txt"); +os1 << "hello, world"; // still writes to file1.txt, not to file2.txt! + +std::ostream&& os1 = std::ofstream("file1.txt"); +std::ostream&& os2 = std::ofstream("file2.txt"); +std::swap(os1, os2); +os1 << "hello, world"; // writes to file1.txt, not to file2.txt! +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +This is because the move constructor, the move assignment operator and +<tt>swap</tt> are all implemented through calls to <tt>std::basic_ios</tt> member +functions <tt>move()</tt> and <tt>swap()</tt> that do not move nor swap the controlled +stream buffers. That can't happen because the stream buffers may have +different types. +</p> + +<p> +Notice that for <tt>basic_streambuf</tt>, the member function <tt>swap()</tt> is +protected. I believe that is correct and all of <tt>basic_istream</tt>, +<tt>basic_ostream</tt>, <tt>basic_iostream</tt> should do the same as the move ctor, move +assignment operator and swap member function are needed by the derived +<tt>fstream</tt>s and <tt>stringstream</tt>s template. The free swap functions for +<tt>basic_(i|o|io)stream</tt> templates should be removed for the same reason. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +We note that the rvalue swap functions have already been removed. +</p> +<p> +Bill is unsure about making the affected functions protected; +he believes they may need to be public. +</p> +<p> +We are also unsure about removing the lvalue swap functions as proposed. +</p> +<p> +Move to Open. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +It's not clear that the use case is compelling. +</p> +<p> +Howard: This needs to be implemented and tested. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-26 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I started out thinking I would recommend NAD for this one. I've turned around +to agree with the proposed resolution (which I've updated to the current draft). +I did not fully understand Ganesh's rationale, and attempt to describe my +improved understanding below. +</p> + +<p> +The move constructor, move assignment operator, and swap function are different +for <tt>basic_istream</tt>, <tt>basic_ostream</tt> and <tt>basic_iostream</tt> +than other classes. A timely conversation with Daniel reminded me of this long +forgotten fact. These members are sufficiently different that they would be +extremely confusing to use in general, but they are very much needed for derived +clients. +</p> + +<ul> +<li> +The move constructor moves everything but the <tt>rdbuf</tt> pointer. +</li> +<li> +The move assignment operator moves everything but the <tt>rdbuf</tt> pointer. +</li> +<li> +The swap function swaps everything but the <tt>rdbuf</tt> pointer. +</li> +</ul> + +<p> +The reason for this behavior is that for the std-derived classes (stringstreams, +filestreams), the <tt>rdbuf</tt> pointer points back into the class itself +(self referencing). It can't be swapped or moved. But this fact isn't born out +at the <tt>stream</tt> level. Rather it is born out at the <tt>fstream</tt>/<tt>sstream</tt> +level. And the lower levels just need to deal with that fact by not messing around +with the <tt>rdbuf</tt> pointer which is stored down at the lower levels. +</p> + +<p> +In a nutshell, it is very confusing for all of those who are not so intimately +related with streams that they've implemented them. And it is even fairly +confusing for some of those who have (including myself). I do not think it is +safe to swap or move <tt>istreams</tt> or <tt>ostreams</tt> because this will +(by necessary design) separate stream state from streambuffer state. Derived +classes (such as <tt>fstream</tt> and <tt>stringstream</tt> must be used to +keep the stream state and stream buffer consistently packaged as one unit during +a move or swap. +</p> + +<p> +I've implemented this proposal and am living with it day to day. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Leave Open. Pablo expected to propose alternative wording which would rename +move construction, move assignment and swap, and may or may not make them +protected. This will impact issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#900">900</a>. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010 Pittsburgh: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Ready for Pittsburgh. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +27.7.1.1 [istream]: make the following member functions protected: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>basic_istream(basic_istream&& rhs); +basic_istream& operator=(basic_istream&& rhs); +void swap(basic_istream& rhs); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Ditto: remove the swap free function signature +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>// swap: +template <class charT, class traits> + void swap(basic_istream<charT, traits>& x, basic_istream<charT, traits>& y);</del> +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +27.7.1.1.2 [istream.assign]: remove paragraph 4 +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>template <class charT, class traits> + void swap(basic_istream<charT, traits>& x, basic_istream<charT, traits>& y);</del> +</pre> +<blockquote> +<del><i>Effects:</i> <tt>x.swap(y)</tt>.</del> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +27.7.1.5 [iostreamclass]: make the following member function protected: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>basic_iostream(basic_iostream&& rhs); +basic_iostream& operator=(basic_iostream&& rhs); +void swap(basic_iostream& rhs); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Ditto: remove the swap free function signature +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>template <class charT, class traits> + void swap(basic_iostream<charT, traits>& x, basic_iostream<charT, traits>& y);</del> +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +27.7.1.5.3 [iostream.assign]: remove paragraph 3 +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>template <class charT, class traits> + void swap(basic_iostream<charT, traits>& x, basic_iostream<charT, traits>& y);</del> +</pre> +<blockquote> +<del><i>Effects:</i> <tt>x.swap(y)</tt>.</del> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +27.7.2.1 [ostream]: make the following member function protected: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>basic_ostream(basic_ostream&& rhs); +basic_ostream& operator=(basic_ostream&& rhs); +void swap(basic_ostream& rhs); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Ditto: remove the swap free function signature +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>// swap: +template <class charT, class traits> + void swap(basic_ostream<charT, traits>& x, basic_ostream<charT, traits>& y);</del> +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +27.7.2.3 [ostream.assign]: remove paragraph 4 +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>template <class charT, class traits> + void swap(basic_ostream<charT, traits>& x, basic_ostream<charT, traits>& y);</del> +</pre> +<blockquote> +<del><i>Effects:</i> <tt>x.swap(y)</tt>.</del> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="920"></a>920. Ref-qualification support in the library</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8.13 [func.memfn] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Bronek Kozicki <b>Opened:</b> 2008-10-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#func.memfn">issues</a> in [func.memfn].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1230">1230</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Daniel Krügler wrote: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Shouldn't above list be completed for &- and &&-qualified +member functions This would cause to add: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>template<Returnable R, class T, CopyConstructible... Args> +unspecified mem_fn(R (T::* pm)(Args...) &); +template<Returnable R, class T, CopyConstructible... Args> +unspecified mem_fn(R (T::* pm)(Args...) const &); +template<Returnable R, class T, CopyConstructible... Args> +unspecified mem_fn(R (T::* pm)(Args...) volatile &); +template<Returnable R, class T, CopyConstructible... Args> +unspecified mem_fn(R (T::* pm)(Args...) const volatile &); +template<Returnable R, class T, CopyConstructible... Args> +unspecified mem_fn(R (T::* pm)(Args...) &&); +template<Returnable R, class T, CopyConstructible... Args> +unspecified mem_fn(R (T::* pm)(Args...) const &&); +template<Returnable R, class T, CopyConstructible... Args> +unspecified mem_fn(R (T::* pm)(Args...) volatile &&); +template<Returnable R, class T, CopyConstructible... Args> +unspecified mem_fn(R (T::* pm)(Args...) const volatile &&); +</pre></blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +yes, absolutely. Thanks for spotting this. Without this change <tt>mem_fn</tt> +cannot be initialized from pointer to ref-qualified member function. I +believe semantics of such function pointer is well defined. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit Daniel provided wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +We need to think about whether we really want to go down the proposed path +of combinatorial explosion. +Perhaps a Note would suffice. +</p> +<p> +We would really like to have an implementation before proceeding. +</p> +<p> +Move to Open, and recommend this be deferred until after the next +Committee Draft has been issued. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10-10 Daniel updated wording to post-concepts. +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1230">1230</a> has a similar proposed resolution +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<ol> +<li> +<p> +Change 20.8 [function.objects]/2, header +<tt><functional></tt> synopsis as follows: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>// 20.7.14, member function adaptors: +template<class R, class T> <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R T::*); + +<ins>template<class R, class T, class ...Args> <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R (T::*)(Args...));</ins> +<ins>template<class R, class T, class ...Args> <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R (T::*)(Args...) const);</ins> +<ins>template<class R, class T, class ...Args> <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R (T::*)(Args...) volatile);</ins> +<ins>template<class R, class T, class ...Args> <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R (T::*)(Args...) const volatile);</ins> + +<ins>template<class R, class T, class ...Args> <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R (T::*)(Args...) &);</ins> +<ins>template<class R, class T, class ...Args> <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R (T::*)(Args...) const &);</ins> +<ins>template<class R, class T, class ...Args> <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R (T::*)(Args...) volatile &);</ins> +<ins>template<class R, class T, class ...Args> <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R (T::*)(Args...) const volatile &);</ins> + +<ins>template<class R, class T, class ...Args> <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R (T::*)(Args...) &&);</ins> +<ins>template<class R, class T, class ...Args> <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R (T::*)(Args...) const &&);</ins> +<ins>template<class R, class T, class ...Args> <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R (T::*)(Args...) volatile &&);</ins> +<ins>template<class R, class T, class ...Args> <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R (T::*)(Args...) const volatile &&);</ins> +</pre></blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change the prototype list of 20.8.13 [func.memfn] as follows [NB: The +following text, most notably p.2 and p.3 which +discuss influence of the cv-qualification on the definition of the +base class's first template parameter remains +unchanged. ]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class R, class T> <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R T::* pm); + +<ins>template<class R, class T, class ...Args> <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R (T::* pm)(Args...));</ins> +<ins>template<class R, class T, class ...Args> <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R (T::* pm)(Args...) const);</ins> +<ins>template<class R, class T, class ...Args> <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R (T::* pm)(Args...) volatile);</ins> +<ins>template<class R, class T, class ...Args> <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R (T::* pm)(Args...) const volatile);</ins> + +<ins>template<class R, class T, class ...Args> <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R (T::* pm)(Args...) &);</ins> +<ins>template<class R, class T, class ...Args> <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R (T::* pm)(Args...) const &);</ins> +<ins>template<class R, class T, class ...Args> <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R (T::* pm)(Args...) volatile &);</ins> +<ins>template<class R, class T, class ...Args> <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R (T::* pm)(Args...) const volatile &);</ins> + +<ins>template<class R, class T, class ...Args> <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R (T::* pm)(Args...) &&);</ins> +<ins>template<class R, class T, class ...Args> <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R (T::* pm)(Args...) const &&);</ins> +<ins>template<class R, class T, class ...Args> <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R (T::* pm)(Args...) volatile &&);</ins> +<ins>template<class R, class T, class ...Args> <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R (T::* pm)(Args...) const volatile &&);</ins> +</pre></blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Remove 20.8.13 [func.memfn]/5: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<del><i>Remarks:</i> Implementations may implement <tt>mem_fn</tt> as a set of +overloaded function templates.</del> +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="921"></a>921. Rational Arithmetic should use template aliases</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.6.1 [ratio.ratio] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Pablo Halpern <b>Opened:</b> 2008-10-07 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#ratio.ratio">issues</a> in [ratio.ratio].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The compile-time functions that operate on <tt>ratio<N,D></tt> require the +cumbersome and error-prone "evaluation" of a <tt>type</tt> member using a +meta-programming style that predates the invention of template aliases. +Thus, multiplying three ratios <tt>a</tt>, <tt>b</tt>, and <tt>c</tt> requires the expression: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>ratio_multiply<a, ratio_multiply<b, c>::type>::type +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +The simpler expression: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>ratio_multiply<a, ratio_multiply<b, c>> +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Could be used by if template aliases were employed in the definitions. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Jens: not a complete proposed resolution: "would need to make similar change" +</p> +<p> +Consensus: We agree with the direction of the issue. +</p> +<p> +Recommend Open. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-11 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Personally I'm <em>not</em> in favor for the addition of: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>typedef ratio type; +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +For a reader of the +standard it's usage or purpose is unclear. I haven't seen similar examples +of attempts to satisfy non-feature complete compilers. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-11 Pablo adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +The addition of type to the <tt>ratio</tt> template allows the previous style +(i.e., in the prototype implementations) to remain valid and permits the +use of transitional library implementations for C++03 compilers. I do +not feel strongly about its inclusion, however, and leave it up to the +reviewers to decide. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +Bill asks for additional discussion in the issue +that spells out more details of the implementation. +Howard points us to issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#948">948</a> +which has at least most of the requested details. +Tom is strongly in favor of overflow-checking at compile time. +Pete points out that there is no change of functionality implied. +We agree with the proposed resolution, +but recommend moving the issue to Review +to allow time to improve the discussion if needed. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-21 Alisdair adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +See <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1121">1121</a> for a potentially incompatible proposal. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + + + <ol start="0"> +<li> +<p> +In 20.6 [ratio]/3 change as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>// ratio arithmetic +template <class R1, class R2> <del>struct</del><ins>using</ins> ratio_add<ins> = <em>see below</em></ins>; +template <class R1, class R2> <del>struct</del><ins>using</ins> ratio_subtract<ins> = <em>see below</em></ins>; +template <class R1, class R2> <del>struct</del><ins>using</ins> ratio_multiply<ins> = <em>see below</em></ins>; +template <class R1, class R2> <del>struct</del><ins>using</ins> ratio_divide<ins> = <em>see below</em></ins>; +</pre></blockquote> +</li> +<li> +<p> +In 20.6.1 [ratio.ratio], change as indicated: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>namespace std { + template <intmax_t N, intmax_t D = 1> + class ratio { + public: + <ins>typedef ratio type;</ins> + static const intmax_t num; + static const intmax_t den; + }; +} +</pre></blockquote> +</li> +<li> +<p> +In 20.6.2 [ratio.arithmetic] change as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class R1, class R2> <del>struct</del><ins>using</ins> ratio_add<ins> = <em>see below</em></ins><del>{ + typedef <em>see below</em> type; +}</del>; +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +1 The <del>nested typedef</del> type <tt><ins>ratio_add<R1, R2></ins></tt> +shall be a synonym for <tt>ratio<T1, T2></tt> +where <tt>T1</tt> has the value <tt>R1::num * R2::den + R2::num * R1::den</tt> and <tt>T2</tt> +has the value <tt>R1::den * R2::den</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +<blockquote><pre>template <class R1, class R2> <del>struct</del><ins>using</ins> ratio_subtract<ins> = <em>see below</em></ins><del>{ + typedef <em>see below</em> type; +}</del>; +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +2 The <del>nested typedef</del> type <tt><ins>ratio_subtract<R1, R2></ins></tt> +shall be a synonym for <tt>ratio<T1, T2></tt> +where <tt>T1</tt> has the value <tt>R1::num * R2::den - R2::num * R1::den</tt> and <tt>T2</tt> +has the value <tt>R1::den * R2::den</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +<blockquote><pre>template <class R1, class R2> <del>struct</del><ins>using</ins> ratio_multiply<ins> = <em>see below</em></ins><del>{ + typedef <em>see below</em> type; +}</del>; +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +3 The <del>nested typedef</del> type <tt><ins>ratio_multiply<R1, R2></ins></tt> +shall be a synonym for <tt>ratio<T1, T2></tt> +where <tt>T1</tt> has the value <tt>R1::num * R2::num</tt> and <tt>T2</tt> has the value <tt>R1::den * R2::den</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +<blockquote><pre>template <class R1, class R2> <del>struct</del><ins>using</ins> ratio_divide<ins> = <em>see below</em></ins><del>{ + typedef <em>see below</em> type; +}</del>; +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +4 The <del>nested typedef</del> type <tt><ins>ratio_divide<R1, R2></ins></tt> +shall be a synonym for <tt>ratio<T1, T2></tt> +where <tt>T1</tt> has the value <tt>R1::num * R2::den</tt> and <tt>T2</tt> has the value <tt>R1::den * R2::num</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> +<li> +<p> +In 20.11.3.1 [time.duration.cons]/4 change as indicated: +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Requires:</i> <tt>treat_as_floating_point<rep>::value</tt> shall be true or +<tt>ratio_divide<Period2, period>::<del>type::</del>den</tt> shall be 1.[..] +</p> +</blockquote> +</li> +<li> +<p> +In 20.11.3.7 [time.duration.cast]/2 change as indicated: +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Returns:</i> Let CF be <tt>ratio_divide<Period, typename +ToDuration::period><del>::type</del></tt>, and [..] +</p> +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="922"></a>922. [func.bind.place] Number of placeholders</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> B [implimits] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Sohail Somani <b>Opened:</b> 2008-10-11 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses DE 24</b></p> + +<p> +With respect to the section 20.8.10.1.3 [func.bind.place]: +</p> +<p> +TR1 dropped some suggested implementation quantities for the number of +placeholders. The purpose of this defect is to put these back for C++0x. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +see DE 24 +</p> +<p> +Recommend applying the proposed resolution from DE 24, with that +Tentatively Ready. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<b>Original proposed resolution:</b> + +<p> +Add 20.8.10.1.3 [func.bind.place]/2: +</p> + +<blockquote> +While the exact number of placeholders (<tt>_M</tt>) is implementation defined, +this number shall be at least 10. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +Add to B [implimits]: +</p> + +<ul> +<li> +Number of placeholders (20.8.10.1.3 [func.bind.place]) [10]. +</li> +</ul> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="925"></a>925. <tt>shared_ptr</tt>'s explicit conversion from <tt>unique_ptr</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.10.2.1 [util.smartptr.shared.const] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Rodolfo Lima <b>Opened:</b> 2008-10-12 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#util.smartptr.shared.const">issues</a> in [util.smartptr.shared.const].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The current working draft +(<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2798.pdf">N2798</a>), +section 20.9.10.2.1 [util.smartptr.shared.const] declares +<tt>shared_ptr</tt>'s constructor that takes a rvalue reference to <tt>unique_ptr</tt> and +<tt>auto_ptr</tt> as being explicit, affecting several valid smart pointer use +cases that would take advantage of this conversion being implicit, for +example: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>class A; +std::unique_ptr<A> create(); +void process(std::shared_ptr<A> obj); + +int main() +{ + process(create()); // use case #1 + std::unique_ptr<A> uobj = create(); + process(std::move(uobj)); // use case #2 + return 0; +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +If <tt>unique_ptr</tt> to <tt>shared_ptr</tt> conversions are explicit, the above lines +should be written: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>process(std::shared_ptr<A>(create())); // use case #1 +process(std::shared_ptr<A>(std::move(uobj))); // use case #2 +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +The extra cast required doesn't seems to give any benefits to the user, +nor protects him of any unintended conversions, this being the raison +d'etre of explicit constructors. +</p> + +<p> +It seems that this constructor was made explicit to mimic the conversion +from <tt>auto_ptr</tt> in pre-rvalue reference days, which accepts both lvalue and +rvalue references. Although this decision was valid back then, C++0x +allows the user to express in a clear and non verbose manner when he wants +move semantics to be employed, be it implicitly (use case 1) or explicitly +(use case 2). +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Howard and Alisdair like the motivating use cases +and the proposed resolution. +</p> +<p> +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In both 20.9.10.2 [util.smartptr.shared] paragraph 1 and +20.9.10.2.1 [util.smartptr.shared.const] change: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class Y> <del>explicit</del> shared_ptr(auto_ptr<Y> &&r); +template <class Y, class D> <del>explicit</del> shared_ptr(unique_ptr<Y, D> &&r); +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="929"></a>929. Thread constructor</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30.3.1.2 [thread.thread.constr] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Anthony Williams <b>Opened:</b> 2008-10-23 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#thread.thread.constr">issues</a> in [thread.thread.constr].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p><b>Addresses UK 323</b></p> + +<p> +The <tt>thread</tt> constructor for starting a new thread with a function and +arguments is overly constrained by the signature requiring rvalue +references for <tt>func</tt> and <tt>args</tt> and the <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> requirements +for the elements of <tt>args</tt>. The use of an rvalue reference for the +function restricts the potential use of a plain function name, since +the type of the bound parameter will be deduced to be a function +reference and decay to pointer-to-function will not happen. This +therefore complicates the implementation in order to handle a simple +case. Furthermore, the use of rvalue references for args prevents the +array to pointer decay. Since arrays are not <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> or even +<tt>MoveConstructible</tt>, this essentially prevents the passing of arrays as +parameters. In particular it prevents the passing of string literals. +Consequently a simple case such as +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void f(const char*); +std::thread t(f,"hello"); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +is ill-formed since the type of the string literal is <tt>const char[6]</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +By changing the signature to take all parameters by value we can +eliminate the <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> requirement and permit the use of +arrays, as the parameter passing semantics will cause the necessary +array-to-pointer decay. They will also cause the function name to +decay to a pointer to function and allow the implementation to handle +functions and function objects identically. +</p> + +<p> +The new signature of the <tt>thread</tt> constructor for a function and +arguments is thus: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<typename F,typename... Args> +thread(F,Args... args); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Since the parameter pack <tt>Args</tt> can be empty, the single-parameter +constructor that takes just a function by value is now redundant. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I agree with everything Anthony says in this issue. However I believe we +can optimize in such a way as to get the pass-by-value behavior with the +pass-by-rvalue-ref performance. The performance difference is that the latter +removes a <tt>move</tt> when passing in an lvalue. +</p> + +<p> +This circumstance is very analogous to <tt>make_pair</tt> (20.3.5 [pairs]) +where we started with passing by const reference, changed to pass by value to +get pointer decay, and then changed to pass by rvalue reference, but modified with +<tt>decay<T></tt> to retain the pass-by-value behavior. If we were to +apply the same solution here it would look like: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>template <class F> explicit thread(F f);</del> +template <class F, class ...Args> thread(F&& f, Args&&... args); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +-4- <i>Requires:</i> <tt>F</tt> and each <tt>Ti</tt> in <tt>Args</tt> shall be <del><tt>CopyConstructible</tt> +if an lvalue and otherwise</del> <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>. +<tt><i>INVOKE</i>(f, w1, w2, ..., wN)</tt> (20.8.2 [func.require]) shall be a valid expression for +some values <tt>w1, w2, ... , wN,</tt> where <tt>N == sizeof...(Args)</tt>. +</p> +<p> +-5- <i>Effects:</i> Constructs an object of type <tt>thread</tt> +<del>and executes <tt><i>INVOKE</i>(f, t1, t2, ..., tN)</tt> in a new +thread of execution, where <tt>t1, t2, ..., tN</tt> are the values in <tt>args...</tt></del>. +<ins>Constructs +the following objects in memory which is accessible to a new thread of execution +as if:</ins> +</p> +<blockquote><pre><ins>typename decay<F>::type g(std::forward<F>(f));</ins> +<ins>tuple<typename decay<Args>::type...> w(std::forward<Args>(args)...);</ins> +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +<ins>The new thread of +execution executes <tt><i>INVOKE</i>(g, wi...)</tt> where the <tt>wi...</tt> refers +to the elements stored in the <tt>tuple w</tt>.</ins> +Any return value from <tt>g</tt> is ignored. +<del>If <tt>f</tt> terminates with an uncaught exception, <tt>std::terminate()</tt> shall be called.</del> +<ins>If the evaluation of <tt><i>INVOKE</i>(g, wi...)</tt> terminates +with an uncaught exception, <tt>std::terminate()</tt> shall be called [<i>Note:</i> +<tt>std::terminate()</tt> could be called before entering <tt>g</tt>. -- <i>end note</i>]. Any +exception thrown before the evaluation of <tt><i>INVOKE</i></tt> has started shall be +catchable in the calling thread.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Text referring to when <tt>terminate()</tt> is called was contributed by Ganesh. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +We agree with the proposed resolution, +but would like the final sentence to be reworded +since "catchable" is not a term of art (and is used nowhere else). +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +This is linked to +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2901.pdf">N2901</a>. +</p> +<p> +Howard to open a separate issue to remove (<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1176">1176</a>). +</p> +<p> +In Frankfurt there is no consensus for removing the variadic constructor. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +We want to move forward with this issue. If we later take it out via <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1176">1176</a> +then that's ok too. Needs small group to improve wording. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Stefanus provided revised wording. Moved to Review Here is the original wording: +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +Modify the class definition of <tt>std::thread</tt> in 30.3.1 [thread.thread.class] to remove the +following signature: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>template<class F> explicit thread(F f);</del> +template<class F, class ... Args> <ins>explicit</ins> thread(F&& f, Args&& ... args); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Modify 30.3.1.2 [thread.thread.constr] to replace the constructors prior to paragraph 4 with +the single constructor as above. Replace paragraph 4 - 6 with the +following: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-4- <i>Requires:</i> <tt>F</tt> and each <tt>Ti</tt> in <tt>Args</tt> shall be <del><tt>CopyConstructible</tt> +if an lvalue and otherwise</del> <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>. +<tt><i>INVOKE</i>(f, w1, w2, ..., wN)</tt> (20.8.2 [func.require]) shall be a valid expression for +some values <tt>w1, w2, ... , wN,</tt> where <tt>N == sizeof...(Args)</tt>. +</p> +<p> +-5- <i>Effects:</i> Constructs an object of type <tt>thread</tt> +<del>and executes <tt><i>INVOKE</i>(f, t1, t2, ..., tN)</tt> in a new +thread of execution, where <tt>t1, t2, ..., tN</tt> are the values in <tt>args...</tt></del>. +<ins>Constructs +the following objects:</ins> +</p> +<blockquote><pre><ins>typename decay<F>::type g(std::forward<F>(f));</ins> +<ins>tuple<typename decay<Args>::type...> w(std::forward<Args>(args)...);</ins> +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +<ins>and executes <tt><i>INVOKE</i>(g, wi...)</tt> in a new thread of execution. +These objects shall be destroyed when the new thread of execution completes.</ins> +Any return value from <tt>g</tt> is ignored. +<del>If <tt>f</tt> terminates with an uncaught exception, <tt>std::terminate()</tt> shall be called.</del> +<ins>If the evaluation of <tt><i>INVOKE</i>(g, wi...)</tt> terminates +with an uncaught exception, <tt>std::terminate()</tt> shall be called [<i>Note:</i> +<tt>std::terminate()</tt> could be called before entering <tt>g</tt>. -- <i>end note</i>]. Any +exception thrown before the evaluation of <tt><i>INVOKE</i></tt> has started shall be +catchable in the calling thread.</ins> +</p> +<p> +-6- <i>Synchronization:</i> The invocation of the constructor <i>happens before</i> the +invocation of <del><tt>f</tt></del> <ins><tt>g</tt></ins>. +</p> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-01-19 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Modify the class definition of <tt>std::thread</tt> in 30.3.1 [thread.thread.class] to remove the +following signature: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>template<class F> explicit thread(F f);</del> +template<class F, class ... Args> <ins>explicit</ins> thread(F&& f, Args&& ... args); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Modify 30.3.1.2 [thread.thread.constr] to replace the constructors prior to paragraph 4 with +the single constructor as above. Replace paragraph 4 - 6 with the +following: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins>Given a function as follows:</ins> +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins> +template<typename T> typename decay<T>::type decay_copy(T&& v) + { return std::forward<T>(v); } +</ins></pre></blockquote> + +<p> +-4- <i>Requires:</i> <tt>F</tt> and each <tt>Ti</tt> in <tt>Args</tt> shall +<del>be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> if an lvalue and otherwise</del> <ins>satisfy +the</ins> <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> <ins>requirements</ins>. +<del><tt><i>INVOKE</i>(f, w1, w2, ..., wN)</tt> (20.8.2 [func.require]) +shall be a valid expression for some values <tt>w1, w2, ... , wN,</tt> where +<tt>N == sizeof...(Args)</tt>.</del> +<ins><tt><i>INVOKE</i>(decay_copy(std::forward<F>(f)), decay_copy(std::forward<Args>(args))...)</tt> (20.8.2 [func.require]) shall be a valid expression.</ins> +</p> + +<p> +-5- <i>Effects:</i> Constructs an object of type <tt>thread</tt> <del>and executes +<tt>INVOKE(f, t1, t2, ..., tN)</tt> in a new thread of execution, where +<tt>t1, t2, ..., tN</tt> are the values in <tt>args...</tt>. +Any return +value from <tt>f</tt> is ignored. If <tt>f</tt> terminates with an +uncaught exception, <tt>std::terminate()</tt> shall be called.</del> +<ins>The new thread of execution executes <tt>INVOKE(decay_copy(std::forward<F>(f)), +decay_copy(std::forward<Args>(args))...)</tt> with the calls to <tt>decay_copy()</tt> being evaluated in +the constructing thread. Any return value from this invocation is +ignored. [<i>Note:</i> this implies any exceptions not thrown from the +invocation of the copy of <tt>f</tt> will be thrown in the constructing thread, +not the new thread. — <i>end note</i>]. +If the invocation of <tt><i>INVOKE</i>(decay_copy(std::forward<F>(f)), +decay_copy(std::forward<Args>(args))...)</tt> terminates with an uncaught +exception, <tt>std::terminate</tt> shall be called. +</ins></p> + +<p> +-6- <i>Synchronization:</i> The invocation of the constructor <i>happens before</i> the +invocation of <ins>the copy of</ins> <tt>f</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="931"></a>931. type trait <tt>extent<T, I></tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.7.4.3 [meta.unary.prop] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Yechezkel Mett <b>Opened:</b> 2008-11-04 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#meta.unary.prop">issues</a> in [meta.unary.prop].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The draft (N2798) says in 20.7.4.3 [meta.unary.prop] Table 44: +</p> +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 44 -- Type property queries</caption> +<tbody><tr><th>Template</th><th>Value</th></tr> +<tr> +<td> +<tt>template <class T, unsigned I = 0> struct extent;</tt> +</td> +<td> +If <tt>T</tt> is not an array type (8.3.4), or if it has rank less than +<tt>I</tt>, or if <tt>I</tt> is 0 +and <tt>T</tt> has type "array of unknown bound of <tt>U</tt>", then 0; otherwise, the +size of the <tt>I</tt>'th dimension of <tt>T</tt> +</td> +</tr> +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Firstly it isn't clear from the wording if <tt>I</tt> is 0-based or 1-based +("the <tt>I</tt>'th dimension" sort of implies 1-based). From the following +example it is clear that the intent is 0-based, in which case it +should say "or if it has rank less than or equal to <tt>I</tt>". +</p> +<p> +Sanity check: +</p> +<p> +The example says <tt>assert((extent<int[2], 1>::value) == 0);</tt> +</p> +<p> +Here the rank is 1 and <tt>I</tt> is 1, but the desired result is 0. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Do not use "size" or "value", use "bound". Also, move the +cross-reference to 8.3.4 to just after "bound". +</p> +<p> +Recommend Tentatively Ready. +</p> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In Table 44 of 20.7.4.3 [meta.unary.prop], third row, column "Value", +change the cell content: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 44 -- Type property queries</caption> +<tbody><tr><th>Template</th><th>Value</th></tr> +<tr> +<td> +<tt>template <class T, unsigned I = 0> struct extent;</tt> +</td> +<td> +If <tt>T</tt> is not an array type <del>(8.3.4)</del>, or if it has rank less than +<ins> or equal to</ins> <tt>I</tt>, or if <tt>I</tt> is 0 +and <tt>T</tt> has type "array of unknown bound of <tt>U</tt>", then 0; otherwise, the +<del>size</del> <ins>bound (8.3.4)</ins> of the <tt>I</tt>'th dimension of <tt>T</tt><ins>, +where indexing of <tt>I</tt> is zero-based.</ins> +</td> +</tr> +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Wording supplied by Daniel. +]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="932"></a>932. <tt>unique_ptr(pointer p)</tt> for pointer deleter types</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.9.2.1 [unique.ptr.single.ctor] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2008-11-26 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-19</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#unique.ptr.single.ctor">issues</a> in [unique.ptr.single.ctor].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p><b>Addresses US 79</b></p> + +<p> +20.9.9.2.1 [unique.ptr.single.ctor]/5 no longer requires for <tt>D</tt> +not to be a pointer type. I believe this restriction was accidently removed +when we relaxed the completeness reuqirements on <tt>T</tt>. The restriction +needs to be put back in. Otherwise we have a run time failure that could +have been caught at compile time: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>{ +unique_ptr<int, void(*)(void*)> p1(malloc(sizeof(int))); <font color="#C80000">// should not compile</font> +} <font color="#C80000">// p1.~unique_ptr() dereferences a null function pointer</font> +unique_ptr<int, void(*)(void*)> p2(malloc(sizeof(int)), free); <font color="#C80000">// ok</font> +</pre></blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Recommend Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved from Tentatively Ready to Open only because the wording needs to be +improved for enable_if type constraining, possibly following Robert's +formula. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +We need to consider whether some requirements in the Requires paragraphs +of [unique.ptr] should instead be Remarks. +</p> +<p> +Leave Open. Howard to provide wording, and possibly demonstrate how this +can be implemented using enable_if. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-27 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +The two constructors to which this issue applies are not easily constrained +with <tt>enable_if</tt> as they are not templated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>unique_ptr(); +explicit unique_ptr(pointer p); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +To "SFINAE" these constructors away would take heroic effort such as specializing +the entire <tt>unique_ptr</tt> class template on pointer deleter types. There +is insufficient motivation for such heroics. Here is the expected and +reasonable implementation for these constructors: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>unique_ptr() + : ptr_(pointer()) + { + static_assert(!is_pointer<deleter_type>::value, + "unique_ptr constructed with null function pointer deleter"); + } +explicit unique_ptr(pointer p) + : ptr_(p) + { + static_assert(!is_pointer<deleter_type>::value, + "unique_ptr constructed with null function pointer deleter"); + } +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +I.e. just use <tt>static_assert</tt> to verify that the constructor is not +instantiated with a function pointer for a deleter. The compiler will automatically +take care of issuing a diagnostic if the deleter is a reference type (uninitialized +reference error). +</p> + +<p> +In keeping with our discussions in Frankfurt, I'm moving this requirement on +the implementation from the Requires paragraph to a Remarks paragraph. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-08-17 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +It is insufficient to require a diagnostic. This doesn't imply an +ill-formed program +as of 1.3.6 [defns.diagnostic] (a typical alternative would be a compiler +warning), but +exactly that seems to be the intend. I suggest to use the following +remark instead: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Remarks:</i> The program shall be ill-formed if this constructor is +instantiated when <tt>D</tt> is a pointer type or reference type. +</blockquote> + +<p> +Via the general standard rules of 1.4 [intro.compliance] the "diagnostic +required" is implied. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Ready. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-03-14 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +We moved +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3073.html">N3073</a> +to the formal motions page in Pittsburgh which should obsolete this issue. I've +moved this issue to NAD Editorial, solved by N3073. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +Solved by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3073.html">N3073</a>. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change the description of the default constructor in 20.9.9.2.1 [unique.ptr.single.ctor]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>unique_ptr(); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +-1- <i>Requires:</i> <tt>D</tt> shall be default constructible, and that construction +shall not throw an exception. <del><tt>D</tt> shall +not be a reference type or pointer type (diagnostic required).</del> +</p> +<p>...</p> +<p><ins> +<i>Remarks:</i> The program shall be ill-formed if this constructor is +instantiated when <tt>D</tt> is a pointer type or reference type. + +</ins></p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Add after 20.9.9.2.1 [unique.ptr.single.ctor]/8: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>unique_ptr(pointer p); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p>...</p> +<p><ins> +<i>Remarks:</i> The program shall be ill-formed if this constructor is +instantiated when <tt>D</tt> is a pointer type or reference type. + +</ins></p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="934"></a>934. <tt>duration</tt> is missing <tt>operator%</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.11.3 [time.duration] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Terry Golubiewski <b>Opened:</b> 2008-11-30 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#time.duration">issues</a> in [time.duration].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p><b>Addresses US 81</b></p> + +<p> +<tt>duration</tt> is missing <tt>operator%</tt>. This operator is convenient +for computing where in a time frame a given <tt>duration</tt> lies. A +motivating example is converting a <tt>duration</tt> into a "broken-down" +time duration such as hours::minutes::seconds: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>class ClockTime +{ + typedef std::chrono::hours hours; + typedef std::chrono::minutes minutes; + typedef std::chrono::seconds seconds; +public: + hours hours_; + minutes minutes_; + seconds seconds_; + + template <class Rep, class Period> + explicit ClockTime(const std::chrono::duration<Rep, Period>& d) + : hours_ (std::chrono::duration_cast<hours> (d)), + minutes_(std::chrono::duration_cast<minutes>(d % hours(1))), + seconds_(std::chrono::duration_cast<seconds>(d % minutes(1))) + {} +}; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Agree except that there is a typo in the proposed resolution. The member +operators should be operator%=. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +We agree with the proposed resolution. +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved from Tentatively Ready to Open only because the wording needs to be +improved for enable_if type constraining, possibly following Robert's +formula. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Howard to open a separate issue (<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1177">1177</a>) to handle the removal of member +functions from overload sets, provide wording, and possibly demonstrate +how this can be implemented using enable_if (see <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#947">947</a>). +</p> +<p> +Move to Ready. +</p> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add to the synopsis in 20.11 [time]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class Rep1, class Period, class Rep2> + duration<typename common_type<Rep1, Rep2>::type, Period> + operator%(const duration<Rep1, Period>& d, const Rep2& s); +template <class Rep1, class Period1, class Rep2, class Period2> + typename common_type<duration<Rep1, Period1>, duration<Rep2, Period2>>::type + operator%(const duration<Rep1, Period1>& lhs, const duration<Rep2, Period2>& rhs); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Add to the synopsis of <tt>duration</tt> in 20.11.3 [time.duration]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class Rep, class Period = ratio<1>> +class duration { +public: + ... + <ins>duration& operator%=(const rep& rhs);</ins> + <ins>duration& operator%=(const duration& d);</ins> + ... +}; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Add to 20.11.3.3 [time.duration.arithmetic]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>duration& operator%=(const rep& rhs); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> <tt>rep_ %= rhs</tt>. +</p> +<p> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt>*this</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<pre>duration& operator%=(const duration& d); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> <tt>rep_ %= d.count()</tt>. +</p> +<p> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt>*this</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Add to 20.11.3.5 [time.duration.nonmember]: +</p> + +<blockquote> + +<pre>template <class Rep1, class Period, class Rep2> + duration<typename common_type<Rep1, Rep2>::type, Period> + operator%(const duration<Rep1, Period>& d, const Rep2& s); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Requires:</i> <tt>Rep2</tt> shall be implicitly convertible to <tt>CR(Rep1, Rep2)</tt> and +<tt>Rep2</tt> shall not be an instantiation of <tt>duration</tt>. Diagnostic required. +</p> +<p> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt>duration<CR, Period>(d) %= s</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class Rep1, class Period1, class Rep2, class Period2> + typename common_type<duration<Rep1, Period1>, duration<Rep2, Period2>>::type + operator%(const duration<Rep1, Period1>& lhs, const duration<Rep2, Period2>& rhs); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt>common_type<duration<Rep1, Period1>, duration<Rep2, Period2>>::type(lhs) %= rhs</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="938"></a>938. <tt>default_delete<T[]>::operator()</tt> should only accept <tt>T*</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.9.1.3 [unique.ptr.dltr.dflt1] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2008-12-07 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Consider: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>derived* p = new derived[3]; +std::default_delete<base[]> d; +d(p); <font color="#C80000">// should fail</font> +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Currently the marked line is a run time failure. We can make it a compile +time failure by "poisoning" <tt>op(U*)</tt>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Recommend Review. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +We agree with the proposed resolution. +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add to 20.9.9.1.3 [unique.ptr.dltr.dflt1]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>namespace std { + template <class T> struct default_delete<T[]> { + void operator()(T*) const; + <ins>template <class U> void operator()(U*) const = delete;</ins> +}; +} +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="939"></a>939. Problem with <tt>std::identity</tt> and reference-to-temporaries</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.3.3 [forward] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2008-12-11 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#forward">issues</a> in [forward].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +<tt>std::identity</tt> takes an argument of type <tt>T const &</tt> +and returns a result of <tt>T const &</tt>. +</p> +<p> +Unfortunately, this signature will accept a value of type other than <tt>T</tt> that +is convertible-to-<tt>T</tt>, and then return a reference to the dead temporary. The +constraint in the concepts version simply protects against returning +reference-to-<tt>void</tt>. +</p> +<p> +Solutions: +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +i/ Return-by-value, potentially slicing bases and rejecting non-copyable +types +</p> +<p> +ii/ Provide an additional overload: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>template< typename T > +template operator( U & ) = delete; +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +This seems closer on intent, but moves beyond the original motivation for +the operator, which is compatibility with existing (non-standard) +implementations. +</p> +<p> +iii/ Remove the <tt>operator()</tt> overload. This restores the original definition +of the <tt>identity</tt>, although now effectively a type_trait rather than part of +the perfect forwarding protocol. +</p> +<p> +iv/ Remove <tt>std::identity</tt> completely; its original reason to exist is +replaced with the <tt>IdentityOf</tt> concept. +</p> +</blockquote> +<p> +My own preference is somewhere between (ii) and (iii) - although I stumbled +over the issue with a specific application hoping for resolution (i)! +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +We dislike options i and iii, and option ii seems like overkill. +If we remove it (option iv), implementers can still provide it under a +different name. +</p> +<p> +Move to Open pending wording (from Alisdair) for option iv. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-23 Alisdair provided wording for option iv. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-20 Alisdair adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I'm not sure why this issue was not discussed at Frankfurt (or I missed +the discussion) but the rationale is now fundamentally flawed. With the +removal of concepts, <tt>std::identity</tt> again becomes an important library +type so we cannot simply remove it. +</p> +<p> +At that point, we need to pick one of the other suggested resolutions, +but have no guidance at the moment. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-20 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I believe the rationale for not addressing this issue in Frankfurt was that it did +not address a national body comment. +</p> +<p> +I also believe that removal of <tt>identity</tt> is still a practical option as +my latest reformulation of <tt>forward</tt>, which is due to comments suggested +at Summit, no longer uses <tt>identity</tt>. :-) +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T, class U, + class = typename enable_if + < + !is_lvalue_reference<T>::value || + is_lvalue_reference<T>::value && + is_lvalue_reference<U>::value + >::type, + class = typename enable_if + < + is_same<typename remove_all<T>::type, + typename remove_all<U>::type>::value + >::type> +inline +T&& +forward(U&& t) +{ + return static_cast<T&&>(t); + +} +</pre> + +<p><i>[ +The above code assumes acceptance of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1120">1120</a> for the definition of +<tt>remove_all</tt>. This is just to make the syntax a little more palatable. +Without this trait the above is still very implementable. +]</i></p> + + +</blockquote> + +<p> +Paper with rationale is on the way ... <i>really</i>, I promise this time! ;-) +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-30 Daniel adds: See <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#823">823</a> for an alternative resolution. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. Howard will update proposed wording to reflect current draft. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Strike from 20.3 [utility]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>template <class T> struct identity;</del> +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Remove from 20.3.3 [forward]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre><del>template <class T> struct identity { + typedef T type; + + const T& operator()(const T& x) const; +};</del> + +<del>const T& operator()(const T& x) const;</del> +</pre> +<blockquote> +<del>-2- <i>Returns:</i> <tt>x</tt></del> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="943"></a>943. <tt>ssize_t</tt> undefined</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 29.5.2 [atomics.types.address] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Holger Grund <b>Opened:</b> 2008-12-19 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#atomics.types.address">issues</a> in [atomics.types.address].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +There is a row in "Table 122 - Atomics for standard typedef types" +in 29.5.1 [atomics.types.integral] with <tt>atomic_ssize_t</tt> +and <tt>ssize_t</tt>. Unless, I'm missing something <tt>ssize_t</tt> +is not defined by the standard. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to review. Proposed resolution: Remove the typedef. Note: ssize_t +is a POSIX type. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +We agree with the proposed resolution. +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Remove the row containing <tt>ssize_t</tt> from Table 119 +"Atomics for standard typedef types" in 29.5.2 [atomics.types.address]. +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="947"></a>947. duration arithmetic: contradictory requirements</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.11.3.5 [time.duration.nonmember] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Pete Becker <b>Opened:</b> 2008-12-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-20</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#time.duration.nonmember">issues</a> in [time.duration.nonmember].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In 20.11.3.5 [time.duration.nonmember], paragraph 8 says that calling +<tt>dur / rep</tt> +when <tt>rep</tt> is an instantiation of <tt>duration</tt> requires a diagnostic. +That's followed by an <tt>operator/</tt> that takes two durations. +So <tt>dur1 / dur2</tt> is legal under the second version, +but requires a diagnostic under the first. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Please see the thread starting with c++std-lib-22980 for more information. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +Move to Open, pending proposed wording (and preferably an implementation). +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-27 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I've addressed this issue under the proposed wording for <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1177">1177</a> which +cleans up several places under 20.11.3 [time.duration] which used the +phrase "diagnostic required". +</p> +<p> +For clarity's sake, here is an example implementation of the constrained <tt>operator/</tt>: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class _Duration, class _Rep, bool = __is_duration<_Rep>::value> +struct __duration_divide_result +{ +}; + +template <class _Duration, class _Rep2, + bool = is_convertible<_Rep2, + typename common_type<typename _Duration::rep, _Rep2>::type>::value> +struct __duration_divide_imp +{ +}; + +template <class _Rep1, class _Period, class _Rep2> +struct __duration_divide_imp<duration<_Rep1, _Period>, _Rep2, true> +{ + typedef duration<typename common_type<_Rep1, _Rep2>::type, _Period> type; +}; + +template <class _Rep1, class _Period, class _Rep2> +struct __duration_divide_result<duration<_Rep1, _Period>, _Rep2, false> + : __duration_divide_imp<duration<_Rep1, _Period>, _Rep2> +{ +}; + +template <class _Rep1, class _Period, class _Rep2> +inline +typename __duration_divide_result<duration<_Rep1, _Period>, _Rep2>::type +operator/(const duration<_Rep1, _Period>& __d, const _Rep2& __s) +{ + typedef typename common_type<_Rep1, _Rep2>::type _Cr; + duration<_Cr, _Period> __r = __d; + __r /= static_cast<_Cr>(__s); + return __r; +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +<tt>__duration_divide_result</tt> is basically a custom-built <tt>enable_if</tt> +that will contain <tt>type</tt> only if <tt>Rep2</tt> is not a <tt>duration</tt> +and if <tt>Rep2</tt> is implicitly convertible to +<tt>common_type<typename Duration::rep, Rep2>::type</tt>. <tt>__is_duration</tt> +is simply a private trait that answers <tt>false</tt>, but is specialized for +<tt>duration</tt> to answer <tt>true</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +The constrained <tt>operator%</tt> works identically. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Mark <del>NAD Editorial</del><ins>Resolved</ins>, fixed by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1177">1177</a>. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="948"></a>948. <tt>ratio</tt> arithmetic tweak</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.6.2 [ratio.arithmetic] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2008-12-26 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#ratio.arithmetic">issues</a> in [ratio.arithmetic].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2800.pdf">N2800</a>, +20.6.2 [ratio.arithmetic] lacks a paragraph from the proposal +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2661.htm">N2661</a>: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p><b>ratio arithmetic [ratio.arithmetic]</b></p> + +<p> +... If the implementation is unable to form the indicated <tt>ratio</tt> due to +overflow, a diagnostic shall be issued. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +The lack of a diagnostic on compile-time overflow is a significant lack of +functionality. This paragraph could be put back into the WP simply editorially. +However in forming this issue I realized that we can do better than that. This +paragraph should also allow alternative formulations which go to extra lengths +to avoid overflow when possible. I.e. we should not mandate overflow when the +implementation can avoid it. +</p> + +<p> +For example: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template <class R1, class R2> struct ratio_multiply { + typedef <i>see below</i>} type; +</pre> + +<blockquote> +The nested typedef type shall be a synonym for <tt>ratio<T1, T2></tt> where +<tt>T1</tt> has the value <tt>R1::num * R2::num</tt> and <tt>T2</tt> has the +value <tt>R1::den * R2::den</tt>. +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +Consider the case where <tt>intmax_t</tt> is a 64 bit 2's complement signed integer, +and we have: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>typedef std::ratio<0x7FFFFFFFFFFFFFFF, 0x7FFFFFFFFFFFFFF0> R1; +typedef std::ratio<8, 7> R2; +typedef std::ratio_multiply<R1, R2>::type RT; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +According to the present formulation the implementaiton will multiply +<tt>0x7FFFFFFFFFFFFFFF * 8</tt> which will result in an overflow and subsequently +require a diagnostic. +</p> + +<p> +However if the implementation is first allowed to divde <tt>0x7FFFFFFFFFFFFFFF</tt> +by <tt>7</tt> obtaining <tt>0x1249249249249249 / 1</tt> and divide +<tt>8</tt> by <tt>0x7FFFFFFFFFFFFFF0</tt> obtaining <tt>1 / 0x0FFFFFFFFFFFFFFE</tt>, +then the exact result can then be computed without overflow: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>[0x7FFFFFFFFFFFFFFF/0x7FFFFFFFFFFFFFF0] * [8/7] = [0x1249249249249249/0x0FFFFFFFFFFFFFFE] +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Example implmentation which accomplishes this: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class R1, class R2> +struct ratio_multiply +{ +private: + typedef ratio<R1::num, R2::den> _R3; + typedef ratio<R2::num, R1::den> _R4; +public: + typedef ratio<__ll_mul<_R3::num, _R4::num>::value, + __ll_mul<_R3::den, _R4::den>::value> type; +}; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Recommend Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add a paragraph prior to p1 in 20.6.2 [ratio.arithmetic]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +Implementations may use other algorithms to compute the indicated ratios to avoid overflow. +If overflow occurs, a diagnostic shall be issued. +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="949"></a>949. <tt>owner_less</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.10.3.7 [util.smartptr.ownerless] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Thomas Plum <b>Opened:</b> 2008-12-30 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +20.9.10.3.7 [util.smartptr.ownerless] (class template <tt>owner_less</tt>) says that +<tt>operator()(x,y)</tt> shall return <tt>x.before(y)</tt>. +</p> +<p> +However, <tt>shared_ptr</tt> and <tt>weak_ptr</tt> have an <tt>owner_before()</tt> but not a +<tt>before()</tt>, and there's no base class to provide a missing <tt>before()</tt>. +</p> +<p> +Being that the class is named <tt>owner_less</tt> , I'm guessing that +"<tt>before()</tt>" should be "<tt>owner_before()</tt>", right? +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Herve adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Agreed with the typo, it should be "shall return <tt>x.owner_before(y)</tt>". +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Recommend Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 20.9.10.3.7 [util.smartptr.ownerless] p2: +</p> + +<blockquote> +-2- <tt>operator()(x,y)</tt> shall return +<tt>x.<ins>owner_</ins>before(y)</tt>. [<i>Note:</i> ... +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="950"></a>950. unique_ptr converting ctor shouldn't accept array form</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.9.2.1 [unique.ptr.single.ctor] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2009-01-07 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-19</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#unique.ptr.single.ctor">issues</a> in [unique.ptr.single.ctor].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +<tt>unique_ptr</tt>'s of array type should not convert to +<tt>unique_ptr</tt>'s which do not have an array type. +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>struct Deleter +{ + void operator()(void*) {} +}; + +int main() +{ + unique_ptr<int[], Deleter> s; + unique_ptr<int, Deleter> s2(std::move(s)); <font color="#C80000">// should not compile</font> +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Walter: Does the "diagnostic required" apply to both arms of the "and"? +</p> +<p> +Tom Plum: suggest to break into several sentences +</p> +<p> +Walter: suggest "comma" before the "and" in both places +</p> +<p> +Recommend Review. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +The post-Summit comments have been applied to the proposed resolution. +We now agree with the proposed resolution. +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved from Tentatively Ready to Open only because the wording needs to be +improved for enable_if type constraining, possibly following Robert's +formula. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-08-01 Howard updates wording and sets to Review. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-27 Pete Opens: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +The proposed replacement text doesn't make sense. +</p> + +<blockquote> +If <tt>D</tt> is a reference type, then <tt>E</tt> shall be the same type as +<tt>D</tt>, else this constructor shall not participate in overload resolution. +</blockquote> + +<p> +This imposes two requirements. 1. If <tt>D</tt> is a reference type, <tt>E</tt> +has to be <tt>D</tt>. 2. If <tt>D</tt> is not a reference type, the constructor +shall not participate in overload resolution. If the latter apples, the language +in the preceding paragraph that this constructor shall not throw an exception if +<tt>D</tt> is not a reference type is superfluous. I suspect that's not the +intention, but I can't parse this text any other way. +</p> + +<blockquote> +<tt>U</tt> shall not be an array type, else this constructor shall not +participate in overload resolution. +</blockquote> + +<p> +I don't know what this means. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-27 Peter adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I think that the intent is (proposed text): +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Remarks:</i> this constructor shall only participate in overload resolution +if: +</p> + +<ul> +<li> +<tt>unique_ptr<U, E>::pointer</tt> is implicitly convertible to +<tt>pointer</tt>, +</li> + +<li> +<tt>U</tt> is not an array type, and +</li> + +<li> +if <tt>D</tt> is a reference type, <tt>E</tt> is the same type as <tt>D</tt>. +</li> +</ul> + +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-28 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I like Peter's proposal. Here is a tweak of it made after looking at my +implementation. I believe this fixes a further defect not addressed by the +current proposed wording: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Remarks:</i> this constructor shall only participate in overload resolution +if: +</p> + +<ul> +<li> +<tt>unique_ptr<U, E>::pointer</tt> is implicitly convertible to +<tt>pointer</tt>, and +</li> + +<li> +<tt>U</tt> is not an array type, and +</li> + +<li> +if <tt>D</tt> is a reference type, <tt>E</tt> is the same type as <tt>D</tt>, +else <tt>E</tt> shall be implicitly convertible to <tt>D</tt>. +</li> +</ul> + +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010 Pittsburgh: Moved to NAD Editorial. Rationale added below. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +Solved by +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3073.html">N3073</a>. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 20.9.9.2.1 [unique.ptr.single.ctor]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template <class U, class E> unique_ptr(unique_ptr<U, E>&& u); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +-20- <i>Requires:</i> If <tt>D</tt> is not a reference type, +construction of the deleter <tt>D</tt> from an rvalue of type <tt>E</tt> +shall be well formed and shall not throw an exception. <del>If <tt>D</tt> is +a reference type, then <tt>E</tt> shall be the same type as <tt>D</tt> +(diagnostic required). <tt>unique_ptr<U, E>::pointer</tt> shall be +implicitly convertible to <tt>pointer</tt>. [<i>Note:</i> These requirements +imply that <tt>T</tt> and <tt>U</tt> are complete types. — <i>end note</i>]</del> +</p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Remarks:</i> If <tt>D</tt> is +a reference type, then <tt>E</tt> shall be the same type as <tt>D</tt>, else this +constructor shall not participate in overload resolution. <tt>unique_ptr<U, E>::pointer</tt> shall be +implicitly convertible to <tt>pointer</tt>, else this +constructor shall not participate in overload resolution. <tt>U</tt> shall not be +an array type, else this +constructor shall not participate in overload resolution. [<i>Note:</i> These requirements +imply that <tt>T</tt> and <tt>U</tt> are complete types. — <i>end note</i>] +</ins></p> + +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 20.9.9.2.3 [unique.ptr.single.asgn]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template <class U, class E> unique_ptr& operator=(unique_ptr<U, E>&& u); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +-6- <i>Requires:</i> Assignment of the deleter <tt>D</tt> from an rvalue +<tt>D</tt> shall not throw an exception. <del><tt>unique_ptr<U, +E>::pointer</tt> shall be implicitly convertible to <tt>pointer</tt>. +[<i>Note:</i> These requirements imply that <tt>T</tt> and <tt>U</tt> +are complete types. — <i>end note</i>]</del> +</p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Remarks:</i> <tt>unique_ptr<U, +E>::pointer</tt> shall be implicitly convertible to <tt>pointer</tt>, else this +operator shall not participate in overload resolution. +<tt>U</tt> shall not be an array type, else this +operator shall not participate in overload resolution. +[<i>Note:</i> These requirements imply that <tt>T</tt> and <tt>U</tt> +are complete types. — <i>end note</i>] +</ins></p> + +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="951"></a>951. Various threading bugs #1</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.11.2.1 [time.traits.is_fp] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Pete Becker <b>Opened:</b> 2009-01-07 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-24</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p> +Related to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#953">953</a>. +</p> + +<p> +20.11.2.1 [time.traits.is_fp] says that the type <tt>Rep</tt> "is +assumed to be ... a class emulating an integral type." What are the +requirements for such a type? +</p> +<p><i>[ +2009-05-10 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<tt>IntegralLike</tt>. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +As with issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#953">953</a>, +we recommend this issue be addressed in the context of providing concepts for the entire <tt>thread</tt> header. +</p> +<p> +We look forward to proposed wording. +</p> +<p> +Move to Open. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-08-01 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I have surveyed all clauses of 20.11.2.2 [time.traits.duration_values], +20.11.2.3 [time.traits.specializations] and 20.11.3 [time.duration]. +I can not find any clause which involves the use of a <tt>duration::rep</tt> type +where the requirements on the <tt>rep</tt> type are not clearly spelled out. +These requirements were carefully crafted to allow any arithmetic type, or +any user-defined type emulating an arithmetic type. +</p> + +<p> +Indeed, <tt>treat_as_floating_point</tt> +becomes completely superfluous if <tt>duration::rep</tt> can never be a class type. +</p> + +<p> +There will be some <tt>Rep</tt> types which will not meet the requirements of +<em>every</em> <tt>duration</tt> operation. This is no different than the fact +that <tt>vector<T></tt> can easily be used for types <tt>T</tt> which are +not <tt>DefaultConstructible</tt>, even though some members of <tt>vector<T></tt> +require <tt>T</tt> to be <tt>DefaultConstructible</tt>. This is why the requirements +on <tt>Rep</tt> are specified for each operation individually. +</p> + +<p> +In 20.11.2.1 [time.traits.is_fp] p1: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class Rep> struct treat_as_floating_point + : is_floating_point<Rep> { }; +</pre> + +<blockquote> +The <tt>duration</tt> template uses the <tt>treat_as_floating_point</tt> trait to help +determine if a <tt>duration</tt> object can be converted to another <tt>duration</tt> +with a different tick period. If <tt>treat_as_floating_point<Rep>::value</tt> is +<tt>true</tt>, then <tt>Rep</tt> is a floating-point type and implicit conversions are +allowed among <tt>duration</tt>s. Otherwise, the implicit convertibility depends +on the tick periods of the <tt>duration</tt>s. If <tt>Rep</tt> is <u>a class type which +emulates a floating-point type</u>, the author of <tt>Rep</tt> can specialize +<tt>treat_as_floating_point</tt> so that <tt>duration</tt> will treat this <tt>Rep</tt> as if it +were a floating-point type. Otherwise <tt>Rep</tt> is assumed to be an integral +type or <u>a class emulating an integral type</u>. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +The phrases "a class type which emulates a floating-point type" and +"a class emulating an integral type" are clarifying phrases which refer to +the summation of all the requirements on the <tt>Rep</tt> type specified in +detail elsewhere (and <em>should not</em> be repeated here). +</p> + +<p> +This specification has been implemented, now multiple times, and the experience +has been favorable. The current specification clearly specifies the requirements +at each point of use (though I'd be happy to fix any place I may have missed, +but none has been pointed out). +</p> + +<p> +I am amenable to improved wording of this paragraph (and any others), but do not have any +suggestions for improved wording at this time. I am <em>strongly</em> opposed to +changes which would significantly alter the semantics of the +specification under 20.11 [time] without firmly grounded and +documented rationale, example implementation, testing, and user +experience which relates a positive experience. +</p> + +<p> +I recommend NAD unless someone wants to produce some clarifying wording. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Stefanus to provide wording to turn this into a note. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-11 Stefanus provided wording. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><i>[ +2010 Rapperswil: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 20.11.2.1 [time.traits.is_fp]/1: +</p> + +<blockquote> +1 The <tt>duration</tt> template uses the <tt>treat_as_floating_point</tt> trait +to help determine if a <tt>duration</tt> object can be converted to another +<tt>duration</tt> with a different tick period. If +<tt>treat_as_floating_point<Rep>::value</tt> is <tt>true</tt>, then +<del><tt>Rep</tt> is a floating-point type and</del> implicit conversions are allowed among +<tt>duration</tt>s. Otherwise, the implicit convertibility depends on the tick +periods of the <tt>duration</tt>s. <del>If <tt>Rep</tt> is a class type which +emulates a floating-point type, the author of <tt>Rep</tt> can specialize +<tt>treat_as_floating_point</tt> so that duration will treat this <tt>Rep</tt> +as if it were a floating-point type. Otherwise <tt>Rep</tt> is assumed to be an +integral type or a class emulating an integral type.</del> +<ins>[<i>Note:</i> The intention of this trait is to indicate whether a given +class behaves like a floating point type, and thus allows division of one value +by another with acceptable loss of precision. If +<tt>treat_as_floating_point<Rep>::value</tt> is <tt>false</tt>, +<tt>Rep</tt> will be treated as if it behaved like an integral type for the +purpose of these conversions. — <i>end note</i>]</ins> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="953"></a>953. Various threading bugs #3</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.11.1 [time.clock.req] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Pete Becker <b>Opened:</b> 2009-01-07 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-20</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#time.clock.req">issues</a> in [time.clock.req].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p> +Related to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#951">951</a>. +</p> + +<p> +20.11.1 [time.clock.req] says that a clock's <tt>rep</tt> member is "an +arithmetic type or a class emulating an arithmetic type." What are the +requirements for such a type? +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-10 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +This wording was aimed directly at the <tt>ArithmeticLike</tt> concept. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +We recommend this issue be addressed in the context of providing concepts +for the entire <tt>thread</tt> header. +</p> +<p> +May resolve for now by specifying arithmetic types, +and in future change to <tt>ArithmeticLike</tt>. +However, Alisdair believes this is not feasible. +</p> +<p> +Bill disagrees. +</p> +<p> +We look forward to proposed wording. Move to Open. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-08-01 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +See commented dated 2009-08-01 in <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#951">951</a>. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Stefanus to provide wording to turn this into a note. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-11 Stephanus provided wording for <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#951">951</a> which addresses +this issue as well. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><i>[ +2010 Rapperswil: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to <del>NAD Editorial</del><ins>Resolved</ins>, resolved by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#951">951</a>. +</blockquote> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="954"></a>954. Various threading bugs #4</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.11.1 [time.clock.req] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Pete Becker <b>Opened:</b> 2009-01-07 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#time.clock.req">issues</a> in [time.clock.req].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Table 55 -- Clock Requirements (in 20.11.1 [time.clock.req]) +</p> + +<ol type="a"> +<li> +the requirements for <tt>C1::time_point</tt> require <tt>C1</tt> and <tt>C2</tt> +to "refer to the same epoch", but "epoch" is not defined. +</li> +<li> +"Different clocks may share a <tt>time_point</tt> definition if it is +valid to compare their <tt>time_point</tt>s by comparing their +respective <tt>duration</tt>s." What does "valid" mean here? And, since +<tt>C1::rep</tt> is "**THE** representation type of the native +<tt>duration</tt> and <tt>time_point</tt>" (emphasis added), there +doesn't seem to be much room for some other representation. +</li> +<li> +<tt>C1::is_monotonic</tt> has type "<tt>const bool</tt>". The +"<tt>const</tt>" should be removed. +</li> +<li> +<tt>C1::period</tt> has type <tt>ratio</tt>. <tt>ratio</tt> isn't a type, +it's a template. What is the required type? +</li> +</ol> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-10 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<ol type="a"> +<li> +<p> +"epoch" is purposefully not defined beyond the common English +<a href="http://www.dictionary.net/epoch">definition</a>. The C standard +also chose not to define epoch, though POSIX did. I believe it is a strength +of the C standard that epoch is not defined. When it is known that two <tt>time_point</tt>s +refer to the same epoch, then a definition of the epoch is not needed to compare +the two <tt>time_point</tt>s, or subtract them. +</p> +<p> +A <tt>time_point</tt> and a <tt>Clock</tt> implicitly refer to an (unspecified) epoch. +The <tt>time_point</tt> represents an offset (<tt>duration</tt>) from an epoch. +</p> +</li> +<li> +<p> +The sentence: +</p> +<blockquote> +Different clocks +may share a <tt>time_point</tt> +definition if it is valid to +compare their <tt>time_point</tt>s by +comparing their respective +<tt>duration</tt>s. +</blockquote> + +<p> +is redundant and could be removed. I believe the sentence which follows the above: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<tt>C1</tt> and <tt>C2</tt> shall refer to the same epoch. +</blockquote> + +<p> +is sufficient. If two clocks share the same epoch, then by definition, comparing +their <tt>time_point</tt>s is valid. +</p> +</li> +<li> +<tt>is_monotonic</tt> is meant to never change (be <tt>const</tt>). It is also +desired that this value be usable in compile-time computation and branching. +</li> +<li> +<p> +This should probably instead be worded: +</p> +<blockquote> +An instantiation of <tt>ratio</tt>. +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Re (a): It is not clear to us whether "epoch" is a term of art. +</p> +<p> +Re (b), (c), and (d): We agree with Howard's comments, +and would consider adding to (c) a <tt>static constexpr</tt> requirement. +</p> +<p> +Move to Open pending proposed wording. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-25 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +In regards to (d) I suggest to say "a specialization of ratio" instead of +"An instantiation of ratio". This seems to be the better matching standard +core language term for this kind of entity. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-25 Ganesh adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Regarding (a), I found this paper on the ISO website using the term "epoch" consistently with the current wording: +</p> + +<p> +<a href="http://standards.iso.org/ittf/PubliclyAvailableStandards/C030811e_FILES/MAIN_C030811e/text/ISOIEC_18026E_TEMPORAL_CS.HTM">http://standards.iso.org/ittf/PubliclyAvailableStandards/C030811e_FILES/MAIN_C030811e/text/ISOIEC_18026E_TEMPORAL_CS.HTM</a> +</p> +<p> +which is part of ISO/IEC 18026 "Information technology -- Spatial Reference Model (SRM)". +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-08-01 Howard: Moved to Reivew as the wording requested in Batavia has been provided. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<ol type="a"> +<li> +<p> +Change 20.11.1 [time.clock.req] p1: +</p> +<blockquote> +-1- A clock is a bundle consisting of a native <tt>duration</tt>, a native <tt>time_point</tt>, and a function <tt>now()</tt> to get the +current <tt>time_point</tt>. <ins>The origin of the clock's <tt>time_point</tt> is referred to as the clock's <i>epoch</i> as defined in +section 6.3 of ISO/IEC 18026.</ins> +A clock shall meet the requirements in Table 45. +</blockquote> +</li> +<li> +<p> +Remove the sentence from the <tt>time_point</tt> row of the table "Clock Requirements": +</p> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Clock requirements</caption> +<tbody><tr> +<td> +<tt>C1::time_point</tt> +</td> +<td> +<tt>chrono::time_point<C1></tt> or <tt>chrono::time_point<C2, C1::duration></tt> +</td> +<td> +The native <tt>time_point</tt> type of the clock. +<del>Different clocks may share a <tt>time_point</tt> definition if it is valid to compare their <tt>time_point</tt>s by comparing their respective <tt>duration</tt>s.</del> +<tt>C1</tt> and <tt>C2</tt> shall refer to the same epoch. +</td> +</tr> +</tbody></table> +</li> +</ol> +<ol type="a" start="4"> +<li> +<p> +Change the row starting with <tt>C1::period</tt> of the table "Clock Requirements": +</p> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Clock requirements</caption> +<tbody><tr> +<td> +<tt>C1::period</tt> +</td> +<td> +<ins>a specialization of</ins> <tt>ratio</tt> +</td> +<td> +The tick period of the clock in seconds. +</td> +</tr> +</tbody></table> + +</li> +</ol> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="956"></a>956. Various threading bugs #6</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.11.1 [time.clock.req] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Pete Becker <b>Opened:</b> 2009-01-07 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-24</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#time.clock.req">issues</a> in [time.clock.req].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +20.11.1 [time.clock.req] uses the word "native" in several places, +but doesn't define it. What is a "native <tt>duration</tt>"? +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-10 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +The standard uses "native" in several places without defining it (e.g. +2.14.3 [lex.ccon]). It is meant to mean "that which is defined +by the facility", or something along those lines. In this case it refers +to the nested <tt>time_point</tt> and <tt>duration</tt> types of the clock. +Better wording is welcome. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +Move to Open pending proposed wording from Pete. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10-23 Pete provides wording: +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-18 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I see that 30.4.1.3 [thread.timedmutex.requirements]/3 says: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Precondition:</i> If the tick <tt>period</tt> of <tt>rel_time</tt> is not +exactly convertible to the native tick <tt>period</tt>, the <tt>duration</tt> +shall be rounded up to the nearest native tick <tt>period</tt>. +</blockquote> + +<p> +I would prefer to see that adapted as well. Following the same style as +the proposed resolution I come up with +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Precondition:</i> If the tick <tt>period</tt> of <tt>rel_time</tt> is not +exactly convertible to the <del>native</del> tick <tt>period</tt> <ins>of the +execution environment</ins>, the <tt>duration</tt> shall be rounded up to the +nearest <del>native</del> tick <tt>period</tt> <ins>of the execution +environment</ins>. +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-03-28 Daniel synced wording with N3092 +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Post-Rapperswil, Howard provides wording: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Tentatively Ready with revised wording from Howard Hinnant after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +Change 20.11.1 [time.clock.req]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +1 A clock is a bundle consisting of a <del>native</del> <tt>duration</tt>, a +<del>native</del> <tt>time_point</tt>, and a function <tt>now()</tt> to get the +current <tt>time_point</tt>. The origin of the clock's <tt>time_point</tt> is +referred to as the clock's <i>epoch</i>. A clock shall meet the requirements in +Table 56. +</p> + +<p> +2 ... +</p> + +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 56 — Clock requirements</caption> +<tbody><tr><th>Expression</th> <th>Return type</th> <th>Operational semantics</th></tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>C1::rep</tt></td> +<td>An arithmetic type or a class emulating an arithmetic type</td> +<td>The representation type of <del>the native</del> +<tt><ins>C1::</ins>duration</tt><ins>.</ins> <del>and +<tt>time_point</tt>.</del></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>C1::period</tt></td> +<td align="center">...</td> +<td align="center">...</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>C1::duration</tt></td> +<td><tt>chrono::duration<C1::rep, C1::period></tt></td> +<td>The <del>native</del> <tt>duration</tt> type of the clock.</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>C1::time_point</tt></td> +<td><tt>chrono::time_point<C1></tt> or <tt>chrono::time_point<C2, +C1::duration></tt></td> +<td>The <del>native</del> <tt>time_point</tt> type of the clock. <tt>C1</tt> and +<tt>C2</tt> shall refer to the same epoch.</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td colspan="3" align="center">...</td> +</tr> + +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="957"></a>957. Various threading bugs #7</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.11.5.1 [time.clock.system] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Pete Becker <b>Opened:</b> 2009-01-07 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#time.clock.system">issues</a> in [time.clock.system].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +20.11.5.1 [time.clock.system]: <tt>to_time_t</tt> is overspecified. It +requires truncation, but should allow rounding. For example, suppose a +system has a clock that gives times in milliseconds, but <tt>time()</tt> rounds +those times to the nearest second. Then <tt>system_clock</tt> can't use any +resolution finer than one second, because if it did, truncating times +between half a second and a full second would produce the wrong <tt>time_t</tt> +value. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit Anthony Williams provided proposed wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +Move to Review pending input from Howard. and other stakeholders. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-23 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +I am in favor of the wording provided by Anthony. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 20.11.5.1 [time.clock.system] replace paragraphs 3 and 4 with: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>time_t to_time_t(const time_point& t); +</pre> +<blockquote> +-3- <i>Returns:</i> A <tt>time_t</tt> object that represents the same +point in time as <tt>t</tt> when both values are <del>truncated</del> +<ins>restricted</ins> to the coarser of the precisions of +<tt>time_t</tt> and <tt>time_point</tt>. <ins> It is implementation +defined whether values are rounded or truncated to the required +precision.</ins> +</blockquote> + +<pre>time_point from_time_t(time_t t); +</pre> +<blockquote> +-4- <i>Returns:</i> A <tt>time_point</tt> object that represents the +same point in time as <tt>t</tt> when both values are <del>truncated</del> +<ins>restricted</ins> to the +coarser of the precisions of <tt>time_t</tt> and <tt>time_point</tt>. +<ins>It is implementation defined whether values are +rounded or truncated to the required precision.</ins> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="960"></a>960. Various threading bugs #10</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30.4.1 [thread.mutex.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Pete Becker <b>Opened:</b> 2009-01-07 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#thread.mutex.requirements">issues</a> in [thread.mutex.requirements].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +30.4.1 [thread.mutex.requirements]: paragraph 4 is entitled +"Error conditions", but according to 17.5.1.4 [structure.specifications], "Error +conditions:" specifies "the error conditions for error codes reported by +the function." It's not clear what this should mean when there is no +function in sight. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to open. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Beman provided proposed wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. Fix the proposed wording with "functions of type Mutex" +-> "functions of Mutex type" +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 30.4.1 [thread.mutex.requirements] Mutex requirements, +paragraph 4 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-4- <del><i>Error conditions:</i></del> +<ins>The error conditions for error codes, if any, reported by member +functions of Mutex type shall be:</ins> +</p> +<ul> +<li> +<tt>not_enough_memory</tt> -- if there is not enough memory to construct +the mutex object. +</li> +<li> +<tt>resource_unavailable_try_again</tt> -- if any native handle type +manipulated is not available. +</li> +<li> +<tt>operation_not_permitted</tt> -- if the thread does not have the +necessary permission to change the state of the mutex object. +</li> +<li> +<tt>device_or_resource_busy</tt> -- if any native handle type +manipulated is already locked. +</li> +<li> +<tt>invalid_argument</tt> -- if any native handle type manipulated as +part of mutex construction is incorrect. +</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="962"></a>962. Various threading bugs #12</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30.4.2.2.2 [thread.lock.unique.locking] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Pete Becker <b>Opened:</b> 2009-01-07 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#thread.lock.unique.locking">issues</a> in [thread.lock.unique.locking].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +30.4.2.2.2 [thread.lock.unique.locking]: <tt>unique_lock::lock</tt> is +required to throw an object of type <tt>std::system_error</tt> "when the +postcondition cannot be achieved." The postcondition is <tt>owns == true</tt>, +and this is trivial to achieve. Presumably, the requirement is intended +to mean something more than that. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Summit: +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +Move to open. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Beman has volunteered to provide proposed wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-21 Beman added wording to address 30.2.2 [thread.req.exception] +in response to the Frankfurt notes in <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#859">859</a>. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-09-25 Beman: minor update to wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p><i>Change Exceptions 30.2.2 [thread.req.exception] as indicated:</i></p> +<blockquote> +<p>Some functions described in this Clause are specified to throw exceptions of +type <code>system_error</code> (19.5.5). Such exceptions shall be thrown if <ins> +any of the <i>Error conditions</i> are detected or</ins> a call to an operating +system or other underlying API results in an error that prevents the library +function from <del>satisfying its postconditions or from returning a meaningful +value</del> <ins>meeting its specifications</ins>. <ins>Failure to +allocate storage shall be reported as described in +17.6.4.12 [res.on.exception.handling].</ins></p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>Change thread assignment 30.3.1.5 [thread.thread.member], join(), +paragraph 8 as indicated:</i></p> +<blockquote> +<p><i>Throws:</i> <code>std::system_error</code> when <del>the postconditions cannot be achieved</del> <ins>an exception is required (30.2.2 [thread.req.exception])</ins>.</p> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>Change thread assignment 30.3.1.5 [thread.thread.member], detach(), paragraph +13 as indicated:</i></p> +<blockquote> + +<p><i>Throws:</i> <code>std::system_error</code> when <del>the effects or +postconditions cannot be achieved</del> <ins>an exception is required (30.2.2 [thread.req.exception])</ins>.</p> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>Change Mutex requirements 30.4.1 [thread.mutex.requirements], paragraph +11, as indicated:</i></p> +<blockquote> + +<p><i>Throws:</i> <code>std::system_error</code> when <del>the effects or +postcondition cannot be achieved</del> <ins>an exception is required (30.2.2 [thread.req.exception])</ins>.</p> +</blockquote> +<p><i>Change unique_lock locking 30.4.2.2.2 [thread.lock.unique.locking], +paragraph 3, as indicated:</i></p> +<blockquote> + +<p><i>Throws:</i> <code>std::system_error</code> when <del>the postcondition cannot be achieved</del> <ins>an exception is required (30.2.2 [thread.req.exception])</ins>.</p> +</blockquote> +<p><i>Change unique_lock locking 30.4.2.2.2 [thread.lock.unique.locking], +paragraph 8, as indicated:</i></p> +<blockquote> + +<p><i>Throws:</i> <code>std::system_error</code> when <del>the postcondition cannot be achieved</del> <ins>an exception is required (30.2.2 [thread.req.exception])</ins>.</p> +</blockquote> +<p><i>Change unique_lock locking 30.4.2.2.2 [thread.lock.unique.locking], +paragraph 13, as indicated:</i></p> +<blockquote> + +<p><i>Throws:</i> <code>std::system_error</code> when <del>the postcondition cannot be achieved</del> <ins>an exception is required (30.2.2 [thread.req.exception])</ins>.</p> +</blockquote> +<p><i>Change unique_lock locking 30.4.2.2.2 [thread.lock.unique.locking], +paragraph 18, as indicated:</i></p> +<blockquote> + +<p><i>Throws:</i> <code>std::system_error</code> when <del>the postcondition cannot be achieved</del> <ins>an exception is required (30.2.2 [thread.req.exception])</ins>.</p> +</blockquote> +<p><i>Change unique_lock locking 30.4.2.2.2 [thread.lock.unique.locking], +paragraph 22, as indicated:</i></p> +<blockquote> + +<p><i>Throws:</i> <code>std::system_error</code> when <del>the postcondition cannot be achieved</del> <ins>an exception is required (30.2.2 [thread.req.exception])</ins>.</p> +</blockquote> +<p><i>Change Function call_once 30.4.4.2 [thread.once.callonce], paragraph 4, as +indicated</i></p> +<blockquote> + <p><i>Throws:</i> <code>std::system_error</code> when <del>the effects cannot be achieved</del> <ins>an exception is required (30.2.2 [thread.req.exception])</ins>, + or any exception thrown by <code>func</code>.</p> +</blockquote> +<p><i>Change Class condition_variable 30.5.1 [thread.condition.condvar], +paragraph 12, as indicated:</i></p> +<blockquote> + +<p><i>Throws:</i> <code>std::system_error</code> when <del>the effects or +postcondition cannot be achieved</del> <ins>an exception is required (30.2.2 [thread.req.exception])</ins>.</p> +</blockquote> +<p><i>Change Class condition_variable 30.5.1 [thread.condition.condvar], +paragraph 19, as indicated:</i></p> +<blockquote> + +<p><i>Throws:</i> <code>std::system_error</code> when <del>the effects or +postcondition cannot be achieved</del> <ins>an exception is required (30.2.2 [thread.req.exception])</ins>.</p> +</blockquote> +<p><i>Change Class condition_variable_any 30.5.2 [thread.condition.condvarany], +paragraph 10, as indicated:</i></p> +<blockquote> + +<p><i>Throws:</i> <code>std::system_error</code> when <del>the effects or +postcondition cannot be achieved</del> <ins>an exception is required (30.2.2 [thread.req.exception])</ins>.</p> +</blockquote> +<p><i>Change Class condition_variable_any 30.5.2 [thread.condition.condvarany], +paragraph 16, as indicated:</i></p> +<blockquote> + +<p><i>Throws:</i> <code>std::system_error</code> when <del>the returned value, effects, or +postcondition cannot be achieved</del> <ins>an exception is required (30.2.2 [thread.req.exception])</ins>.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>Assuming issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#859">859</a>, Monotonic Clock is Conditionally Supported?, has been +applied to the working paper, change Change 30.5.1 [thread.condition.condvar] as +indicated:</i></p> +<blockquote> +<pre>template <class Rep, class Period> +bool wait_for(unique_lock<mutex>& lock, + const chrono::duration<Rep, Period>& rel_time);</pre> +<pre>...</pre> + +<p><i>Throws:</i> <code>std::system_error</code> when <del>the effects or +postcondition cannot be achieved</del> <ins>an exception is required ([thread.req.exception])</ins>.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>Assuming issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#859">859</a>, Monotonic Clock is Conditionally Supported?, has been +applied to the working paper, change Change 30.5.1 [thread.condition.condvar] as +indicated:</i></p> +<blockquote> +<pre>template <class Rep, class Period, class Predicate> + bool wait_for(unique_lock<mutex>& lock, + const chrono::duration<Rep, Period>& rel_time, + Predicate pred);</pre> + <pre>...</pre> + +<p><i>Throws:</i> <code>std::system_error</code> when <del>the effects or +postcondition cannot be achieved</del> <ins>an exception is required (30.2.2 [thread.req.exception])</ins>.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>Assuming issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#859">859</a>, Monotonic Clock is Conditionally Supported?, has been +applied to the working paper, change 30.5.2 [thread.condition.condvarany] as +indicated:</i></p> +<blockquote> +<pre>template <class Lock, class Rep, class Period> + bool wait_for(Lock& lock, const chrono::duration<Rep, Period>& rel_time);</pre> + <pre>...</pre> + +<p><i>Throws:</i> <code>std::system_error</code> when <del>the returned value, effects or +postcondition cannot be achieved</del> <ins>an exception is required (30.2.2 [thread.req.exception])</ins>.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>Assuming issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#859">859</a>, Monotonic Clock is Conditionally Supported?, has been +applied to the working paper, change 30.5.2 [thread.condition.condvarany] as +indicated:</i></p> +<blockquote> +<pre>template <class Lock, class Rep, class Period, class Predicate> + bool wait_for(Lock& lock, const chrono::duration<Rep, Period>& rel_time, Predicate pred);</pre> + <pre>...</pre> + +<p><i>Throws:</i> <code>std::system_error</code> when <del>the returned value, effects or +postcondition cannot be achieved</del> <ins>an exception is required (30.2.2 [thread.req.exception])</ins>.</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="963"></a>963. Various threading bugs #13</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30.3.1.5 [thread.thread.member] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Pete Becker <b>Opened:</b> 2009-01-07 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#thread.thread.member">issues</a> in [thread.thread.member].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +30.3.1.5 [thread.thread.member]: <tt>thread::detach</tt> is required to +throw an exception if the thread is "not a detachable thread". +"Detachable" is never defined. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Due to a mistake on my part, 3 proposed resolutions appeared at approximately +the same time. They are all three noted below in the discussion. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Summit, proposed resolution: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +In 30.3.1.5 [thread.thread.member] change: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void detach(); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p>...</p> +<p>-14- <i>Error conditions:</i></p> +<ul> +<li><tt>no_such_process</tt> -- <ins>if the thread is</ins> not <del>a</del> valid<del> thread</del>.</li> +<li><tt>invalid_argument</tt> -- <ins>if the thread is</ins> not <del>a detachable</del> <ins>joinable</ins><del> thread</del>.</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit, Jonathan Wakely adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +A <tt>thread</tt> is detachable if it is joinable. As we've defined joinable, +we can just use that. +</p> +<p> +This corresponds to the pthreads specification, where pthread_detach +fails if the thread is not joinable: +</p> +<blockquote> +EINVAL: The implementation has detected that the value specified by +thread does not refer to a joinable thread. +</blockquote> +<p> +Jonathan recommends this proposed wording: +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +In 30.3.1.5 [thread.thread.member] change: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void detach(); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p>...</p> +<p>-14- <i>Error conditions:</i></p> +<ul> +<li>...</li> +<li><tt>invalid_argument</tt> -- not a <del>detachable</del> <ins>joinable</ins> thread.</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit, Anthony Williams adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +This is covered by the precondition that <tt>joinable()</tt> be <tt>true</tt>. +</p> +<p> +Anthony recommends this proposed wording: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +In 30.3.1.5 [thread.thread.member] change: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void detach(); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p>...</p> +<p>-14- <i>Error conditions:</i></p> +<ul> +<li>...</li> +<li><del><tt>invalid_argument</tt> -- not a detachable thread.</del></li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Mark as Ready with proposed resolution from Summit. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +In 30.3.1.5 [thread.thread.member] change: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void detach(); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p>...</p> +<p>-14- <i>Error conditions:</i></p> +<ul> +<li><tt>no_such_process</tt> -- <ins>if the thread is</ins> not <del>a</del> valid<del> thread</del>.</li> +<li><tt>invalid_argument</tt> -- <ins>if the thread is</ins> not <del>a detachable</del> <ins>joinable</ins><del> thread</del>.</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="965"></a>965. Various threading bugs #15</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30.5.1 [thread.condition.condvar] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Pete Becker <b>Opened:</b> 2009-01-07 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#thread.condition.condvar">issues</a> in [thread.condition.condvar].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +30.5.1 [thread.condition.condvar]: the constructor for +<tt>condition_variable</tt> throws an exception with error code +<tt>device_or_resource_busy</tt> "if attempting to initialize a +previously-initialized but as of yet undestroyed <tt>condition_variable</tt>." +How can this occur? +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Summit: +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Move to review. Proposed resolution: strike the <tt>device_or_resource_busy</tt> +error condition from the constructor of <tt>condition_variable</tt>. +</p> +<ul> +<li> +This is a POSIX error that cannot occur in this interface because the +C++ interface does not separate declaration from initialization. +</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +We agree with the proposed resolution. +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 30.5.1 [thread.condition.condvar] p3: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<ul> +<li>...</li> +<li> +<del><tt>device_or_resource_busy</tt> -- if attempting to initialize a +previously-initialized but as of yet undestroyed +<tt>condition_variable</tt>.</del> +</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="967"></a>967. Various threading bugs #17</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30.3.1.2 [thread.thread.constr] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Pete Becker <b>Opened:</b> 2009-01-07 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#thread.thread.constr">issues</a> in [thread.thread.constr].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +the error handling for the constructor for <tt>condition_variable</tt> +distinguishes lack of memory from lack of other resources, but the error +handling for the thread constructor does not. Is this difference +intentional? +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Beman has volunteered to provide proposed wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-09-25 Beman provided proposed wording. +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +The proposed resolution assumes <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#962">962</a> has been accepted and +its proposed resolution applied to the working paper. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + + +<p><span style="font-style: italic">Change Mutex requirements 30.4.1 [thread.mutex.requirements], +paragraph 4, as indicated:</span></p> +<blockquote> + +<p><i>Error conditions:</i></p> + <blockquote> + +<ul> +<li><del> <code>not_enough_memory</code> — if there is not enough memory to construct +the mutex object.</del></li> + +<li><code>resource_unavailable_try_again</code> — if any native handle type +manipulated is not available.</li> + +<li><code>operation_not_permitted</code> — if the thread does not have the +necessary permission to change the state of the mutex object.</li> + +<li><code>device_or_resource_busy</code> — if any native handle type +manipulated is already locked.</li> + +<li><code>invalid_argument</code> — if any native handle type manipulated as +part of mutex construction is incorrect.</li> +</ul> + </blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><span style="font-style: italic">Change Class condition_variable 30.5.1 [thread.condition.condvar], +default constructor, as indicated:</span></p> +<blockquote> + <p><code>condition_variable();</code></p> + <blockquote> + <p><i>Effects:</i> Constructs an object of type <code>condition_variable</code>.</p> + <p><ins><i>Throws:</i> <code>std::system_error</code> when an exception is required (30.2.2 [thread.req.exception])</ins>.</p> + <p><i>Error conditions:</i></p> + <blockquote> + <ul> + <li><del><code>not_enough_memory</code> — if a memory limitation prevents + initialization.</del></li> + <li> <code>resource_unavailable_try_again</code> — if some non-memory + resource limitation prevents initialization.</li> + <li> <code>device_or_resource_busy</code> — if attempting to initialize a + previously-initialized but as of yet undestroyed <code>condition_variable</code>.</li> + </ul> + </blockquote> + </blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="968"></a>968. Various threading bugs #18</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30.4.1 [thread.mutex.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Pete Becker <b>Opened:</b> 2009-01-07 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#thread.mutex.requirements">issues</a> in [thread.mutex.requirements].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +30.4.1 [thread.mutex.requirements]: several functions are +required to throw exceptions "if the thread does not have the necessary +permission ...". "The necessary permission" is not defined. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Summit: +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +Move to open. +</blockquote> + + +<p><i>[ +Beman has volunteered to provide proposed wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Ready with minor word-smithing in the example. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + + +<p><i>Change Exceptions 30.2.2 [thread.req.exception] as indicated:</i></p> +<blockquote> +<p>Some functions described in this Clause are +specified to throw exceptions of type <code>system_error</code> (19.5.5). Such exceptions +shall be thrown if any of the <i>Error conditions</i> are detected or a call to an operating system or other underlying API +results in an error that prevents the library function from meeting its specifications. +<i>[Note:</i> See 17.6.4.12 [res.on.exception.handling] for exceptions thrown to report +storage allocation failures. <i>—end +note]</i></p> + +<p><ins><i>[Example:</i></ins></p> + +<blockquote> + +<p><ins>Consider a function in this clause that is specified to throw exceptions of type <code> +system_error</code> and specifies <i>Error conditions</i> that include <code> +operation_not_permitted</code> for a thread that does not have the privilege to +perform the operation. Assume that, during the execution of this function, an <code>errno</code> +of <code>EPERM</code> is reported by a POSIX API call used by the +implementation. Since POSIX specifies an <code>errno</code> of <code>EPERM</code> +when "the caller does not have the privilege to perform the operation", +the implementation maps <code>EPERM</code> to an <code>error_condition</code> +of <code>operation_not_permitted</code> (19.5 [syserr]) and an exception of type <code> +system_error</code> is thrown. </ins></p> + +</blockquote> + +<p><ins><i>—end example]</i></ins></p> + +<p><span style="font-style: italic">Editorial note: For the sake of exposition, +the existing text above is shown with the changes proposed in issues 962 and 967. The +proposed additional example is independent of whether or not the 962 and 967 +proposed resolutions are accepted.</span></p> + +</blockquote> + +<p><span style="font-style: italic">Change Mutex requirements 30.4.1 [thread.mutex.requirements], +paragraph 4, as indicated:</span></p> + +<blockquote> + +<p>— <code>operation_not_permitted</code> — if the thread does not have the +<del>necessary permission to change the state of the mutex object</del> <ins>privilege to perform the operation</ins>.</p> + +</blockquote> + +<p><span style="font-style: italic">Change Mutex requirements 30.4.1 [thread.mutex.requirements], +paragraph 12, as indicated:</span></p> + +<blockquote> + +<p>— <code>operation_not_permitted</code> — if the thread does not have the +<del>necessary permission to change the state of the mutex</del> <ins>privilege to perform the operation</ins>.</p> + +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="970"></a>970. addressof overload unneeded</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.8.1 [specialized.addressof] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2009-01-16 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +20.9.8.1 [specialized.addressof] specifies: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <ObjectType T> T* addressof(T& r); +template <ObjectType T> T* addressof(T&& r); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +The two signatures are ambiguous when the argument is an lvalue. The +second signature seems not useful: what does it mean to take the +address of an rvalue? +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Recommend Review. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +We agree with the proposed resolution. +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-18 Moved from Pending WP to WP. Confirmed in +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n3000.pdf">N3000</a>. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 20.9.8.1 [specialized.addressof]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <ObjectType T> T* addressof(T& r); +<del>template <ObjectType T> T* addressof(T&& r);</del> +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="974"></a>974. <tt>duration<double></tt> should not implicitly convert to <tt>duration<int></tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.11.3.1 [time.duration.cons] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2009-01-21 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The following code should not compile because it involves implicit truncation +errors (against the design philosophy of the <tt>duration</tt> library). +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>duration<double> d(3.5); +duration<int> i = d; <font color="#C80000">// implicit truncation, should not compile</font> +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +This intent was codified in the example implementation which drove this proposal +but I failed to accurately translate the code into the specification in this +regard. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +We agree with the proposed resolution. +</p> +<p> +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved from Tentatively Ready to Open only because the wording needs to be +improved for enable_if type constraining, possibly following Robert's +formula. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-08-01 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Addressed by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1177">1177</a>. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Not completely addressed by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1177">1177</a>. Move to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 20.11.3.1 [time.duration.cons], p4: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template <class Rep2, class Period2> + duration(const duration<Rep2, Period2>& d); +</pre> +<blockquote> +-4- <i>Requires:</i> <tt>treat_as_floating_point<rep>::value</tt> +shall be <tt>true</tt> or <ins>both</ins> <tt>ratio_divide<Period2, +period>::type::den</tt> shall be 1 +<ins>and <tt>treat_as_floating_point<Rep2>::value</tt> +shall be <tt>false</tt></ins>. +Diagnostic required. +[<i>Note:</i> This requirement prevents implicit truncation error when +converting between integral-based <tt>duration</tt> types. Such a +construction could easily lead to confusion about the value of the +<tt>duration</tt>. -- <i>end note</i>] +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="975"></a>975. <tt>is_convertible</tt> cannot be instantiated for non-convertible types</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.7.6 [meta.rel] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2009-01-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#meta.rel">issues</a> in [meta.rel].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<b>Addresses UK 206</b> + +<p> +Related to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1114">1114</a>. +</p> + +<p> +The current specification of <tt>std::is_convertible</tt> (reference is draft +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2798.pdf">N2798</a>) +is basically defined by 20.7.6 [meta.rel]/4: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +In order to instantiate the template <tt>is_convertible<From, +To></tt>, the following code shall be well formed: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T> + typename add_rvalue_reference<T>::type create(); + +To test() { + return create<From>(); +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +[<i>Note:</i> This requirement gives well defined results for reference +types, void types, array types, and function types. --<i>end note</i>] +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +The first sentence can be interpreted, that e.g. the expression +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>std::is_convertible<double, int*>::value +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +is ill-formed because <tt>std::is_convertible<double, int*></tt> could not be +instantiated, or in more general terms: The wording requires that +<tt>std::is_convertible<X, Y></tt> cannot be instantiated for otherwise valid +argument types <tt>X</tt> and <tt>Y</tt> if <tt>X</tt> is not convertible to <tt>Y</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +This semantic is both unpractical and in contradiction to what the last type +traits paper +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2255.html">N2255</a> +proposed: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +If the following <tt>test</tt> function is well formed code <tt>b</tt> +is <tt>true</tt>, else it is <tt>false</tt>. +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T> + typename add_rvalue_reference<T>::type create(); + +To test() { + return create<From>(); +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +[<i>Note:</i> This definition gives well defined results for <tt>reference</tt> +types, <tt>void</tt> types, array types, and function types. --<i>end note</i>] +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Jens: Checking that code is well-formed and then returning true/false +sounds like speculative compilation. John Spicer would really dislike +this. Please find another wording suggesting speculative compilation. +</p> +<p> +Recommend Open. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit, Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +John finds the following wording clearer: +</p> +<blockquote> + +<table border="1"> +<tbody><tr> +<th>Template</th><th>Condition</th><th>Comments</th> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><tt>template <class From, class To><br>struct is_convertible;</tt></td> +<td><i>see below</i></td> +<td><tt>From</tt> and <tt>To</tt> shall be complete types, arrays of unknown bound, +or (possibly cv-qualified) <tt>void</tt> types.</td> +</tr> +</tbody></table> + +<p> +Given the following function prototype: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T> + typename add_rvalue_reference<T>::type create(); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +<tt>is_convertible<From, To>::value</tt> shall be <tt>true</tt> if the +return expression in the following code would be well-formed, including +any implicit conversions to the return type of the function, else +<tt>is_convertible<From, To>::value</tt> shall be <tt>false</tt>. +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>To test() { + return create<From>(); +} +</pre></blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<b>Original proposed wording:</b> + +<p> +In 20.7.6 [meta.rel]/4 change: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<del>In order to instantiate the template <tt>is_convertible<From, To></tt>, the +following code shall be well formed</del> <ins>If the following code +is well formed <tt>is_convertible<From, To>::value</tt> is <tt>true</tt>, otherwise +<tt>false</tt></ins>:[..] +</blockquote> + +<p><b>Revision 2</b></p> + +<blockquote> + +<p> +In 20.7.6 [meta.rel] change: +</p> + +<blockquote> + +<table border="1"> +<tbody><tr> +<th>Template</th><th>Condition</th><th>Comments</th> +</tr> +<tr> +</tr><tr><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>template <class From, class To><br>struct is_convertible;</tt></td> +<td> +<del>The code set out below shall be well formed.</del> +<ins><i>see below</i></ins></td> +<td><tt>From</tt> and <tt>To</tt> shall be complete types, arrays of unknown bound, +or (possibly cv-qualified) <tt>void</tt> types.</td> +</tr> +</tbody></table> + +<p> +-4- <del>In order to instantiate the template <tt>is_convertible<From, To></tt>, the +following code shall be well formed:</del> +<ins>Given the following function prototype:</ins> +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T> + typename add_rvalue_reference<T>::type create(); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +<ins><tt>is_convertible<From, To>::value</tt> inherits either directly or +indirectly from <tt>true_type</tt> if the +return expression in the following code would be well-formed, including +any implicit conversions to the return type of the function, else +<tt>is_convertible<From, To>::value</tt> inherits either directly or +indirectly from <tt>false_type</tt>.</ins> +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>To test() { + return create<From>(); +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +[<i>Note:</i> This requirement gives well defined results for reference types, +void types, array types, and function types. <i>-- end note</i>] +</p> + +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +We agree with the proposed resolution. +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +In 20.7.6 [meta.rel] change: +</p> + +<blockquote> + +<table border="1"> +<tbody><tr> +<th>Template</th><th>Condition</th><th>Comments</th> +</tr> +<tr> +</tr><tr><td>...</td><td>...</td><td>...</td></tr> +<tr><td><tt>template <class From, class To><br>struct is_convertible;</tt></td> +<td> +<del>The code set out below shall be well formed.</del> +<ins><i>see below</i></ins></td> +<td><tt>From</tt> and <tt>To</tt> shall be complete types, arrays of unknown bound, +or (possibly cv-qualified) <tt>void</tt> types.</td> +</tr> +</tbody></table> + +<p> +-4- <del>In order to instantiate the template <tt>is_convertible<From, To></tt>, the +following code shall be well formed:</del> +<ins>Given the following function prototype:</ins> +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T> + typename add_rvalue_reference<T>::type create(); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +<ins>the predicate condition for a template specialization +<tt>is_convertible<From, To></tt> shall be satisfied, if and only +if the return expression in the following code would be well-formed, +including any implicit conversions to the return type of the +function.</ins> +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>To test() { + return create<From>(); +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +[<i>Note:</i> This requirement gives well defined results for reference types, +void types, array types, and function types. <i>— end note</i>] +</p> + +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="978"></a>978. Hashing smart pointers</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8.15 [unord.hash] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-02-02 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#unord.hash">issues</a> in [unord.hash].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses UK 208</b></p> +<p> +I don't see an open issue on supporting <tt>std::hash</tt> for smart pointers +(<tt>unique_ptr</tt> and <tt>shared_ptr</tt> at least). +</p> +<p> +It seems reasonable to at least expect support for the smart +pointers, especially as they support comparison for use in ordered +associative containers. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Howard points out that the client can always supply a custom hash function. +</p> +<p> +Alisdair replies that the smart pointer classes are highly likely +to be frequently used as hash keys. +</p> +<p> +Bill would prefer to be conservative. +</p> +<p> +Alisdair mentions that this issue may also be viewed as a subissue or +duplicate of issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1025">1025</a>. +</p> +<p> +Move to Open, and recommend the issue be deferred until after the next +Committee Draft is issued. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-31 Peter adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<blockquote> +Howard points out that the client can always supply a custom hash function. +</blockquote> +<p> +Not entirely true. The client cannot supply the function that hashes the +address of the control block (the equivalent of the old <tt>operator<</tt>, now +proudly carrying the awkward name of '<tt>owner_before</tt>'). Only the +implementation can do that, not necessarily via specializing <tt>hash<></tt>, of +course. +</p> +<p> +This hash function makes sense in certain situations for <tt>shared_ptr</tt> +(when one needs to switch from <tt>set/map</tt> using ownership ordering to +<tt>unordered_set/map</tt>) and is the only hash function that makes sense for +<tt>weak_ptr</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-28 Alisdair provides wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-16 Moved from Ready to Open: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Pete writes: +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +As far as I can see, "...suitable for using this type as key in unordered +associative containers..." doesn't define any semantics. It's advice to the +reader, and if it's present at all it should be in a note. But we have far too +much of this sort of editorial commentary as it is. +</p> +<p> +And in the resolution of 978 it's clearly wrong: it says that if there is no +hash specialization available for <tt>D::pointer</tt>, the implementation may provide +<tt>hash<unique_ptr<T,D>></tt> if the result is not suitable for use in unordered +containers. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Howard writes: +</p> + +<blockquote> +Is this a request to pull 978 from Ready? +</blockquote> + +<p> +Barry writes: +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +I read this as more than a request. The PE says it's wrong, so it can't be +Ready. +</p> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-01-31 Alisdair: related to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1245">1245</a> and <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1182">1182</a>. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-08 Beman updates wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-09 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p><i>Add the following declarations to the synopsis of <tt><memory></tt> in +20.9 [memory] </i></p> + +<blockquote> +<pre><ins>// [util.smartptr.hash] hash support +template <class T> struct hash; +template <class T, class D> struct hash<unique_ptr<T,D>>; +template <class T> struct hash<shared_ptr<T>>;</ins></pre> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>Add a new subclause under 20.9.10 [util.smartptr] called hash support </i></p> + +<blockquote> +<h3><ins>hash support [util.smartptr.hash]</ins></h3> + +<pre><ins>template <class T, class D> struct hash<unique_ptr<T,D>>;</ins></pre> + +<blockquote> +<p><ins> +Specialization meeting the requirements of class template <tt>hash</tt> (20.8.15 [unord.hash]). For an object <tt>p</tt> of type <tt>UP</tt>, where +<tt>UP</tt> is a type <tt>unique_ptr<T,D></tt>, +<tt>hash<UP>()(p)</tt> shall evaluate to the same value as +<tt>hash<typename UP::pointer>()(p.get())</tt>. The specialization +<tt>hash<typename UP::pointer></tt> is required to be well-formed. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> + +<pre><ins>template <class T> struct hash<shared_ptr<T>>;</ins></pre> + +<blockquote> +<p><ins> +Specialization meeting the requirements of class template <tt>hash</tt> (20.8.15 [unord.hash]). For an object <tt>p</tt> of type +<tt>shared_ptr<T></tt>, <tt>hash<shared_ptr<T>>()(p)</tt> +shall evaluate to the same value as <tt> hash<T*>()(p.get())</tt>. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="981"></a>981. Unordered container requirements should add <tt>initializer_list</tt> support</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2.5 [unord.req] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2009-02-08 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index-open.html#unord.req">active issues</a> in [unord.req].</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#unord.req">issues</a> in [unord.req].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Refering to +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2800.pdf">N2800</a> +all container requirements tables (including those for +associative containers) provide useful member function overloads +accepting <tt>std::initializer_list</tt> as argument, the only exception is +Table 87. There seems to be no reason for not providing them, because 23.7 [unord] +is already <tt>initializer_list</tt>-aware. For the sake of +library interface consistency and user-expectations corresponding +overloads should be added to the table requirements of unordered +containers as well. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +We agree with the proposed resolution. +</p> +<p> +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +In 23.2.5 [unord.req]/9 insert: +</p> + +<blockquote> +... <tt>[q1, q2)</tt> is a valid range in <tt>a</tt>, <ins><tt>il</tt> +designates an object of type <tt>initializer_list<value_type></tt>, </ins><tt>t</tt> is a value of type +<tt>X::value_type</tt>, ... +</blockquote> + +<p> +In 23.2.5 [unord.req], Table 87 insert: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 87 - Unordered associative container requirements (in addition to container)</caption> +<tbody><tr> +<th>Expression</th> <th>Return type</th> <th>Assertion/note<br>pre-/post-condition</th> <th>Complexity</th> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><tt>X(i, j)<br>X a(i, j)</tt></td> <td><tt>X</tt></td> <td>...</td> <td>...</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><ins><tt>X(il)</tt></ins></td> <td><ins><tt>X</tt></ins></td> +<td><ins>Same as <tt>X(il.begin(), il.end())</tt>.</ins></td> +<td><ins>Same as <tt>X(il.begin(), il.end())</tt>.</ins></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td>...</td> <td>...</td> <td>...</td> <td>...</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><tt>a = b</tt></td> <td><tt>X</tt></td> <td>...</td> <td>...</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><ins><tt>a = il</tt></ins></td> <td><ins><tt>X&</tt></ins></td> +<td><ins><tt>a = X(il); return *this;</tt></ins></td> +<td><ins>Same as <tt>a = X(il)</tt>.</ins></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td>...</td> <td>...</td> <td>...</td> <td>...</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><tt>a.insert(i, j)</tt></td> <td><tt>void</tt></td> <td>...</td> <td>...</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><ins><tt>a.insert(il)</tt></ins></td> <td><ins><tt>void</tt></ins></td> +<td><ins>Same as <tt>a.insert(il.begin(), il.end())</tt>.</ins></td> +<td><ins>Same as <tt>a.insert(il.begin(), il.end())</tt>.</ins></td> +</tr> +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="982"></a>982. Wrong complexity for initializer_list assignment in Table 85</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2.4 [associative.reqmts] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2009-02-08 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index-open.html#associative.reqmts">active issues</a> in [associative.reqmts].</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#associative.reqmts">issues</a> in [associative.reqmts].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +According to +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2800.pdf">N2800</a>, +the associative container requirements table 85 says + that assigning an <tt>initializer_list</tt> to such a container is of + constant complexity, which is obviously wrong. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +We agree with the proposed resolution. +</p> +<p> +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +In 23.2.4 [associative.reqmts], Table 85 change: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 85 - Associative container requirements (in addition to container)</caption> +<tbody><tr> +<th>Expression</th> <th>Return type</th> <th>Assertion/note<br>pre-/post-condition</th> <th>Complexity</th> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><tt>a = il</tt></td> <td><tt>X&</tt></td> <td><tt>a = X(il);<br>return *this;</tt></td> +<td><del>constant</del><ins>Same as <tt>a = X(il)</tt>.</ins></td> +</tr> +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="983"></a>983. <tt>unique_ptr</tt> reference deleters should not be moved from</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.9.2 [unique.ptr.single] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2009-02-10 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-19</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#unique.ptr.single">issues</a> in [unique.ptr.single].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Dave brought to my attention that when a <tt>unique_ptr</tt> has a non-const reference +type deleter, move constructing from it, even when the <tt>unique_ptr</tt> containing +the reference is an rvalue, could have surprising results: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>D d(some-state); +unique_ptr<A, D&> p(new A, d); +unique_ptr<A, D> p2 = std::move(p); +<font color="#C80000">// has d's state changed here?</font> +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +I agree with him. It is the <tt>unique_ptr</tt> that is the rvalue, not the +deleter. When the deleter is a reference type, the <tt>unique_ptr</tt> should +respect the "lvalueness" of the deleter. +</p> + +<p> +Thanks Dave. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +Seems correct, but complicated enough that we recommend moving to Review. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-03-14 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +We moved +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3073.html">N3073</a> +to the formal motions page in Pittsburgh which should obsolete this issue. I've +moved this issue to NAD Editorial, solved by N3073. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +Solved by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3073.html">N3073</a>. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 20.9.9.2.1 [unique.ptr.single.ctor], p20-21 +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template <class U, class E> unique_ptr(unique_ptr<U, E>&& u); +</pre> + +<blockquote> + +<p> +-20- <i>Requires:</i> If <tt><del>D</del> <ins>E</ins></tt> is not a reference type, +construction of the deleter <tt>D</tt> from an rvalue of type <tt>E</tt> +shall be well formed and shall not throw an exception. +<ins> +Otherwise <tt>E</tt> is a reference type and construction of the deleter +<tt>D</tt> from an lvalue of type <tt>E</tt> shall be well formed and +shall not throw an exception. +</ins> +If <tt>D</tt> is +a reference type, then <tt>E</tt> shall be the same type as <tt>D</tt> +(diagnostic required). <tt>unique_ptr<U, E>::pointer</tt> shall be +implicitly convertible to <tt>pointer</tt>. [<tt>Note:</tt> These +requirements imply that <tt>T</tt> and <tt>U</tt> are complete types. +<i>-- end note</i>] +</p> + +<p> +-21- <i>Effects:</i> Constructs a <tt>unique_ptr</tt> which owns the +pointer which <tt>u</tt> owns (if any). If the deleter +<ins><tt>E</tt></ins> is not a reference type, <del>it</del> <ins>this +deleter</ins> is move constructed from <tt>u</tt>'s deleter, otherwise +<del>the reference</del> <ins>this deleter</ins> is copy constructed +from <tt>u</tt>.'s deleter. After the construction, <tt>u</tt> no longer +owns a pointer. [<i>Note:</i> The deleter constructor can be implemented +with <tt>std::forward<<del>D</del><ins>E</ins>></tt>. <i>-- end +note</i>] +</p> + +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 20.9.9.2.3 [unique.ptr.single.asgn], p1-3 +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>unique_ptr& operator=(unique_ptr&& u); +</pre> +<blockquote> + +<p> +-1- <i>Requires:</i> <ins>If the deleter <tt>D</tt> is not a reference type,</ins> +<del>A</del><ins>a</ins>ssignment of the deleter <tt>D</tt> from an rvalue <tt>D</tt> shall not throw an exception. +<ins> +Otherwise the deleter <tt>D</tt> is a reference type, +and assignment of the deleter <tt>D</tt> from an lvalue <tt>D</tt> shall not throw an exception.</ins> +</p> + +<p> +-2- <i>Effects:</i> reset(u.release()) followed by +a<ins>n</ins> <del>move</del> assignment from <del><tt>u</tt>'s deleter to this deleter</del> +<ins><tt>std::forward<D>(u.get_deleter())</tt></ins>. +</p> + +<p> +-3- <i>Postconditions:</i> This <tt>unique_ptr</tt> now owns the pointer +which <tt>u</tt> owned, and <tt>u</tt> no longer owns it. <del>[<i>Note:</i> If +<tt>D</tt> is a reference type, then the referenced lvalue deleters are +move assigned. <i>-- end note</i>]</del> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 20.9.9.2.3 [unique.ptr.single.asgn], p6-7 +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template <class U, class E> unique_ptr& operator=(unique_ptr<U, E>&& u); +</pre> +<blockquote> + +<p> +<i>Requires:</i> <ins>If the deleter <tt>E</tt> is not a reference type,</ins> +<del>A</del><ins>a</ins>ssignment of the deleter <tt>D</tt> from an rvalue +<tt><del>D</del><ins>E</ins></tt> shall not throw an exception. +<ins> +Otherwise the deleter <tt>E</tt> is a reference type, +and assignment of the deleter <tt>D</tt> from an lvalue <tt>E</tt> shall not throw an exception.</ins> +<tt>unique_ptr<U, E>::pointer</tt> shall be implicitly convertible to <tt>pointer</tt>. +[<i>Note:</i> These requirements imply that <tt>T</tt> and <tt>U></tt> +are complete types. <i>-- end note</i>] +</p> + +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> <tt>reset(u.release())</tt> followed by +a<ins>n</ins> <del>move</del> assignment from <del><tt>u</tt>'s deleter to this deleter</del> +<ins><tt>std::forward<E>(u.get_deleter())</tt></ins>. +<del>If either +<tt>D</tt> or <tt>E</tt> is a reference type, then the referenced lvalue +deleter participates in the move assignment.</del> +</p> + +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="984"></a>984. Does <tt><cinttypes></tt> have macro guards?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.9.2 [c.files] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2009-02-12 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The C standard says about <tt><inttypes.h></tt>: +</p> + +<blockquote> +C++ implementations should define these macros only when <tt>__STDC_FORMAT_MACROS</tt>is defined +before <tt><inttypes.h></tt> is included. +</blockquote> + +<p> +The C standard has a similar note about <tt><stdint.h></tt>. For <tt><cstdint></tt> +we adopted a "thanks but no thanks" policy and documented that fact in +18.4.1 [cstdint.syn]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +... [<i>Note:</i> The macros defined by <tt><stdint></tt> are +provided unconditionally. In particular, the symbols +<tt>__STDC_LIMIT_MACROS</tt> and <tt>__STDC_CONSTANT_MACROS</tt> +(mentioned in C99 footnotes 219, 220, and 222) play no role in C++. +<i>-- end note</i>] +</blockquote> + +<p> +I recommend we put a similar note in 27.9.2 [c.files] regarding <tt><cinttypes></tt>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +We agree with the proposed resolution. +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add to 27.9.2 [c.files]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +Table 112 describes header <tt><cinttypes></tt>. +<ins> +[<i>Note:</i> The macros defined by <tt><cintypes></tt> are +provided unconditionally. In particular, the symbol +<tt>__STDC_FORMAT_MACROS</tt> +(mentioned in C99 footnote 182) plays no role in C++. +<i>-- end note</i>] +</ins> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="986"></a>986. Generic <tt>try_lock</tt> contradiction</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30.4.3 [thread.lock.algorithm] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Chris Fairles <b>Opened:</b> 2009-02-14 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In 30.4.3 [thread.lock.algorithm], the generic <tt>try_lock</tt> effects (p2) say that a failed +<tt>try_lock</tt> is when it either returns <tt>false</tt> or throws an exception. In +the event a call to <tt>try_lock</tt> does fail, by either returning <tt>false</tt> or +throwing an exception, it states that <tt>unlock</tt> shall be called for all +prior arguments. Then the returns clause (p3) goes on to state +in a note that after returning, either all locks are locked or none +will be. So what happens if multiple locks fail on <tt>try_lock</tt>? +</p> + +<p> +Example: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>#include <mutex> + +int main() { + std::mutex m0, m1, m2; + std::unique_lock<std::mutex> l0(m0, std::defer_lock); + std::unique_lock<std::mutex> l1(m1); //throws on try_lock + std::unique_lock<std::mutex> l2(m2); //throws on try_lock + + int result = std::try_lock(l0, l1, l2); + + assert( !l0.owns_lock() ); + assert( l1.owns_lock() ); //?? + assert( l2.owns_lock() ); //?? +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +The first lock's <tt>try_lock</tt> succeeded but, being a prior argument to a +lock whose <tt>try_lock</tt> failed, it gets unlocked as per the effects clause +of 30.4.3 [thread.lock.algorithm]. However, 2 locks remain locked in this case but the return +clause states that either all arguments shall be locked or none will +be. This seems to be a contradiction unless the intent is for +implementations to make an effort to unlock not only prior arguments, +but the one that failed and those that come after as well. Shouldn't +the note only apply to the arguments that were successfully locked? +</p> + +<p> +Further discussion and possible resolutions in c++std-lib-23049. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Summit: +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +Move to review. Agree with proposed resolution. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +We agree with the proposed resolution. +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +Change 30.4.3 [thread.lock.algorithm], p2: +</p> + +<blockquote> +-2- <i>Effects:</i> Calls <tt>try_lock()</tt> for each argument in order +beginning with the first until all arguments have been processed or a +call to <tt>try_lock()</tt> fails, either by returning <tt>false</tt> or by throwing an +exception. If a call to <tt>try_lock()</tt> fails, <tt>unlock()</tt> shall be called for +all prior arguments<ins> and there shall be no further calls to <tt>try_lock()</tt></ins>. +</blockquote> + +<p> +Delete the note from 30.4.3 [thread.lock.algorithm], p3 +</p> + +<blockquote> +-3- <i>Returns:</i> -1 if all calls to <tt>try_lock()</tt> returned <tt>true</tt>, +otherwise a 0-based index value that indicates +the argument for which <tt>try_lock()</tt> returned <tt>false</tt>. <del>[<i>Note:</i> +On return, either all arguments will be +locked or none will be locked. -- <i>end note</i>]</del> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="987"></a>987. <tt>reference_wrapper</tt> and function types</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8.4 [refwrap] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2009-02-18 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#refwrap">issues</a> in [refwrap].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The synopsis in 20.8.4 [refwrap] says: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <<b>ObjectType</b> T> class reference_wrapper +... +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +And then paragraph 3 says: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +The template instantiation <tt>reference_wrapper<T></tt> shall be +derived from <tt>std::unary_function<T1, R></tt> only if the type +<tt>T</tt> is any of the following: +</p> + +<ul> +<li> +a <b>function type</b> or a pointer to function type taking one argument of +type <tt>T1</tt> and returning <tt>R</tt> +</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + +<p> +But function types are not <tt>ObjectType</tt>s. +</p> + +<p> +Paragraph 4 contains the same contradiction. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Jens: restricted reference to ObjectType +</p> +<p> +Recommend Review. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit, Peter adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +In <a href="https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/1846">https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/1846</a> +however Eric Niebler makes the very reasonable point that <tt>reference_wrapper<F></tt>, +where <tt>F</tt> is a function type, represents a reference to a function, +a legitimate entity. So <tt>boost::ref</tt> was changed to allow it. +</p> +<p> +<a href="https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/browser/trunk/libs/bind/test/ref_fn_test.cpp">https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/browser/trunk/libs/bind/test/ref_fn_test.cpp</a> +</p> +<p> +Therefore, I believe an alternative proposed resolution for issue 987 could simply +allow <tt>reference_wrapper</tt> to be used with function types. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit, Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I agree with Peter (and Eric). I got this one wrong on my first try. Here +is code that demonstrates how easy (and useful) it is to instantiate +<tt>reference_wrapper</tt> with a function type: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>#include <functional> + +template <class F> +void test(F f); + +void f() {} + +int main() +{ + test(std::ref(f)); +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Output (link time error shows type of <tt>reference_wrapper</tt> instantiated +with function type): +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>Undefined symbols: + "void test<std::reference_wrapper<void ()()> >(std::reference_wrapper<void ()()>)",... +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +I've taken the liberty of changing the proposed wording to allow function types +and set to Open. I'll also freely admit that I'm not positive <tt>ReferentType</tt> +is the correct concept. +</p> + +</blockquote> + + + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Howard observed that <tt>FunctionType</tt>, +a concept not (yet?) in the Working Paper, +is likely the correct constraint to be applied. +However, the proposed resolution provides an adequate approximation. +</p> +<p> +Move to Review. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-23 Alisdair adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +By constraining to <tt>PointeeType</tt> we rule out the ability for <tt>T</tt> to be a +reference, and call in reference-collapsing. I'm not sure if this is +correct and intended, but would like to be sure the case was considered. +</p> +<p> +Is dis-allowing reference types and the +implied reference collapsing the intended result? +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved from Review to Open only because the wording needs to be +tweaked for concepts removal. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10-14 Daniel provided de-conceptified wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 post-Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 20.8.4 [refwrap]/1 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<tt>reference_wrapper<T></tt> is a <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> and +<tt><ins>Copy</ins>Assignable</tt> wrapper around a +reference to an object <ins>or function</ins> of type <tt>T</tt>. +</blockquote> + + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="990"></a>990. <tt>monotonic_clock::is_monotonic</tt> must be <tt>true</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> X [time.clock.monotonic] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-09 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#time.clock.monotonic">issues</a> in [time.clock.monotonic].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +There is some confusion over what the value of <tt>monotonic_clock::is_monotonic</tt> +when <tt>monotonic_clock</tt> is a synonym for <tt>system_clock</tt>. The +intent is that if <tt>monotonic_clock</tt> exists, then <tt>monotonic_clock::is_monotonic</tt> +is <tt>true</tt>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +We agree with the proposed resolution. +</p> +<p> +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change X [time.clock.monotonic], p1: +</p> + +<blockquote> +-1- Objects of class <tt>monotonic_clock</tt> represent clocks for which +values of <tt>time_point</tt> never decrease as physical time advances. +<tt>monotonic_clock</tt> may be a synonym for <tt>system_clock</tt> +<ins>if and only if <tt>system_clock::is_monotonic</tt> is +<tt>true</tt></ins>. +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="991"></a>991. Response to JP 50</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.3.3.2.2 [conversions.string] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> P.J. Plauger <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-03 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#conversions.string">issues</a> in [conversions.string].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Add custom allocator parameter to <tt>wstring_convert</tt>, since we cannot +allocate memory for strings from a custom allocator. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +We agree with the proposed resolution. +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 22.3.3.2.2 [conversions.string]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class Codecvt, class Elem = wchar_t<ins>, + class Wide_alloc = std::allocator<Elem>, + class Byte_alloc = std::allocator<char> </ins>> class wstring_convert { + public: + typedef std::basic_string<char<ins>, char_traits<char>, Byte_alloc</ins>> byte_string; + typedef std::basic_string<Elem<ins>, char_traits<Elem>, Wide_alloc</ins>> wide_string; + ... +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Change 22.3.3.2.2 [conversions.string], p3: +</p> + +<blockquote> +-3- The class template describes an ob ject that controls conversions +between wide string ob jects of class +<tt>std::basic_string<Elem<ins>, char_traits<Elem>, Wide_alloc</ins>></tt> +and byte string objects of class +<tt>std::basic_string<char<ins>, char_traits<char>, Byte_alloc</ins>></tt> +<del>(also known as <tt>std::string</tt>)</del>. +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="993"></a>993. Response to UK 188</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.5 [support.start.term] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> P.J. Plauger <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-03 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#support.start.term">issues</a> in [support.start.term].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The function <tt>_Exit</tt> does not appear to be defined in this standard. +Should it be added to the table of functions included-by-reference to +the C standard? +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-09 Alisdair fixed some minor issues in the wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +We agree with the proposed resolution. +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add to 18.5 [support.start.term] Table 20 (Header +<tt><cstdlib></tt> synopsis) Functions: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>_Exit +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Add before the description of <tt>abort(void)</tt>: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void _Exit [[noreturn]] (int status) +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +The function <tt>_Exit(int status)</tt> has additional behavior in this +International Standard: +</p> +<ul> +<li> +The program is terminated without executing destructors for objects of +automatic, thread, or static storage duration and without calling the +functions passed to <tt>atexit()</tt> (3.6.3 [basic.start.term]). +</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="994"></a>994. Response to UK 193</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.6.2.3 [new.handler] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> P.J. Plauger <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-03 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +<tt>quick_exit</tt> has been added as a new valid way to terminate a program in a +well defined way +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +We agree with the proposed resolution. +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 18.6.2.3 [new.handler], p2: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-2- <i>Required behavior:</i> ... +</p> +<ul> +<li>...</li> +<li> +<del>call either <tt>abort()</tt> or <tt>exit();</tt></del> +<ins>terminate execution of the program without returning to the caller</ins> +</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="997"></a>997. Response to UK 163</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17.5.1.4 [structure.specifications] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Thomas Plum <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-03 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#structure.specifications">issues</a> in [structure.specifications].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Many functions are defined as "Effects: Equivalent to a...", which seems +to also define the preconditions, effects, etc. But this is not made +clear. +</p> + +<p> +After studying the occurrences of "Effects: Equivalent to", I agree with +the diagnosis but disagree with the solution. In 21.4.2 [string.cons] +we find +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +14 <i>Effects:</i> If <tt>InputIterator</tt> is an integral type, equivalent to +<tt>basic_string(static_cast<size_type>(begin), static_cast<value_type>(end), a)</tt> +</p> +<p> +15 Otherwise constructs a string from the values in the range <tt>[begin, +end)</tt>, as indicated in the Sequence Requirements table (see 23.1.3). +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +This would be devishly difficult to re-write with an explicit +"Equivalent to:" clause. Instead, I propose the following, which will +result in much less editorial re-work. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-09 Alisdair adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +This issue is related to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#492">492</a>. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +We agree with the proposed resolution. +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add a new paragraph after 17.5.1.4 [structure.specifications], p3: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-3- Descriptions of function semantics contain the following elements (as appropriate):<sup>154</sup> +</p> + +<ul> +<li> +<i>Requires:</i> the preconditions for calling the function +</li> +<li> +<i>Effects:</i> the actions performed by the function +</li> +<li> +<i>Postconditions:</i> the observable results established by the function +</li> +<li> +<i>Returns:</i> a description of the value(s) returned by the function +</li> +<li> +<i>Throws:</i> any exceptions thrown by the function, and the conditions that would cause the exception +</li> +<li> +<i>Complexity:</i> the time and/or space complexity of the function +</li> +<li> +<i>Remarks:</i> additional semantic constraints on the function +</li> +<li> +<i>Error conditions:</i> the error conditions for error codes reported by the function. +</li> +<li> +<i>Notes:</i> non-normative comments about the function +</li> +</ul> + +<p><ins> +Whenever the <i>Effects</i> element specifies that the semantics of some +function <tt>F</tt> are <i>Equivalent to</i> some <i>code-sequence</i>, then +the various elements are interpreted as follows. If <tt>F</tt>'s +semantics specifies a <i>Requires</i> element, then that requirement is +logically imposed prior to the <i>equivalent-to</i> semantics. Then, +the semantics of the <i>code-sequence</i> are determined by the +<i>Requires</i>, <i>Effects</i>, <i>Postconditions</i>, <i>Returns</i>, +<i>Throws</i>, <i>Complexity</i>, <i>Remarks</i>, <i>Error +Conditions</i> and <i>Notes</i> specified for the (one or more) function +invocations contained in the <i>code-sequence</i>. The value returned from +<tt>F</tt> is specified by <tt>F</tt>'s <i>Returns</i> element, or +if <tt>F</tt> has no <i>Returns</i> element, a non-<tt>void</tt> return from <tt>F</tt> is specified +by the <i>Returns</i> elements in <i>code-sequence</i>. If +<tt>F</tt>'s semantics contains a <i>Throws</i> (or +<i>Postconditions</i>, or <i>Complexity</i>) element, then that +supersedes any occurrences of that element in the <i>code-sequence</i>. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="998"></a>998. Smart pointer referencing its owner</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.9.2.5 [unique.ptr.single.modifiers] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Pavel Minaev <b>Opened:</b> 2009-02-26 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#unique.ptr.single.modifiers">issues</a> in [unique.ptr.single.modifiers].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Consider the following (simplified) implementation of +<tt>std::auto_ptr<T>::reset()</tt>: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void reset(T* newptr = 0) { + if (this->ptr && this->ptr != newptr) { + delete this->ptr; + } + this->ptr = newptr; +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Now consider the following code which uses the above implementation: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>struct foo { + std::auto_ptr<foo> ap; + foo() : ap(this) {} + void reset() { ap.reset(); } +}; +int main() { + (new foo)->reset(); +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +With the above implementation of auto_ptr, this results in U.B. at the +point of auto_ptr::reset(). If this isn't obvious yet, let me explain +how this goes step by step: +</p> + +<ol> +<li> +<tt>foo::reset()</tt> entered +</li> +<li> +<tt>auto_ptr::reset()</tt> entered +</li> +<li> +<tt>auto_ptr::reset()</tt> tries to delete <tt>foo</tt> +</li> +<li> +<tt>foo::~foo()</tt> entered, tries to destruct its members +</li> +<li> +<tt>auto_ptr::~auto_ptr()</tt> executed - <tt>auto_ptr</tt> is no longer a valid object! +</li> +<li> +<tt>foo::~foo()</tt> left +</li> +<li> +<tt>auto_ptr::reset()</tt> sets its "ptr" field to 0 <- U.B.! <tt>auto_ptr</tt> +is not a valid object here already! +</li> +</ol> + +<p><i>[ +Thanks to Peter Dimov who recognized the connection to <tt>unique_ptr</tt> and +brought this to the attention of the LWG, and helped with the solution. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +To fix this behavior <tt>reset</tt> must be specified such that deleting the +pointer is the last action to be taken within <tt>reset</tt>. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Alisdair adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +The example providing the rationale for LWG <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#998">998</a> is poor, as it relies on +broken semantics of having two object believing they are unique owners of a +single resource. It should not be surprising that UB results from such +code, and I feel no need to go out of our way to support such behaviour. +</p> +<p> +If an example is presented that does not imply multiple ownership of a +unique resource, I would be much more ready to accept the proposed +resolution. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Howard summarizes: +</p> +<blockquote> +This issue has to do with circular ownership, +and affects <tt>auto_ptr</tt>, too (but we don't really care about that). +It is intended to spell out the order in which operations must be performed +so as to avoid the possibility +of undefined behavior in the self-referential case. +</blockquote> +<p> +Howard points to message c++std-lib-23175 for another example, +requested by Alisdair. +</p> +<p> +We agree with the issue and with the proposed resolution. +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</p> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 20.9.9.2.5 [unique.ptr.single.modifiers], p5 (<i>Effects</i> clause for <tt>reset</tt>), and p6: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-5- <i>Effects:</i> <del>If <tt>get() == nullptr</tt> there are no effects. Otherwise <tt>get_deleter()(get())</tt>.</del> +<ins>Assigns <tt>p</tt> to the stored <tt>pointer</tt>, and then if the old value of the <tt>pointer</tt> is not +equal to <tt>nullptr</tt>, calls <tt>get_deleter()(</tt>the old value of the <tt>pointer)</tt>. +[<i>Note:</i> The order of these operations is significant because the call to <tt>get_deleter()</tt> +may destroy <tt>*this</tt>. <i>-- end note</i>]</ins> +</p> + +<p> +-6- Postconditions: <tt>get() == p</tt>. +<ins>[<i>Note:</i> The postcondition does not hold if the call to +<tt>get_deleter()</tt> destroys <tt>*this</tt> since <tt>this->get()</tt> is no longer a valid +expression. <i>-- end note</i>]</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="999"></a>999. Taking the address of a function</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.8 [specialized.algorithms] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Peter Dimov <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-09 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#specialized.algorithms">issues</a> in [specialized.algorithms].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The same fix (reference <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#987">987</a>) may be applied to <tt>addressof</tt>, which is also constrained to +<tt>ObjectType</tt>. (That was why <tt>boost::ref</tt> didn't work with functions - it +tried to apply <tt>boost::addressof</tt> and the <tt>reinterpret_cast<char&></tt> +implementation of <tt>addressof</tt> failed.) +</p> + + + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +We agree. +</p> +<p> +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved from Tentatively Ready to Open only because the wording needs to be +tweaked for concepts removal. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10-10 Daniel updates wording to concept-free. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 post-Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p><i>[ +The resolution assumes that <tt>addressof</tt> is reintroduced as described in +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2946.pdf">n2946</a> +]</i></p> + + +<p> +In 20.9.8 [specialized.algorithms] change as described: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T> T* addressof(T& r); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<i>Returns:</i> The actual address of the object <ins>or function</ins> +referenced by <tt>r</tt>, even in the +presence of an overloaded <tt>operator&</tt>. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1004"></a>1004. Response to UK 179</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17.6.3.8 [res.on.functions] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-11 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#res.on.functions">issues</a> in [res.on.functions].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p><b>Addresses UK 179</b></p> + +<p> +According to the 4th bullet there is a problem if "if any replacement +function or handler function or destructor operation throws an +exception". There should be no problem throwing exceptions so long as +they are caught within the function. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +The phrasing "throws an exception" is commonly used elsewhere +to mean "throws or propagates an exception." +Move to Open pending a possible more general resolution. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Replace "propagates" in the proposed resolution with the phrase "exits +via" and move to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change the 4th bullet of 17.6.3.8 [res.on.functions], p2: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<ul> +<li> +if any replacement function or handler function or destructor operation +<del>throws</del> <ins>exits via</ins> an exception, unless specifically +allowed in the applicable <i>Required behavior:</i> paragraph. +</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1006"></a>1006. <tt>operator delete</tt> in garbage collected implementation</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.6.1 [new.delete] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-11 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#new.delete">issues</a> in [new.delete].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p><b>Addresses UK 190</b></p> + +<p> +It is not entirely clear how the current specification acts in the +presence of a garbage collected implementation. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Agreed. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-09 Alisdair adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Proposed wording is too strict for implementations that do not support +garbage collection. Updated wording supplied. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +We recommend advancing this to Tentatively Ready +with the understanding that it will not be moved for adoption +unless and until the proposed resolution to Core issue #853 is adopted. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +(Editorial note: This wording ties into the proposed +resolution for Core #853) +</p> + +<p> +Add paragraphs to 18.6.1.1 [new.delete.single]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void operator delete(void* ptr) throw(); +<del>void operator delete(void* ptr, const std::nothrow_t&) throw();</del> +</pre> + +<p><i>[ +The second signature deletion above is editorial. +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p><ins> +<i>Requires:</i> If an implementation has strict pointer safety +(3.7.4.3 [basic.stc.dynamic.safety]) then <tt>ptr</tt> shall +be a safely-derived pointer. +</ins></p> + +<p>-10- ...</p> +</blockquote> + +<pre>void operator delete(void* ptr, const std::nothrow_t&) throw(); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p><ins> +<i>Requires:</i> If an implementation has strict pointer safety +(3.7.4.3 [basic.stc.dynamic.safety]) then <tt>ptr</tt> shall +be a safely-derived pointer. +</ins></p> + +<p>-15- ...</p> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +Add paragraphs to 18.6.1.2 [new.delete.array]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void operator delete[](void* ptr) throw(); +<del>void operator delete[](void* ptr, const std::nothrow_t&) throw();</del> +</pre> + +<p><i>[ +The second signature deletion above is editorial. +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p><ins> +<i>Requires:</i> If an implementation has strict pointer safety +(3.7.4.3 [basic.stc.dynamic.safety]) then <tt>ptr</tt> shall +be a safely-derived pointer. +</ins></p> + +<p>-9- ...</p> +</blockquote> + +<pre>void operator delete[](void* ptr, const std::nothrow_t&) throw(); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p><ins> +<i>Requires:</i> If an implementation has strict pointer safety +(3.7.4.3 [basic.stc.dynamic.safety]) then <tt>ptr</tt> shall +be a safely-derived pointer. +</ins></p> + +<p>-13- ...</p> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + + +<p> +Add paragraphs to 18.6.1.3 [new.delete.placement]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void operator delete(void* ptr, void*) throw(); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p><ins> +<i>Requires:</i> If an implementation has strict pointer safety +(3.7.4.3 [basic.stc.dynamic.safety]) then <tt>ptr</tt> shall +be a safely-derived pointer. +</ins></p> + +<p>-7- ...</p> +</blockquote> + +<pre>void operator delete[](void* ptr, void*) throw(); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p><ins> +<i>Requires:</i> If an implementation has strict pointer safety +(3.7.4.3 [basic.stc.dynamic.safety]) then <tt>ptr</tt> shall +be a safely-derived pointer. +</ins></p> + +<p>-9- ...</p> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1011"></a>1011. <tt>next/prev</tt> wrong iterator type</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 24.4.4 [iterator.operations] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-11 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#iterator.operations">issues</a> in [iterator.operations].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p><b>Addresses UK 271</b></p> + +<p> +<tt>next/prev</tt> return an incremented iterator without changing the value of +the original iterator. However, even this may invalidate an +<tt>InputIterator</tt>. A <tt>ForwardIterator</tt> is required to guarantee the +'multipass' property. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +We agree with the proposed resolution. +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved from Tentatively Ready to Open only because the wording needs to be +tweaked for concepts removal. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10-14 Daniel provided de-conceptified wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + + +<ol> +<li> +<p> +Change header <tt><iterator></tt> synopsis 24.3 [iterator.synopsis] as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>// 24.4.4, iterator operations: +... +template <class <del>Input</del><ins>Forward</ins>Iterator> + <del>Input</del><ins>Forward</ins>Iterator + next(<del>Input</del><ins>Forward</ins>Iterator x, typename std::iterator_traits<<del>Input</del><ins>Forward</ins>Iterator>::difference_type n = 1); +</pre></blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 24.4.4 [iterator.operations] before p.6 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class <del>Input</del><ins>Forward</ins>Iterator> + <del>Input</del><ins>Forward</ins>Iterator + next(<del>Input</del><ins>Forward</ins>Iterator x, typename std::iterator_traits<<del>Input</del><ins>Forward</ins>Iterator>::difference_type n = 1); +</pre></blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1012"></a>1012. <tt>reverse_iterator</tt> default ctor should value initialize</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 24.5.1.3.1 [reverse.iter.cons] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-11 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p><b>Addresses UK 277</b></p> + +<p> +The default constructor default-initializes current, rather than +value-initializes. This means that when Iterator corresponds to a +trivial type, the current member is left un-initialized, even when the +user explictly requests value intialization! At this point, it is not +safe to perform any operations on the reverse_iterator other than assign +it a new value or destroy it. Note that this does correspond to the +basic definition of a singular iterator. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Agree with option i. +</blockquote> + +<p> +Related issue: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#408">408</a> +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +We believe this should be revisited +in conjunction with issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#408">408</a>, +which nearly duplicates this issue. +Move to Open. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 post-Frankfurt: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Change "constructed" to "initialized" in two places in the proposed resolution. +</p> +<p> +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Ready for this meeting. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change [reverse.iter.con]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>reverse_iterator(); +</pre> +<blockquote> +-1- <i>Effects:</i> <del>Default</del> <ins>Value</ins> initializes <tt>current</tt>. Iterator +operations applied to the resulting iterator have defined behavior if and +only if the corresponding operations are defined on a <del>default constructed</del> +<ins>value initialized</ins> +iterator of type <tt>Iterator</tt>. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 24.5.3.3.1 [move.iter.op.const]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>move_iterator(); +</pre> +<blockquote> +-1- <i>Effects:</i> Constructs a <tt>move_iterator</tt>, <del>default</del> <ins>value</ins> +initializing <tt>current</tt>. +<ins>Iterator +operations applied to the resulting iterator have defined behavior if and +only if the corresponding operations are defined on a +value initialized +iterator of type <tt>Iterator</tt>.</ins> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1014"></a>1014. Response to UK 317 and JP 74</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 28.8.2 [re.regex.construct] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-11 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#re.regex.construct">issues</a> in [re.regex.construct].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p><b>Addresses UK 317 and JP 74</b></p> + +<p> +UK 317: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<tt>basic_string</tt> has both a constructor and an assignment operator that +accepts an initializer list, <tt>basic_regex</tt> should have the same. +</blockquote> + +<p> +JP 74: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<tt>basic_regx & operator= (initializer_list<T>);</tt> is not defined. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +UK 317 asks for both assignment and constructor, +but the requested constructor is already present in the current Working Paper. +We agree with the proposed resolution. +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 28.8 [re.regex]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class charT, + class traits = regex_traits<charT> > +class basic_regex { + ... + basic_regex& operator=(const charT* ptr); + <ins>basic_regex& operator=(initializer_list<charT> il);</ins> + template <class ST, class SA> + basic_regex& operator=(const basic_string<charT, ST, SA>& p); + ... +}; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Add in 28.8.2 [re.regex.construct]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<blockquote> +-20- ... +</blockquote> +<pre>basic_regex& operator=(initializer_list<charT> il); +</pre> +<blockquote> +-21- <i>Effects:</i> returns <tt>assign(il.begin(), il.end());</tt> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1019"></a>1019. Response to UK 205</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.7.3 [meta.help] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-11 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#meta.help">issues</a> in [meta.help].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p><b>Addresses UK 205</b></p> + +<p> +<tt>integral_constant</tt> objects should be usable in integral-constant-expressions. +The addition to the language of literal types and the enhanced rules for +constant expressions make this possible. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +We agree that the <tt>static</tt> data member +ought be declared <tt>constexpr</tt>, +but do not see a need for the proposed <tt>operator value_type()</tt>. +(A use case would be helpful.) +Move to Open. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-23 Alisdair adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +The motivating case in my mind is that we can then use +<tt>true_type</tt> and <tt>false_type</tt> as integral Boolean expressions, for example inside +a <tt>static_assert</tt> declaration. In that sense it is purely a matter of style. +</p> +<p> +Note that Boost has applied the non-explicit conversion operator for many +years as it has valuable properties for extension into other metaprogramming +libraries, such as MPL. If additional rationale is desired I will poll the +Boost lists for why this extension was originally applied. I would argue +that explicit conversion is more appropriate for 0x though. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-04 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Here's a use case which demonstrates the syntactic niceness which Alisdair describes: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>#define requires(...) class = typename std::enable_if<(__VA_ARGS__)>::type + +template <class T, class U, + requires(!is_lvalue_reference<T>() || + is_lvalue_reference<T>() && is_lvalue_reference<U>()), + requires(is_same<typename base_type<T>::type, + typename base_type<U>::type>)> +inline +T&& +forward(U&& t) +{ + return static_cast<T&&>(t); +} +</pre></blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 post-Frankfurt: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Ready for this meeting. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add to the <tt>integral_constant</tt> struct definition in 20.7.3 [meta.help]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T, T v> +struct integral_constant { + static const<ins>expr</ins> T value = v; + typedef T value_type; + typedef integral_constant<T,v> type; + <ins>constexpr operator value_type() { return value; }</ins> +}; +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1021"></a>1021. Response to UK 211</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.9.2.3 [unique.ptr.single.asgn] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-11 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p><b>Addresses UK 211</b></p> + +<p> +The <tt>nullptr_t</tt> type was introduced to resolve the null pointer literal +problem. It should be used for the assignemnt operator, as with the +constructor and elsewhere through the library. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +We agree with the proposed resolution. +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change the synopsis in 20.9.9.2 [unique.ptr.single]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>unique_ptr& operator=(<del><i>unspecified-pointer-type</i></del> <ins>nullptr_t</ins>); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Change 20.9.9.2.3 [unique.ptr.single.asgn]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>unique_ptr& operator=(<del><i>unspecified-pointer-type</i></del> <ins>nullptr_t</ins>); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<del>Assigns from the literal 0 or <tt>NULL</tt>. [<i>Note:</i> The +<i>unspecified-pointer-type</i> is often implemented as a pointer to a +private data member, avoiding many of the implicit conversion pitfalls. +<i>-- end note</i>]</del> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1030"></a>1030. Response to JP 44</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.10.5 [util.smartptr.shared.atomic] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-11 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p><b>Addresses JP 44</b></p> + +<p> +The 1st parameter <tt>p</tt> and 2nd parameter <tt>v</tt> is now +<tt>shared_ptr<T>*</tt>. +</p> +<p> +It should be <tt>shared_ptr<T>&</tt>, or if these are +<tt>shared_ptr<T>*</tt> then add the "<tt>p</tt> shall not be a +null pointer" at the requires. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Agree. All of the functions need a requirement that <tt>p</tt> (or +<tt>v</tt>) is a pointer to a valid object. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 post-Frankfurt: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Lawrence explained that these signatures match the regular atomics. The +regular atomics must not use references because these signatures are +shared with C. The decision to pass shared_ptrs by pointer rather than +by reference was deliberate and was motivated by the principle of least +surprise. +</p> +<p> +Lawrence to write wording that requires that the pointers not be null. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-09-20 Lawrence provided wording: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +The parameter types for atomic shared pointer access +were deliberately chosen to be pointers +to match the corresponding parameters of the atomics chapter. +Those in turn were deliberately chosen +to match C functions, +which do not have reference parameters. +</p> +<p> +We adopt the second suggestion, +to require that such pointers not be null. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In section "<code>shared_ptr</code> atomic access" +20.9.10.5 [util.smartptr.shared.atomic], add to each function the +following clause. +</p> +<blockquote><p> +<i>Requires:</i> <code>p</code> shall not be null. +</p></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1033"></a>1033. <tt>thread::join()</tt> effects?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30.3.1.5 [thread.thread.member] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alberto Ganesh Barbati <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-12 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#thread.thread.member">issues</a> in [thread.thread.member].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p> +While looking at <tt>thread::join()</tt> I think I spotted a couple of +possible defects in the specifications. I could not find a previous +issue or NB comment about that, but I might have missed it. +</p> + +<p> +The postconditions clause for <tt>thread::join()</tt> is: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Postconditions:</i> If <tt>join()</tt> throws an exception, the value +returned by <tt>get_id()</tt> is unchanged. Otherwise, <tt>get_id() == id()</tt>. +</blockquote> + +<p> +and the throws clause is: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Throws:</i> <tt>std::system_error</tt> when the postconditions cannot be achieved. +</blockquote> + +<p> +Now... how could the postconditions <em>not</em> be achieved? +It's just a matter of resetting the value of <tt>get_id()</tt> or leave it +unchanged! I bet we can always do that. Moreover, it's a chicken-and-egg +problem: in order to decide whether to throw or not I depend on the +postconditions, but the postconditions are different in the two cases. +</p> + +<p> +I believe the throws clause should be: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Throws:</i> <tt>std::system_error</tt> when the effects or postconditions +cannot be achieved. +</blockquote> + +<p> +as it is in <tt>detach()</tt>, or, even better, as the postcondition is +trivially satisfiable and to remove the circular dependency: +</p> + + +<blockquote> +<i>Throws:</i> <tt>std::system_error</tt> if the effects cannot be achieved. +</blockquote> + +<p> +Problem is that... ehm... <tt>join()</tt> has no "Effects" clause. Is that intentional? +</p> + +<p><i>[ +See the thread starting at c++std-lib-23204 for more discussion. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Pete believes there may be some more general language (in frontmatter) +that can address this and related issues such as <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#962">962</a>. +</p> +<p> +Move to Open. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-18 Anthony provides wording. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-12 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Edit 30.3.1.5 [thread.thread.member] as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void join(); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +5 <i>Precondition:</i> <tt>joinable()</tt> is <tt>true</tt>. +</p> +<p><ins> +<i>Effects:</i> Blocks until the thread represented by <tt>*this</tt> has completed. +</ins></p> + +<p> +6 <i>Synchronization:</i> The completion of the thread represented by +<tt>*this</tt> happens before (1.10 [intro.multithread]) +<tt>join()</tt> returns. [<i>Note:</i> Operations on <tt>*this</tt> are not +synchronized. — <i>end note</i>] +</p> + +<p> +7 <i>Postconditions:</i> <del>If <tt>join()</tt> throws an exception, the value +returned by <tt>get_id()</tt> is unchanged. Otherwise,</del> <ins>The thread +represented by <tt>*this</tt> has completed.</ins> <tt>get_id() == id()</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +8 ... +</p> + + +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1034"></a>1034. Response to UK 222</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2.1 [container.requirements.general] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-12 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index-open.html#container.requirements.general">active issues</a> in [container.requirements.general].</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#container.requirements.general">issues</a> in [container.requirements.general].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p><b>Addresses UK 222</b></p> + +<p> +It is not clear what purpose the Requirement tables serve in the +Containers clause. Are they the definition of a library Container? Or +simply a conventient shorthand to factor common semantics into a single +place, simplifying the description of each subsequent container? This +becomes an issue for 'containers' like <tt>array</tt>, which does not meet the +default-construct-to-empty requirement, or <tt>forward_list</tt> which does not +support the size operation. Are these components no longer containers? +Does that mean the remaining requirements don't apply? Or are these +contradictions that need fixing, despite being a clear design decision? +</p> + +<p> +Recommend: +</p> + +<p> +Clarify all the tables in 23.2 [container.requirements] are +there as a convenience for documentation, rather than a strict set of +requirements. Containers should be allowed to relax specific +requirements if they call attention to them in their documentation. The +introductory text for <tt>array</tt> should be expanded to mention a +default constructed <tt>array</tt> is not empty, and +<tt>forward_list</tt> introduction should mention it does not provide +the required <tt>size</tt> operation as it cannot be implemented +efficiently. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Agree in principle. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 post-Frankfurt: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +We agree in principle, but we have a timetable. This group feels that +the issue should be closed as NAD unless a proposed resolution is +submitted prior to the March 2010 meeting. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Looked at this and still intend to close as NAD in March +2010 unless there is proposed wording that we like. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-02 Nicolai M. Josuttis updates proposed wording and adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I just came across issue #1034 (response to UK 222), +which covers the role of container requirements. +The reason I found this issue was that I am wondering why +<tt>array<></tt> is specified to be a sequence container. +For me, currently, this follows from +Sequence containers 23.2.3 [sequence.reqmts] +saying: +</p> +<blockquote> +The library provides five basic kinds of sequence containers: <tt>array</tt>, +<tt>vector</tt>, <tt>forward_list</tt>, <tt>list</tt>, and <tt>deque</tt>. while +later on in Table 94 "Sequence container requirements" are defined. +</blockquote> + +<p> +IMO, you can hardly argue that this is NAD. +We MUST say somewhere that either array is not a sequence container +or does not provide all operations of a sequence container +(even not all requirements of a container in general). +</p> +<p> +Here is the number of requirements <tt>array<></tt> does not meet +(AFAIK): +</p> +<p> +general container requirements: +</p> +<ul> +<li> +a default constructed <tt>array</tt> is not empty +</li> +<li> +<tt>swap</tt> has no constant complexity +</li> +</ul> + +<p> + Note also that <tt>swap</tt> not only has linear complexity + it also invalidates iterators (or to be more precise, + assigns other values to the elements), which + is different from the effect swap has for other containers. + For this reason, I must say that i tend to propose to + remove <tt>swap()</tt> for <tt>arrays</tt>. + </p> + +<p> +sequence container requirements: +</p> + +<ul> +<li> +There is no constructor and assignment for a range +</li> +<li> +There is no constructor and assignment for <tt>n</tt> copies of <tt>t</tt> +</li> +<li> + There are no <tt>emplace</tt>, <tt>insert</tt>, <tt>erase</tt>, <tt>clear</tt>, + <tt>assign</tt> operations +</li> +</ul> + +<p> +In fact, out of all sequence container requirements <tt>array<></tt> only +provides the following operations: +from sequence requirements (Table 94): +</p> +<blockquote><pre>X(il); +a = il; +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +and from optional requirements (Table 95): +</p> +<blockquote><pre>[], at(), front(), back() +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +This is almost nothing! +</p> + +<p> +Note in addition, that due to the fact that +<tt>array</tt> is an aggregate and not a container with +<tt>initializer_lists</tt> +a construction or assignment with an initializer list is valid +for all sequence containers but not valid for array: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>vector<int> v({1,2,3}); // OK +v = {4,5,6}; // OK + +array<int,3> a({1,2,3}); // Error +array<int,3> a = {1,2,3}; // OK +a = {4,5,6}; // Error +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +BTW, for this reason, I am wondering, why <tt><array></tt> includes +<tt><initializer_list></tt>. +</p> + +<p> +IMO, we can't really say that <tt>array</tt> is a sequence container. +<tt>array</tt> is special. +As the solution to this issue seemed to miss some proposed wording +where all could live with, let me try to suggest some. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-12 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010 Pittsburgh: Ok with move to Ready except for "OPEN:" part. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p><i>In Sequence containers 23.2.3 [sequence.reqmts] modify paragraph 1 as +indicated: </i> </p> +<blockquote> + <p>1 A sequence container organizes a finite set of objects, all of the same + type, into a strictly linear arrangement. The library provides <del>five</del> + <ins>four</ins> basic kinds of sequence containers: <del><tt>array</tt>,</del> + <tt>vector</tt>, <tt>forward_list</tt>, <tt>list</tt>, and <tt>deque</tt>. + <ins>In addition, <tt>array</tt> is provided as a sequence container that + only provides limited sequence operations because it has a fixed number of + elements.</ins> <del>It</del> <ins>The library</ins> also provides container adaptors that make it easy to + construct abstract data types, such as <tt>stack</tt>s or <tt>queue</tt>s, out + of the basic sequence container kinds (or out of other kinds of sequence + containers that the user might define). </p> +</blockquote> +<p><i>Modify paragraph 2 as follows (just editorial): </i> </p> +<blockquote> + <p>2 The <del>five basic</del> sequence + containers offer the programmer different complexity trade-offs and should be + used accordingly. <tt>vector</tt> or <tt>array</tt> is the type of sequence + container that should be used by default. <tt>list</tt> or <tt>forward_list</tt> + should be used when there are frequent insertions and deletions from the + middle of the sequence. <tt>deque</tt> is the data structure of choice when + most insertions and deletions take place at the beginning or at the end of the + sequence. </p> +</blockquote> +<p><i>In Class template array 23.3.1 [array] modify paragraph 3 as indicated: +</i> </p> +<blockquote> + <p>3 <del>Unless otherwise specified, all <tt>array</tt> operations are as + described in 23.2.</del> <ins>An array satisfies all of the requirements of a + container and of a reversible container (given in two tables in 23.2 [container.requirements]) + except that a default constructed <tt>array</tt> is not empty, <tt>swap</tt> + does not have constant complexity, and <tt>swap</tt> may throw exceptions. An <tt>array</tt> satisfies some of the requirements of a + sequence container (given in 23.2.3 [sequence.reqmts]).</ins> Descriptions are + provided here only for operations on <tt>array</tt> that are not described + <del>in that Clause</del> <ins>in one of these tables</ins> or for operations + where there is additional semantic information. </p> +</blockquote> +<p><i>In array specialized algorithms 23.3.1.2 [array.special] add to the +specification of <tt>swap()</tt>: </i> </p> +<blockquote> + <pre>template <class T, size_t N> void swap(array<T,N>& x, array<T,N>& y); +</pre> + <blockquote> + <p>1 <i>Effects:</i> ... </p> + <p><ins><i>Complexity:</i> Linear in <tt>N</tt>. </ins></p> + </blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1037"></a>1037. Response to UK 232</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2.3 [sequence.reqmts] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-12 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#sequence.reqmts">issues</a> in [sequence.reqmts].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p><b>Addresses UK 232</b></p> + +<p> +<tt>match_results</tt> may follow the requirements but is not listed a general +purpose library container. +</p> + +<p> +Remove reference to <tt>match_results</tt> against <tt>a[n]</tt> operation. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Agree. <tt>operator[]</tt> is defined elsewhere. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +We agree with the proposed resolution. +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 23.2.3 [sequence.reqmts] Table 84, remove reference to +<tt>match_results</tt> in the row describing the <tt>a[n]</tt> operation. +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1038"></a>1038. Response to UK 233</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2.3 [sequence.reqmts] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-12 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#sequence.reqmts">issues</a> in [sequence.reqmts].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p><b>Addresses UK 233</b></p> + +<p> +Table 84 is missing references to several new container types. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Agree. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +We agree with the proposed resolution. +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 23.2.3 [sequence.reqmts] Table 84, Add reference to listed +containers to the following rows: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 84 -- Optional sequence container operations</caption> +<tbody><tr> +<th>Expression</th> +<th>Return type</th> +<th>Operational semantics</th> +<th>Container</th> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><tt>a.front()</tt></td> +<td>...</td> +<td>...</td> +<td><tt>vector, list, deque, basic_string<ins>, array, forward_list</ins></tt></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><tt>a.back()</tt></td> +<td>...</td> +<td>...</td> +<td><tt>vector, list, deque, basic_string<ins>, array</ins></tt></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><tt>a.emplace_front(args)</tt></td> +<td>...</td> +<td>...</td> +<td><tt>list, deque<ins>, forward_list</ins></tt></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><tt>a.push_front(t)</tt></td> +<td>...</td> +<td>...</td> +<td><tt>list, deque<ins>, forward_list</ins></tt></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><tt>a.push_front(rv)</tt></td> +<td>...</td> +<td>...</td> +<td><tt>list, deque<ins>, forward_list</ins></tt></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><tt>a.pop_front()</tt></td> +<td>...</td> +<td>...</td> +<td><tt>list, deque<ins>, forward_list</ins></tt></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><tt>a[n]</tt></td> +<td>...</td> +<td>...</td> +<td><tt>vector, deque, basic_string<ins>, array</ins></tt></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><tt>a.at(n)</tt></td> +<td>...</td> +<td>...</td> +<td><tt>vector, deque<ins>, basic_string, array</ins></tt></td> +</tr> +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1039"></a>1039. Response to UK 234</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2.3 [sequence.reqmts] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-12 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#sequence.reqmts">issues</a> in [sequence.reqmts].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p><b>Addresses UK 234</b></p> + +<p> +The reference to <tt>iterator</tt> in semantics for <tt>back</tt> should +also allow for <tt>const_iterator</tt> when called on a const-qualified +container. This would be ugly to specify in the 03 standard, but is +quite easy with the addition of <tt>auto</tt> in this new standard. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Agree. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +We agree with the proposed resolution. +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 23.2.3 [sequence.reqmts] Table 84, replace iterator with auto in semantics for back: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 84 -- Optional sequence container operations</caption> +<tbody><tr> +<th>Expression</th> +<th>Return type</th> +<th>Operational semantics</th> +<th>Container</th> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><tt>a.back()</tt></td> +<td><tt>reference; const_reference</tt> for constant <tt>a</tt></td> +<td><tt>{ <del>iterator</del> <ins>auto</ins> tmp = a.end();<br>--tmp;<br>return *tmp; }</tt></td> +<td><tt>vector, list, deque, basic_string</tt></td> +</tr> +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1040"></a>1040. Response to UK 238</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2.4 [associative.reqmts] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-12 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index-open.html#associative.reqmts">active issues</a> in [associative.reqmts].</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#associative.reqmts">issues</a> in [associative.reqmts].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p><b>Addresses UK 238</b></p> + +<p> +Leaving it unspecified whether or not <tt>iterator</tt> and <tt>const_iterator</tt> are the +same type is dangerous, as user code may or may not violate the One +Definition Rule by providing overloads for +both types. It is probably too late to specify a single behaviour, but +implementors should document what to expect. Observing that problems can be +avoided by users restricting themselves to using <tt>const_iterator</tt>, add a note to that effect. +</p> +<p> +Suggest Change 'unspecified' to 'implementation defined'. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Agree with issue. Agree with adding the note but not with changing the +normative text. We believe the note provides sufficient guidance. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +We agree with the proposed resolution. +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 23.2.4 [associative.reqmts] p6, add: +</p> + +<blockquote> +-6- <tt>iterator</tt> of an associative container meets the requirements +of the <tt>BidirectionalIterator</tt> concept. For associative +containers where the value type is the same as the key type, both +<tt>iterator</tt> and <tt>const_iterator</tt> are constant iterators. It +is unspecified whether or not <tt>iterator</tt> and +<tt>const_iterator</tt> are the same type. +<ins>[<i>Note:</i> <tt>iterator</tt> and <tt>const_iterator</tt> have identical semantics in +this case, and <tt>iterator</tt> is convertible to <tt>const_iterator</tt>. Users can avoid +violating the One Definition Rule by always using <tt>const_iterator</tt> +in their function parameter lists <i>-- end note</i>]</ins> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1044"></a>1044. Response to UK 325</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30.4 [thread.mutex] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-12 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#thread.mutex">issues</a> in [thread.mutex].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p><b>Addresses UK 325</b></p> + +<p> +We believe constexpr literal values should be a more natural expression +of empty tag types than extern objects as it should improve the +compiler's ability to optimize the empty object away completely. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to review. The current specification is a "hack", and the proposed +specification is a better "hack". +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +We agree with the proposed resolution. +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change the synopsis in 30.4 [thread.mutex]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>struct defer_lock_t <ins>{}</ins>; +struct try_to_lock_t <ins>{}</ins>; +struct adopt_lock_t <ins>{}</ins>; + +<del>extern</del> const<ins>expr</ins> defer_lock_t defer_lock <ins>{}</ins>; +<del>extern</del> const<ins>expr</ins> try_to_lock_t try_to_lock <ins>{}</ins>; +<del>extern</del> const<ins>expr</ins> adopt_lock_t adopt_lock <ins>{}</ins>; +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1045"></a>1045. Response to UK 326</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30.4.2.2.1 [thread.lock.unique.cons] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-12 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p><b>Addresses UK 326</b></p> + +<p> +The precondition that the mutex is not owned by this thread offers +introduces the risk of un-necessary undefined behaviour into the +program. The only time it matters whether the current thread owns the +mutex is in the lock operation, and that will happen subsequent to +construction in this case. The lock operation has the identical +pre-condition, so there is nothing gained by asserting that precondition +earlier and denying the program the right to get into a valid state +before calling lock. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Summit: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Agree, move to review. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +We agree with the proposed resolution. +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Strike 30.4.2.2.1 [thread.lock.unique.cons] p7: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>unique_lock(mutex_type& m, defer_lock_t); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<del>-7- <i>Precondition:</i> If <tt>mutex_type</tt> is not a recursive mutex +the calling thread does not own the mutex.</del> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1054"></a>1054. <tt>forward</tt> broken</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.3.3 [forward] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-13 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-20</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#forward">issues</a> in [forward].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p> +This is a placeholder issue to track the fact that we (well I) put the standard +into an inconsistent state by requesting that we accept +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2844.html">N2844</a> +except for the proposed changes to [forward]. +</p> + +<p> +There will exist in the post meeting mailing +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2835.html">N2835</a> +which in its current state reflects the state of affairs prior to the Summit +meeting. I hope to update it in time for the post Summit mailing, but as I write +this issue I have not done so yet. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +Move to Open, awaiting the promised paper. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-08-02 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +My current preferred solution is: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T> +struct __base_type +{ + typedef typename remove_cv<typename remove_reference<T>::type>::type type; +}; + +template <class T, class U, + class = typename enable_if< + !is_lvalue_reference<T>::value || + is_lvalue_reference<T>::value && + is_lvalue_reference<U>::value>::type, + class = typename enable_if< + is_same<typename __base_type<T>::type, + typename __base_type<U>::type>::value>::type> +inline +T&& +forward(U&& t) +{ + return static_cast<T&&>(t); +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +This has been tested by Bill, Jason and myself. +</p> + +<p> +It allows the following lvalue/rvalue casts: +</p> + +<ol> +<li> +Cast an lvalue <tt>t</tt> to an lvalue <tt>T</tt> (identity). +</li> +<li> +Cast an lvalue <tt>t</tt> to an rvalue <tt>T</tt>. +</li> +<li> +Cast an rvalue <tt>t</tt> to an rvalue <tt>T</tt> (identity). +</li> +</ol> + +<p> +It disallows: +</p> + +<ol type="a"> +<li> +Cast an rvalue <tt>t</tt> to an lvalue <tt>T</tt>. +</li> +<li> +Cast one type <tt>t</tt> to another type <tt>T</tt> (such as <tt>int</tt> to <tt>double</tt>). +</li> +</ol> + +<p> +"a." is disallowed as it can easily lead to dangling references. +"b." is disallowed as this function is meant to only change the lvalue/rvalue +characteristic of an expression. +</p> + +<p> +Jason has expressed concern that "b." is not dangerous and is useful in contexts +where you want to "forward" a derived type as a base type. I find this use case +neither dangerous, nor compelling. I.e. I could live with or without the "b." +constraint. Without it, forward would look like: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T, class U, + class = typename enable_if< + !is_lvalue_reference<T>::value || + is_lvalue_reference<T>::value && + is_lvalue_reference<U>::value>::type> +inline +T&& +forward(U&& t) +{ + return static_cast<T&&>(t); +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Or possibly: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T, class U, + class = typename enable_if< + !is_lvalue_reference<T>::value || + is_lvalue_reference<T>::value && + is_lvalue_reference<U>::value>::type, + class = typename enable_if< + is_base_of<typename __base_type<U>::type, + typename __base_type<T>::type>::value>::type> +inline +T&& +forward(U&& t) +{ + return static_cast<T&&>(t); +} +</pre></blockquote> + + +<p> +The "promised paper" is not in the post-Frankfurt mailing only because I'm waiting +for the non-concepts draft. But I'm hoping that by adding this information here +I can keep people up to date. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-08-02 David adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +<tt>forward</tt> was originally designed to do one thing: perfect forwarding. +That is, inside a function template whose actual argument can be a const +or non-const lvalue or rvalue, restore the original "rvalue-ness" of the +actual argument: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T> +void f(T&& x) +{ + // x is an lvalue here. If the actual argument to f was an + // rvalue, pass static_cast<T&&>(x) to g; otherwise, pass x. + g( forward<T>(x) ); +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Attempting to engineer <tt>forward</tt> to accomodate uses other than perfect +forwarding dilutes its idiomatic meaning. The solution proposed here +declares that <tt>forward<T>(x)</tt> means nothing more than <tt>static_cast<T&&>(x)</tt>, +with a patchwork of restrictions on what <tt>T</tt> and <tt>x</tt> can be that can't be +expressed in simple English. +</p> + +<p> +I would be happy with either of two approaches, whose code I hope (but +can't guarantee) I got right. +</p> + +<ol> +<li> +<p> +Use a simple definition of <tt>forward</tt> that accomplishes its original +purpose without complications to accomodate other uses: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T, class U> +T&& forward(U& x) +{ + return static_cast<T&&>(x); +} +</pre></blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Use a definition of <tt>forward</tt> that protects the user from as many +potential mistakes as possible, by actively preventing <em>all</em> other +uses: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T, class U> +boost::enable_if_c< + // in forward<T>(x), x is a parameter of the caller, thus an lvalue + is_lvalue_reference<U>::value + // in caller's deduced T&& argument, T can only be non-ref or lvalue ref + && !is_rvalue_reference<T>::value + // Must not cast cv-qualifications or do any type conversions + && is_same<T&,U&>::value + , T&&>::type forward(U&& a) +{ + return static_cast<T&&>(a); +} +</pre></blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-09-27 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +A paper, +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2951.html">N2951</a>, +is available which compares several implementations (including David's) with respect to several +use cases (including Jason's) and provides wording for one implementation. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<del>NAD Editorial</del><ins>Resolved</ins>. Solved by +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2951.html">N2951</a>. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1055"></a>1055. Response to UK 98</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.7.7.6 [meta.trans.other] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-12 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-20</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#meta.trans.other">issues</a> in [meta.trans.other].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p><b>Addresses UK 98</b></p> + +<p> +It would be useful to be able to determine the underlying +type of an arbitrary enumeration type. This would allow +safe casting to an integral type (especially needed for +scoped enums, which do not promote), and would allow +use of <tt>numeric_limits</tt>. In general it makes generic +programming with enumerations easier. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +Pete observes (and Tom concurs) +that the proposed resolution seems to require compiler support +for its implementation, +as it seems necessary to look at the range of values +of the enumerated type. +To a first approximation, +a library solution could give an answer based on the size of the type. +If the user has specialized <tt>numeric_limits</tt> for the enumerated type, +then the library might be able to do better, +but there is no such requirement. +Keep status as Open +and solicit input from CWG. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-23 Alisdair adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Just to confirm that the BSI originator of this comment assumed it did +indeed imply a compiler intrinsic. Rather than request a Core extension, it +seemed in keeping with that the type traits interface provides a library API +to unspecified compiler features - where we require several other traits +(e.g. <tt>has_trivial_*</tt>) to get the 'right' answer now, unlike in TR1. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Addressed in <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2947.html">N2947</a>. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<del>NAD Editorial</del><ins>Resolved</ins>. Solved by +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2984.html">N2984</a>. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add a new row to the table in 20.7.7.6 [meta.trans.other]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 41 -- Other transformations</caption> +<tbody><tr> +<th>Template</th> +<th>Condition</th> +<th>Comments</th> +</tr> +<tr> +<td> +<tt>template< class T > struct enum_base;</tt> +</td> +<td> +<tt>T</tt> shall be an enumeration type (7.2 [dcl.enum]) +</td> +<td> +The member typedef <tt>type</tt> shall name the underlying type +of the enum <tt>T</tt>. +</td> +</tr> +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1065"></a>1065. Response to UK 168</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17.6.1.1 [contents] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#contents">issues</a> in [contents].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses UK 168</b></p> +<p> +We should make it clear (either by note or normatively) that namespace +<tt>std</tt> may contain inline namespaces, and that entities specified to be +defined in std may in fact be defined in one of these inline namespaces. +(If we're going to use them for versioning, eg when TR2 comes along, +we're going to need that.) +</p> + +<p> +Replace "namespace std or namespaces nested within namespace std" with +"namespace std or namespaces nested within namespace std or inline +namespaces nested directly or indirectly within namespace std" +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Summit: +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +adopt UK words (some have reservations whether it is correct) +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-09 Alisdair improves the wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Bill believes there is strictly speaking no need to say that +because no portable test can detect the difference. +However he agrees that it doesn't hurt to say this. +</p> +<p> +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 17.6.1.1 [contents] p2: +</p> + +<blockquote> +All library entities except macros, <tt>operator new</tt> and +<tt>operator delete</tt> are defined within the namespace <tt>std</tt> or +namespaces nested within namespace <tt>std</tt>. +<ins>It is unspecified whether names declared in a specific namespace +are declared directly in that namespace, or in an inline namespace inside +that namespace. [<i>Footnote:</i> This gives implementers freedom to support +multiple configurations of the library.]</ins> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1066"></a>1066. Response to UK 189 and JP 27</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18 [language.support] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses UK 189 and JP 27</b></p> +<p> +The addition of the <tt>[[noreturn]]</tt> attribute to the language will be an +important aid for static analysis tools. +</p> + +<p> +The following functions should be declared in C++ with the +<tt>[[noreturn]]</tt> attribute: <tt>abort</tt> <tt>exit</tt> +<tt>quick_exit</tt> <tt>terminate</tt> <tt>unexpected</tt> +<tt>rethrow_exception</tt> <tt>throw_with_nested</tt>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Summit: +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +Agreed. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +We agree with the proposed resolution. +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 18.5 [support.start.term] p3: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p>-2- ...</p> +<pre><ins>void</ins> abort <ins>[[noreturn]]</ins> (void) +</pre> +<p>-3- ...</p> +<p>-6- ...</p> +<pre><ins>void</ins> exit<ins> [[noreturn]] </ins>(int status) +</pre> +<p>-7- ...</p> +<p>-11- ...</p> +<pre>void quick_exit<ins> [[noreturn]] </ins>(int status) +</pre> +<p>-12- ...</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change the <tt><exception></tt> synopsis in 18.8 [support.exception]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void unexpected<ins> [[noreturn]] </ins>(); +... +void terminate<ins> [[noreturn]] </ins>(); +... +void rethrow_exception<ins> [[noreturn]] </ins>(exception_ptr p); +... +template <class T> void throw_with_nested<ins> [[noreturn]] </ins>(T&& t); <del>// [[noreturn]]</del> +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Change D.13.3 [unexpected]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void unexpected<ins> [[noreturn]] </ins>(); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Change 18.8.3.3 [terminate]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void terminate<ins> [[noreturn]] </ins>(); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Change 18.8.5 [propagation]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void rethrow_exception<ins> [[noreturn]] </ins>(exception_ptr p); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +In the synopsis of 18.8.6 [except.nested] and the definition area change: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T> void throw_with_nested<ins> [[noreturn]] </ins>(T&& t); <del>// [[noreturn]]</del> +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1070"></a>1070. Ambiguous move overloads in function</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8.14.2 [func.wrap.func] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-19 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#func.wrap.func">issues</a> in [func.wrap.func].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The synopsis in 20.8.14.2 [func.wrap.func] says: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<Returnable R, CopyConstructible... ArgTypes> +class function<R(ArgTypes...)> +{ + ... + template<class F> + requires CopyConstructible<F> && Callable<F, ArgTypes...> + && Convertible<Callable<F, ArgTypes...>::result_type, R> + function(F); + template<class F> + requires CopyConstructible<F> && Callable<F, ArgTypes...> + && Convertible<Callable<F, ArgTypes...>::result_type, R> + function(F&&); + ... + template<class F, Allocator Alloc> function(allocator_arg_t, const Alloc&, F); + template<class F, Allocator Alloc> function(allocator_arg_t, const Alloc&, F&&); + ... + template<class F> + requires CopyConstructible<F> && Callable<F, ArgTypes..> + && Convertible<Callable<F, ArgTypes...>::result_type + function& operator=(F); + template<class F> + requires CopyConstructible<F> && Callable<F, ArgTypes...> + && Convertible<Callable<F, ArgTypes...>::result_type, R> + function& operator=(F&&); + ... +}; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Each of the 3 pairs above are ambiguous. We need only one of each pair, and we +could do it with either one. If we choose the <tt>F&&</tt> version we +need to bring <tt>decay</tt> into the definition to get the pass-by-value behavior. +In the proposed wording I've gotten lazy and just used the pass-by-value signature. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-01 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1024">1024</a> modifies the second removed constructor. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +We briefly discussed whether we ought support moveable function objects, +but decided that should be a separate issue if someone cares to propose it. +</p> +<p> +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change the synopsis of 20.8.14.2 [func.wrap.func], and remove the associated definitions in +20.8.14.2.1 [func.wrap.func.con]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<Returnable R, CopyConstructible... ArgTypes> +class function<R(ArgTypes...)> +{ + ... + template<class F> + requires CopyConstructible<F> && Callable<F, ArgTypes...> + && Convertible<Callable<F, ArgTypes...>::result_type, R> + function(F); + <del>template<class F> + requires CopyConstructible<F> && Callable<F, ArgTypes...> + && Convertible<Callable<F, ArgTypes...>::result_type, R> + function(F&&);</del> + ... + template<class F, Allocator Alloc> function(allocator_arg_t, const Alloc&, F); + <del>template<class F, Allocator Alloc> function(allocator_arg_t, const Alloc&, F&&);</del> + ... + template<class F> + requires CopyConstructible<F> && Callable<F, ArgTypes..> + && Convertible<Callable<F, ArgTypes...>::result_type + function& operator=(F); + <del>template<class F> + requires CopyConstructible<F> && Callable<F, ArgTypes...> + && Convertible<Callable<F, ArgTypes...>::result_type, R> + function& operator=(F&&);</del> + ... +}; +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1071"></a>1071. is_bind_expression should derive from integral_constant<bool></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8.10.1.1 [func.bind.isbind] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-19 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#func.bind.isbind">issues</a> in [func.bind.isbind].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p> +Class template is_bind_expression 20.8.10.1.1 [func.bind.isbind]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>namespace std { + template<class T> struct is_bind_expression { + static const bool value = see below; + }; +} +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +<tt>is_bind_expression</tt> should derive from <tt>std::integral_constant<bool></tt> like +other similar trait types. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +We need the same thing for the trait <tt>is_placeholder</tt> as well. +</blockquote> +<p><i>[ +2009-03-22 Daniel provided wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +We recommend this be deferred until after the next Committee Draft is issued. +</p> +<p> +Move to Open. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-31 Peter adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I am opposed to the proposed resolution and to the premise of the issue +in general. The traits's default definitions should NOT derive from +<tt>integral_constant</tt>, because this is harmful, as it misleads people into +thinking that <tt>is_bind_expression<E></tt> always derives from +<tt>integral_constant</tt>, whereas it may not. +</p> +<p> +<tt>is_bind_expression</tt> and <tt>is_placeholder</tt> allow user +specializations, and in fact, this is their primary purpose. Such user +specializations may not derive from <tt>integral_constant</tt>, and the +places where <tt>is_bind_expression</tt> and <tt>is_placeholder</tt> are +used intentionally do not require such derivation. +</p> +<p> +The long-term approach here is to switch to +<tt>BindExpression<E></tt> and <tt>Placeholder<P></tt> +explicit concepts, of course, but until that happens, I say leave them +alone. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 post-Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Tentatively Ready. We are comfortable with requiring user specializations +to derive from <tt>integral_constant</tt>. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<ol> +<li> +<p> +In 20.8.10.1.1 [func.bind.isbind] change as indicated: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>namespace std { + template<class T> struct is_bind_expression <ins>: integral_constant<bool, <i>see below</i>> { };</ins><del>{ + static const bool value = <i>see below</i>; + };</del> +} +</pre></blockquote> +</li> +<li> +<p> +In 20.8.10.1.1 [func.bind.isbind]/2 change as indicated: +</p> +<blockquote><pre><del>static const bool value;</del> +</pre> +<blockquote> +-2- <del><tt>true</tt> if <tt>T</tt> is a type returned from <tt>bind</tt>, <tt>false</tt> otherwise.</del> + <ins>If <tt>T</tt> is a type returned from <tt>bind</tt>, <tt>is_bind_expression<T></tt> shall +be publicly derived from + <tt>integral_constant<bool, true></tt>, otherwise it shall be +publicly derived from + <tt>integral_constant<bool, false></tt>.</ins> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> +<li> +<p> +In [func.bind.isplace] change as indicated: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>namespace std { + template<class T> struct is_placeholder <ins>: integral_constant<int, <i>see below</i>> { };</ins><del>{ + static const int value = <i>see below</i>; + };</del> +} +</pre></blockquote> +</li> +<li> +<p> +In [func.bind.isplace]/2 change as indicated: +</p> +<blockquote><pre><del>static const int value;</del> +</pre> +<blockquote> +-2- <del>value is <tt>J</tt> if <tt>T</tt> is the type of <tt>std::placeholders::_J</tt>, 0 otherwise.</del> + <ins>If <tt>T</tt> is the type of <tt>std::placeholders::_J</tt>, <tt>is_placeholder<T></tt> +shall be publicly + derived from <tt>integral_constant<int, J></tt> otherwise it shall +be publicly derived + from <tt>integral_constant<int, 0></tt>.</ins> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1073"></a>1073. Declaration of <tt>allocator_arg</tt> should be <tt>constexpr</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9 [memory] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-19 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#memory">issues</a> in [memory].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p> +Declaration of <tt>allocator_arg</tt> should be <tt>constexpr</tt> to ensure constant +initialization. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +We agree with the proposed resolution. Move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 20.9 [memory] p2: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>// 20.8.1, allocator argument tag +struct allocator_arg_t { }; +const<ins>expr</ins> allocator_arg_t allocator_arg = allocator_arg_t(); +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1075"></a>1075. Response to US 65, US 74.1</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20 [utilities], 23 [containers] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alan Talbot <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-20</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#utilities">issues</a> in [utilities].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses US 65 and US 74.1</b></p> + +<p>US 65:</p> + +<blockquote> +Scoped allocators and allocator propagation traits add a small amount of +utility at the cost of a great deal of machinery. The machinery is user +visible, and it extends to library components that don't have any +obvious connection to allocators, including basic concepts and simple +components like <tt>pair</tt> and <tt>tuple</tt>. + +<p>Suggested resolution:</p> + +<p> +Sketch of proposed resolution: Eliminate scoped allocators, replace +allocator propagation traits with a simple uniform rule (e.g. always +propagate on copy and move), remove all mention of allocators from +components that don't explicitly allocate memory (e.g. pair), and adjust +container interfaces to reflect this simplification. +</p> +<p> +Components that I propose eliminating include HasAllocatorType, +is_scoped_allocator, allocator_propagation_map, scoped_allocator_adaptor, +and ConstructibleAsElement. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>US 74.1:</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Scoped allocators represent a poor trade-off for standardization, since +(1) scoped-allocator--aware containers can be implemented outside the +C++ standard library but used with its algorithms, (2) scoped +allocators only benefit a tiny proportion of the C++ community +(since few C++ programmers even use today's allocators), and (3) all C++ +users, especially the vast majority of the C++ community that won't ever +use scoped allocators are forced to cope with the interface complexity +introduced by scoped allocators. +</p> +<p> +In essence, the larger community will suffer to support a very small +subset of the community who can already implement their own +data structures outside of the standard library. Therefore, scoped +allocators should be removed from the working paper. +</p> +<p> +Some evidence of the complexity introduced by scoped allocators: +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +20.3.5 [pairs], 20.4 [tuple]: Large increase in the +number of pair and tuple constructors. +</p> +<p> +23 [containers]: Confusing "AllocatableElement" requirements throughout. +</p> +</blockquote> +<p>Suggested resolution:</p> + +<p> +Remove support for scoped allocators from the working paper. This +includes at least the following changes: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Remove X [allocator.element.concepts] +</p> +<p> +Remove 20.10 [allocator.adaptor] +</p> +<p> +Remove [construct.element] +</p> +<p> +In Clause 23 [containers]: replace requirements naming the +<tt>AllocatableElement</tt> concept with requirements naming <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>, +<tt>MoveConstructible</tt>, <tt>DefaultConstructible</tt>, or <tt>Constructible</tt>, as +appropriate. +</p> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit Alan moved from NAD to Open. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-15 Ganesh adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +The requirement <tt>AllocatableElement</tt> should not be replaced with +<tt>Constructible</tt> on the <tt>emplace_xxx()</tt> functions as suggested. In the +one-parameter case the <tt>Constructible</tt> requirement is not satisfied when +the constructor is explicit (as per [concept.map.fct], twelfth +bullet) but we do want to allow explicit constructors in emplace, as the +following example shows: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>vector<shared_ptr<int>> v; +v.emplace_back(new int); <font color="#C80000">// should be allowed</font> +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +If the issue is accepted and scoped allocators are removed, I suggest to +add a new pair of concepts to [concept.construct], namely: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>auto concept HasExplicitConstructor<typename T, typename... Args> { + explicit T::T(Args...); +} + +auto concept ExplicitConstructible<typename T, typename... Args> + : HasExplicitConstructor<T, Args...>, NothrowDestructible<T> +{ } +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +We should then use <tt>ExplicitConstructible</tt> as the requirement for all +<tt>emplace_xxx()</tt> member functions. +</p> +<p> +For coherence and consistency with the similar concepts +<tt>Convertible/ExplicitlyConvertible</tt>, we might also consider changing +<tt>Constructible</tt> to: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>auto concept Constructible<typename T, typename... Args> + : HasConstructor<T, Args...>, ExplicitConstructible<T, Args...> +{ } +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Moreover, all emplace-related concepts in [container.concepts] +should also use <tt>ExplicitConstructible</tt> instead of <tt>Constructible</tt> in the +definitions of their axioms. In fact the concepts in [container.concepts] should be +corrected even if the issue is not accepted. +</p> +<p> +On the other hand, if the issue is not accepted, the scoped allocator +adaptors should be fixed because the following code: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <typename T> using scoped_allocator = scoped_allocator_adaptor<allocator<T>>; + +vector<shared_ptr<int>, scoped_allocator<shared_ptr<int>>> v; +v.emplace_back(new int); <font color="#C80000">// ops! doesn't compile</font> +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +doesn't compile, as the member function <tt>construct()</tt> of the scoped +allocator requires non-explicit constructors through concept +<tt>ConstructibleWithAllocator</tt>. Fixing that is not difficult but probably +more work than it's worth and is therefore, IMHO, one more reason in +support of the complete removal of scoped allocators. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-06-09 Alan adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I reopened this issue because I did not think that these National Body +comments were adequately addressed by marking them NAD. My understanding +is that something can be marked NAD if it is clearly a misunderstanding +or trivial, but a substantive issue that has any technical merit +requires a disposition that addresses the concerns. +</p> +<p> +The notes in the NB comment list (US 65 & US 74.1) say that: +</p> +<ol type="a"> +<li> +this issue has not introduced any new arguments not previously discussed, +</li> +<li> +the vote (4-9-3) was not a consensus for removing scoped allocators, +</li> +<li> +the issue is resolved by +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2840.pdf">N2840</a>. +</li> +</ol> +<p> +My opinion is: +</p> +<ol type="a"> +<li> +there are new arguments in both comments regarding concepts (which were +not present in the library when the scoped allocator proposal was voted +in), +</li> +<li> +the vote was clearly not a consensus for removal, but just saying there +was a vote does not provide a rationale, +</li> +<li> +I do not believe that N2840 addresses these comments (although it does +many other things and was voted in with strong approval). +</li> +</ol> + +<p> +My motivation to open the issue was to ensure that the NB comments were +adequately addressed in a way that would not risk a "no" vote on our +FCD. If there are responses to the technical concerns raised, then +perhaps they should be recorded. If the members of the NB who authored +the comments are satisfied with N2840 and the other disposition remarks +in the comment list, then I am sure they will say so. In either case, +this issue can be closed very quickly in Frankfurt, and hopefully will +have helped make us more confident of approval with little effort. If in +fact there is controversy, my thought is that it is better to know now +rather than later so there is more time to deal with it. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<del>NAD Editorial</del><ins>Resolved</ins>. Addressed by +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2982.pdf">N2982</a>. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +Scoped allocators have been revised significantly. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1079"></a>1079. UK-265: <code>RandomAccessIterator</code>'s <code>operator-</code> has nonsensical effects clause</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 24.2.7 [random.access.iterators] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Doug Gregor <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#random.access.iterators">issues</a> in [random.access.iterators].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses UK 265</b></p> + +<p>UK-265:</p> +<p> +This effects clause is nonesense. It looks more like an axiom stating +equivalence, and certainly an effects clause cannot change the state of +two arguments passed by const reference +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-09-18 Alisdair adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +For random access iterators, the definitions of <tt>(b-a)</tt> and +<tt>(a<b)</tt> are circular: +</p> + +<p> +From table Table 104 -- Random access iterator requirements: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>b - a :==> (a < b) ? distance(a,b) : -distance(b,a) + +a < b :==> b - a > 0 +</pre></blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Ready. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-13 Alisdair opens. +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Looking again at LWG #1079, the wording in the issue no longer exists, and +appears to be entirely an artefact of the concepts wording. +</p> + +<p> +This issue is currently on our Ready list (not even Tentative!) but I think it +has to be pulled as there is no way to apply the resolution. +</p> + +<p> +Looking at the current paper, I think this issue is now "NAD, solved by the +removal of concepts". Unfortunately it is too late to poll again, so we will +have to perform that review in Pittsburgh. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-13 Daniel updates the wording to address the circularity problem. +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p><i>[ +The previous wording is preserved here: +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> + +<p>Modify 24.2.7 [random.access.iterators]p7-9 as follows:</p> + +<blockquote><pre>difference_type operator-(const X& a, const X& b); +</pre> +<ol start="7"> + <li><i>Precondition</i>: there exists a value <code>n</code> of + <code>difference_type</code> such that <code>a == b + n</code>.</li> + <li><del><i>Effects</i>: <code>b == a + (b - a)</code></del></li> + <li><i>Returns</i>: <del><code>(a < b) ? distance(a,b) : + -distance(b,a)</code></del><ins><code>n</code></ins></li> +</ol> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010 Pittsburgh: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Ready for Pittsburgh. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Modify Table 105 in 24.2.7 [random.access.iterators]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 105 — Random access iterator requirements (in addition to +bidirectional iterator)</caption> + +<tbody><tr> +<th>Expression</th> +<th>Return type</th> +<th>Operational semantics</th> +<th>Assertion/note<br>pre-/post-condition</th> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>b - a</tt></td> +<td><tt>Distance</tt></td> +<td><tt><del>distance(a,b)</del></tt> +<ins>return <tt>n</tt></ins></td> +<td>pre: there exists a value <tt>n</tt> of <tt>Distance</tt> such that <tt>a + +n == b</tt>. <tt>b == a + (b - a)</tt>.</td> +</tr> + +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1089"></a>1089. Response to JP 76</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30 [thread] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-22 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#thread">issues</a> in [thread].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses JP 76</b></p> + +<p> +A description for "Throws: Nothing." are not unified. +</p> + +<p> +At the part without throw, "Throws: Nothing." should be described. +</p> + +<p> +Add "Throws: Nothing." to the following. +</p> + +<ul> +<li> +30.3.1.6 [thread.thread.static] p1 +</li> +<li> +30.4.2.1 [thread.lock.guard] p4 +</li> +<li> +30.4.2.2.1 [thread.lock.unique.cons] p6 +</li> +<li> +30.5.1 [thread.condition.condvar] p7 and p8 +</li> +<li> +30.5.2 [thread.condition.condvarany] p6, p7, p19, p21 and p25 +</li> +</ul> + +<p><i>[ +Summit: +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +Pass on to editor. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Post Summit: Editor declares this non-editorial. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-08-01 Howard provided wording: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> + +<p> +The definition of "<i>Throws:</i> Nothing." that I added is probably going to +be controversial, but I beg you to consider it seriously. +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +In C++ there are three "flow control" options for a function: +</p> + +<ol> +<li> +It can return, either with a value, or with <tt>void</tt>. +</li> +<li> +It can call a function which never returns, such as <tt>std::exit</tt> or +<tt>std::terminate</tt>. +</li> +<li> +It can throw an exception. +</li> +</ol> + +The above list can be abbreviated with: + +<ol> +<li><b>R</b>eturns.</li> +<li><b>E</b>nds program.</li> +<li><b>T</b>hrows exception.</li> +</ol> + +<p> +In general a function can have the behavior of any of these 3, or any combination +of any of these three, depending upon run time data. +</p> + +<ol> +<li><b>R</b></li> +<li><b>E</b></li> +<li><b>T</b></li> +<li><b>RE</b></li> +<li><b>RT</b></li> +<li><b>ET</b></li> +<li><b>RET</b></li> +</ol> + +<p> +A function with no throw spec, and no documentation, is in general a <b>RET</b> +function. It may return, it may end the program, or it may throw. When we +specify a function with an empty throw spec: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void f() throw(); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +We are saying that <tt>f()</tt> is an <b>RE</b> function: It may return or end +the program, but it will not throw. +</p> + +<p> +I posit that there are very few places in the library half of the standard +where we intend for functions to be able to end the program (call <tt>terminate</tt>). +And none of those places where we do say <tt>terminate</tt> could be called, +do we currently say "<i>Throws:</i> Nothing.". +</p> + +<p> +I believe that if we define "<i>Throws:</i> Nothing." to mean <b>R</b>, +we will both clarify many, many places in the standard, <em>and</em> give us a +good rationale for choosing between "<i>Throws:</i> Nothing." (<b>R</b>) +and <tt>throw()</tt> (<b>RE</b>) in the future. Indeed, this may give us motivation +to change several <tt>throw()</tt>s to "<i>Throws:</i> Nothing.". +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +I did not add the following changes as JP 76 requested as I believe we want to +allow these functions to throw: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Add a paragraph under 30.4.2.1 [thread.lock.guard] p4: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>explicit lock_guard(mutex_type& m); +</pre> + +<p><ins> +<i>Throws:</i> Nothing. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Add a paragraph under 30.4.2.2.1 [thread.lock.unique.cons] p6: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>explicit unique_lock(mutex_type& m); +</pre> + +<p><ins> +<i>Throws:</i> Nothing. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Add a paragraph under 30.5.2 [thread.condition.condvarany] p19, p21 and p25: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class Lock, class Rep, class Period> + bool wait_for(Lock& lock, const chrono::duration<Rep, Period>& rel_time); +</pre> + +<p><ins> +<i>Throws:</i> Nothing. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class Lock, class Duration, class Predicate> + bool wait_until(Lock& lock, const chrono::time_point<Clock, Duration>& rel_time, Predicate pred); +</pre> + +<p><ins> +<i>Throws:</i> Nothing. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class Lock, class Rep, class Period, class Predicate> + bool wait_for(Lock& lock, const chrono::duration<Rep, Period>& rel_time, Predicate pred); +</pre> + +<p><ins> +<i>Throws:</i> Nothing. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Defer pending further developments with exception restriction annotations. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-11 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-24 Pete moved to Open: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +A "<i>Throws:</i> Nothing" specification is not the place to say that a function +is not allowed to call <tt>exit()</tt>. While I agree with the thrust of the +proposed resolution, "doesn't throw exceptions" is a subset of "always returns +normally". If it's important to say that most library functions don't call +<tt>exit()</tt>, say so. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010 Pittsburgh: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready except for the added paragraph to 17.5.1.4 [structure.specifications]. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + + +<p> +Add a paragraph under 30.3.1.6 [thread.thread.static] p1: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>unsigned hardware_concurrency(); +</pre> + +<p> +-1- <i>Returns:</i> ... +</p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Throws:</i> Nothing. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Add a paragraph under 30.5.1 [thread.condition.condvar] p7 and p8: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>[Informational, not to be incluced in the WP: The POSIX spec allows only:</i> +</p> +<dl> +<dt><i>[EINVAL]</i></dt> +<dd><i>The value <tt>cond</tt> does not refer to an initialized condition variable. — end informational]</i></dd> +</dl> + +<pre>void notify_one(); +</pre> + +<p> +-7- <i>Effects:</i> ... +</p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Throws:</i> Nothing. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> + +<blockquote><pre>void notify_all(); +</pre> + +<p> +-8- <i>Effects:</i> ... +</p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Throws:</i> Nothing. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> + + +<p> +Add a paragraph under 30.5.2 [thread.condition.condvarany] p6 and p7: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>void notify_one(); +</pre> + +<p> +-6- <i>Effects:</i> ... +</p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Throws:</i> Nothing. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> + +<blockquote><pre>void notify_all(); +</pre> + +<p> +-7- <i>Effects:</i> ... +</p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Throws:</i> Nothing. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1094"></a>1094. Response to JP 65 and JP 66</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.5.4.3 [iostate.flags] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> P.J. Plauger <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-24 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#iostate.flags">issues</a> in [iostate.flags].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses JP 65 and JP 66</b></p> + +<p> +Switch from "unspecified-bool-type" to "explicit operator bool() const". +</p> + +<p> +Replace <tt>operator unspecified-bool-type() const;</tt>" with <tt>explicit operator bool() const;</tt> +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +We agree with the proposed resolution. +Move to Review. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change the synopis in 27.5.4 [ios]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>explicit</ins> operator <del><i>unspecified-bool-type</i></del> <ins>bool</ins>() const; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Change 27.5.4.3 [iostate.flags]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>explicit</ins> operator <del><i>unspecified-bool-type</i></del> <ins>bool</ins>() const; +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-1- <i>Returns:</i> <ins><tt>!fail()</tt></ins> <del>If <tt>fail()</tt> then a value that will evaluate +false in a boolean context; otherwise a value that will evaluate true in +a boolean context. The value type returned shall not be convertible to +int.</del> +</p> +<p> +<del>[<i>Note:</i> This conversion can be used in contexts where a bool is expected +(e.g., an <tt>if</tt> condition); however, implicit conversions (e.g., +to <tt>int</tt>) that can occur with <tt>bool</tt> are not allowed, +eliminating some sources of user error. One possible implementation +choice for this type is pointer-to-member. <i>-- end note</i>]</del> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1095"></a>1095. <i>Shared objects and the library</i> wording unclear</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17.6.3.10 [res.on.objects] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Beman Dawes <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-27 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2775.htm">N2775</a>, +<i>Small library thread-safety revisions</i>, among other changes, removed a note from +17.6.3.10 [res.on.objects] that read: +</p> + +<blockquote> +[<i>Note:</i> This prohibition against concurrent non-const access means that +modifying an object of a standard library type shared between threads +without using a locking mechanism may result in a data race. <i>--end note</i>.] +</blockquote> + +<p> +That resulted in wording which is technically correct but can only be +understood by reading the lengthy and complex 17.6.4.9 [res.on.data.races] +Data race avoidance. This has the effect of making +17.6.3.10 [res.on.objects] unclear, and has already resulted in a query +to the LWG reflector. See c++std-lib-23194. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +The proposed wording seems to need a bit of tweaking +("really bad idea" isn't quite up to standardese). +We would like feedback +as to whether the original Note's removal was intentional. +</p> +<p> +Change the phrase "is a really bad idea" +to "risks undefined behavior" and +move to Review status. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Note: Change to read: "Modifying...", Delete 'thus', move to Ready +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 17.6.3.10 [res.on.objects] as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +The behavior of a program is undefined if calls to standard library +functions from different threads may introduce a data race. The +conditions under which this may occur are specified in 17.6.4.7. +</p> +<p><ins> +[<i>Note:</i> Modifying an object of a standard library type shared between +threads risks undefined behavior unless objects of the type are explicitly +specified as being sharable without data races or the user supplies a +locking mechanism. <i>--end note</i>] +</ins></p> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1097"></a>1097. #define __STDCPP_THREADS</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.2 [support.types] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Jens Maurer <b>Opened:</b> 2009-04-03 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#support.types">issues</a> in [support.types].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses DE 18</b></p> + +<p> +Freestanding implementations do not (necessarily) have + support for multiple threads (see 1.10 [intro.multithread]). + Applications and libraries may want to optimize for the + absence of threads. I therefore propose a preprocessor + macro to indicate whether multiple threads can occur. +</p> + +<p> +There is ample prior implementation experience for this + feature with various spellings of the macro name. For + example, gcc implicitly defines <tt>_REENTRANT</tt> + if multi-threading support is selected on the compiler + command-line. +</p> + +<p> +While this is submitted as a library issue, it may be more + appropriate to add the macro in 16.8 cpp.predefined in the + core language. +</p> + +<p> +See also +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2693.html">N2693</a>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +We agree with the issue, and believe it is properly a library issue. +</p> +<p> +We prefer that the macro be conditionally defined +as part of the <tt><thread></tt> header. +</p> +<p> +Move to Review. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-25 Pete moved to Open: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +The proposed resolution adds a feature-test macro named +<tt>__STDCPP_THREADS</tt>, described after the following new text: +</p> + +<blockquote> +The standard library defines the following macros; no explicit prior inclusion +of any header file is necessary. +</blockquote> + +<p> +The correct term here is "header", not "header file". But that's minor. The real +problem is that library entities are always defined in headers. If +<tt>__STDCPP_THREADS</tt> is defined without including any header it's part of +the language and belongs with the other predefined macros in the Preprocessor +clause. +</p> + +<p> +Oddly enough, the comments from Batavia say "We prefer that the macro be +conditionally defined as part of the <tt><thread></tt> header." There's no +mention of a decision to change this. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-26 Ganesh updates wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010 Pittsburgh: Adopt Ganesh's wording and move to Review. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-03-08 Pete adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Most macros we have begin and end with with double underbars, this one +only begins with double underbars. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010 Pittsburgh: Ganesh's wording adopted and moved to Ready for Pittsburgh. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +Change 17.6.1.3 [compliance]/3: +</p> + +<blockquote> +3 The supplied version of the header <tt><cstdlib></tt> shall +declare at least the functions <tt>abort()</tt>, <tt>atexit()</tt>, and +<tt>exit()</tt> (18.5). <ins>The supplied version of the header +<tt><thread></tt> either shall meet the same requirements as for a +hosted implementation or including it shall have no effect.</ins> The +other headers listed in this table shall meet the same requirements as +for a hosted implementation. +</blockquote> + +<p> +Add the following line to table 15: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 15 — C++ headers for freestanding implementations</caption> + +<tbody><tr> +<th>Subclause</th> +<th>Header(s)</th> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td colspan="2">...</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><ins>30.3 [thread.threads] Threads</ins></td> +<td><ins><tt><thread></tt></ins></td> +</tr> + +</tbody></table> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +Add to the <tt><thread></tt> synopsis in 30.3 [thread.threads]/1 the line: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>namespace std { + +<ins>#define __STDCPP_THREADS __cplusplus</ins> + + class thread; + ... +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1098"></a>1098. definition of get_pointer_safety()</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.11 [util.dynamic.safety] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Jens Maurer <b>Opened:</b> 2009-04-03 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#util.dynamic.safety">issues</a> in [util.dynamic.safety].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses DE 18</b></p> + +<p> + In 20.9.11 [util.dynamic.safety], <tt>get_pointer_safety()</tt> purports +to define behavior for + non-safely derived pointers (3.7.4.3 [basic.stc.dynamic.safety]). However, + the cited core-language section in paragraph 4 specifies undefined behavior + for the use of such pointer values. This seems an unfortunate near-contradiction. + I suggest to specify the term <i>relaxed pointer safety</i> in + the core language section and refer to it from the library description. + This issue deals with the library part, the corresponding core issue (c++std-core-13940) + deals with the core modifications. +</p> + +<p> +See also +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2693.html">N2693</a>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +We recommend if this issue is to be moved, +the issue be moved concurrently with the cited Core issue. +</p> +<p> +We agree with the intent of the proposed resolution. +We would like input from garbage collection specialists. +</p> +<p> +Move to Open. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +The core issue is 853 and is in Ready status. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 20.9.11 [util.dynamic.safety] p16, replace the description of +<tt>get_pointer_safety()</tt> with: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<tt>pointer_safety get_pointer_safety();</tt> +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +<del><i>Returns:</i> an enumeration value indicating the implementation's treatment +of pointers that are not safely derived (3.7.4.3). Returns +<tt>pointer_safety::relaxed</tt> if pointers that are not safely derived will be +treated the same as pointers that are safely derived for the duration of +the program. Returns <tt>pointer_safety::preferred</tt> if pointers that are not +safely derived will be treated the same as pointers that are safely +derived for the duration of the program but allows the implementation to +hint that it could be desirable to avoid dereferencing pointers that are +not safely derived as described. [<i>Example:</i> <tt>pointer_safety::preferred</tt> +might be returned to detect if a leak detector is running to avoid +spurious leak reports. -- <i>end note</i>] Returns <tt>pointer_safety::strict</tt> if +pointers that are not safely derived might be treated differently than +pointers that are safely derived.</del> +</p> +<p><ins> +<i>Returns:</i> Returns <tt>pointer_safety::strict</tt> if the implementation has + strict pointer safety (3.7.4.3 [basic.stc.dynamic.safety]). It is + implementation-defined whether <tt>get_pointer_safety</tt> returns + <tt>pointer_safety::relaxed</tt> or <tt>pointer_safety::preferred</tt> if the + implementation has relaxed pointer safety + (3.7.4.3 [basic.stc.dynamic.safety]).<sup>Footnote</sup> +</ins></p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Throws:</i> nothing +</ins></p> + +<p><ins> +Footnote) <tt>pointer_safety::preferred</tt> might be returned to indicate to the + program that a leak detector is running so that the program can avoid + spurious leak reports. +</ins> +</p> + +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1100"></a>1100. <tt>auto_ptr</tt> to <tt>unique_ptr</tt> conversion</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.9.2.1 [unique.ptr.single.ctor] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2009-04-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-19</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#unique.ptr.single.ctor">issues</a> in [unique.ptr.single.ctor].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Message c++std-lib-23182 led to a discussion in which several people +expressed interest in being able to convert an <tt>auto_ptr</tt> to a +<tt>unique_ptr</tt> without the need to call <tt>release</tt>. Below is +wording to accomplish this. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Pete believes it not a good idea to separate parts of a class's definition. +Therefore, if we do this, +it should be part of <tt>unique-ptr</tt>'s specification. +</p> +<p> +Alisdair believes the lvalue overload may be not necessary. +</p> +<p> +Marc believes it is more than just sugar, +as it does ease the transition to <tt>unique-ptr</tt>. +</p> +<p> +We agree with the resolution as presented. +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07 Frankfurt +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved from Tentatively Ready to Open only because the wording needs to be +tweaked for concepts removal. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-08-01 Howard deconceptifies wording: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +I also moved the change from D.12 [depr.auto.ptr] +to 20.9.9.2 [unique.ptr.single] per the Editor's request +in Batavia (as long as I was making changes anyway). Set back +to Review. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-03-14 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +We moved +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3073.html">N3073</a> +to the formal motions page in Pittsburgh which should obsolete this issue. I've +moved this issue to NAD Editorial, solved by N3073. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +Solved by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3073.html">N3073</a>. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add to 20.9.9.2 [unique.ptr.single]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T, class D> +class unique_ptr +{ +public: +<ins> template <class U> + unique_ptr(auto_ptr<U>& u); + template <class U> + unique_ptr(auto_ptr<U>&& u);</ins> +}; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Add to 20.9.9.2.1 [unique.ptr.single.ctor]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class U> + unique_ptr(auto_ptr<U>& u); +template <class U> + unique_ptr(auto_ptr<U>&& u); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Constructs a <tt>unique_ptr</tt> with <tt>u.release()</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +<i>Postconditions:</i> <tt>get() == </tt> the value <tt>u.get()</tt> had before +the construciton, modulo any required offset adjustments resulting from the cast from +<tt>U*</tt> to <tt>T*</tt>. <tt>u.get() == nullptr</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +<i>Throws:</i> nothing. +</p> + +<p> +<i>Remarks:</i> <tt>U*</tt> shall be implicitly convertible to <tt>T*</tt> and +<tt>D</tt> shall be the same type as <tt>default_delete<T></tt>, else these +constructors shall not participate in overload resolution. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1103"></a>1103. <tt>system_error</tt> constructor postcondition overly strict</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 19.5.6.2 [syserr.syserr.members] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2009-04-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +19.5.6.2 [syserr.syserr.members] says: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>system_error(error_code ec, const string& what_arg); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Constructs an object of class <tt>system_error</tt>. +</p> +<p> +<i>Postconditions:</i> <tt>code() == ec</tt> and <tt>strcmp(runtime_error::what(), what_arg.c_str()) == 0</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +However the intent is for: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>std::system_error se(std::errc::not_a_directory, "In FooBar"); +... +se.what(); <font color="#C80000">// returns something along the lines of:</font> + <font color="#C80000">// "In FooBar: Not a directory"</font> +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +The way the constructor postconditions are set up now, to achieve both +conformance, and the desired intent in the <tt>what()</tt> string, the +<tt>system_error</tt> constructor must store "In FooBar" in the base class, +and then form the desired output each time <tt>what()</tt> is called. Or +alternatively, store "In FooBar" in the base class, and store the desired +<tt>what()</tt> string in the derived <tt>system_error</tt>, and override +<tt>what()</tt> to return the string in the derived part. +</p> + +<p> +Both of the above implementations seem suboptimal to me. In one I'm computing +a new string every time <tt>what()</tt> is called. And since <tt>what()</tt> +can't propagate exceptions, the client may get a different string on different +calls. +</p> + +<p> +The second solution requires storing two strings instead of one. +</p> + +<p> +What I would like to be able to do is form the desired <tt>what()</tt> string +once in the <tt>system_error</tt> constructor, and store <em>that</em> in the +base class. Now I'm: +</p> + +<ol> +<li>Computing the desired <tt>what()</tt> only once.</li> +<li>The base class <tt>what()</tt> definition is sufficient and nothrow.</li> +<li>I'm not storing multiple strings.</li> +</ol> + +<p> +This is smaller code, smaller data, and faster. +</p> + +<p> +<tt>ios_base::failure</tt> has the same issue. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Comments about this change received favorable comments from the <tt>system_error</tt> +designers. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +We agree with the proposed resolution. +</p> +<p> +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 19.5.6.2 [syserr.syserr.members], change the following constructor postconditions: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>system_error(error_code ec, const string& what_arg); +</pre> +<blockquote> +-2- <i>Postconditions:</i> <tt>code() == ec</tt> +and <tt><del>strcmp(runtime_error::what(), what_arg.c_str()) == 0</del> +<ins>string(what()).find(what_arg) != string::npos</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> + +<pre>system_error(error_code ec, const char* what_arg); +</pre> +<blockquote> +-4- <i>Postconditions:</i> <tt>code() == ec</tt> +and <tt><del>strcmp(runtime_error::what(), what_arg) == 0</del> +<ins>string(what()).find(what_arg) != string::npos</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> + +<pre>system_error(error_code ec); +</pre> +<blockquote> +-6- <i>Postconditions:</i> <tt>code() == ec</tt> +<del>and <tt>strcmp(runtime_error::what(), ""</tt></del>. +</blockquote> + +<pre>system_error(int ev, const error_category& ecat, const string& what_arg); +</pre> +<blockquote> +-8- <i>Postconditions:</i> <tt>code() == error_code(ev, ecat)</tt> +and <tt><del>strcmp(runtime_error::what(), what_arg.c_str()) == 0</del> +<ins>string(what()).find(what_arg) != string::npos</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> + +<pre>system_error(int ev, const error_category& ecat, const char* what_arg); +</pre> +<blockquote> +-10- <i>Postconditions:</i> <tt>code() == error_code(ev, ecat)</tt> +and <tt><del>strcmp(runtime_error::what(), what_arg) == 0</del> +<ins>string(what()).find(what_arg) != string::npos</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> + +<pre>system_error(int ev, const error_category& ecat); +</pre> +<blockquote> +-12- <i>Postconditions:</i> <tt>code() == error_code(ev, ecat)</tt> +<del>and <tt>strcmp(runtime_error::what(), "") == 0</tt></del>. +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +In 19.5.6.2 [syserr.syserr.members], change the description of <tt>what()</tt>: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>const char *what() const throw(); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +-14- <i>Returns:</i> An NTBS incorporating <del><tt>runtime_error::what()</tt> and +<tt>code().message()</tt></del> <ins>the arguments supplied in the constructor</ins>. +</p> +<p> +[<i>Note:</i> <del>One possible implementation would be:</del> +<ins>The return NTBS might take the form: <tt>what_arg + ": " + code().message()</tt></ins> +</p> +<blockquote><pre><del> +if (msg.empty()) { + try { + string tmp = runtime_error::what(); + if (code()) { + if (!tmp.empty()) + tmp += ": "; + tmp += code().message(); + } + swap(msg, tmp); + } catch(...) { + return runtime_error::what(); + } +return msg.c_str(); +</del></pre></blockquote> +<p> +— <i>end note</i>] +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +In 27.5.2.1.1 [ios::failure], change the synopsis: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>namespace std { + class ios_base::failure : public system_error { + public: + explicit failure(const string& msg, const error_code& ec = io_errc::stream); + explicit failure(const char* msg, const error_code& ec = io_errc::stream); + <del>virtual const char* what() const throw();</del> + }; +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +In 27.5.2.1.1 [ios::failure], change the description of the constructors: +</p> + +<blockquote> + +<pre>explicit failure(const string& msg, , const error_code& ec = io_errc::stream); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +-3- <i>Effects:</i> Constructs an object of class <tt>failure</tt> +<ins>by constructing the base class with <tt>msg</tt> and <tt>ec</tt></ins>. +</p> +<p> +<del>-4- <i>Postcondition:</i> <tt>code() == ec</tt> and <tt>strcmp(what(), msg.c_str()) == 0</tt></del> +</p> +</blockquote> + +<pre>explicit failure(const char* msg, const error_code& ec = io_errc::stream); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +-5- <i>Effects:</i> Constructs an object of class <tt>failure</tt> +<ins>by constructing the base class with <tt>msg</tt> and <tt>ec</tt></ins>. +</p> +<p> +<del>-6- <i>Postcondition:</i> <tt>code() == ec and strcmp(what(), msg) == 0</tt></del> +</p> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +In 27.5.2.1.1 [ios::failure], remove <tt>what</tt> (the base class definition +need not be repeated here). +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre><del>const char* what() const;</del> +</pre> +<blockquote> +<del>-7- <i>Returns:</i> The message <tt>msg</tt> with which the exception was created.</del> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1104"></a>1104. <tt>basic_ios::move</tt> should accept lvalues</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.5.4.2 [basic.ios.members] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2009-04-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#basic.ios.members">issues</a> in [basic.ios.members].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +With the rvalue reference changes in +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2844.html">N2844</a> +<tt>basic_ios::move</tt> no longer has the most convenient signature: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void move(basic_ios&& rhs); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +This signature should be changed to accept lvalues. It does not need to be +overloaded to accept rvalues. This is a special case that only derived clients +will see. The generic <tt>move</tt> still needs to accept rvalues. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Tom prefers, on general principles, to provide both overloads. +Alisdair agrees. +</p> +<p> +Howard points out that there is no backward compatibility issue +as this is new to C++0X. +</p> +<p> +We agree that both overloads should be provided, +and Howard will provide the additional wording. +Move to Open. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-23 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Added overload, moved to Review. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add a signature to the existing prototype in the synopsis of 27.5.4 [ios] +and in 27.5.4.2 [basic.ios.members]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>void move(basic_ios& rhs);</ins> +void move(basic_ios&& rhs); +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1108"></a>1108. thread.req.exception overly constrains implementations</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30.2.2 [thread.req.exception] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Christopher Kohlhoff <b>Opened:</b> 2009-04-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The current formulation of 30.2.2 [thread.req.exception]/2 reads: +</p> +<blockquote> +The error_category of the <tt>error_code</tt> reported by such an +exception's <tt>code()</tt> member function is as specified in the error +condition Clause. +</blockquote> +<p> +This constraint on the code's associated <tt>error_categor</tt> means an +implementation must perform a mapping from the system-generated +error to a <tt>generic_category()</tt> error code. The problems with this +include: +</p> + +<ul> +<li> +The mapping is always performed, even if the resultant value is + never used. +</li> +<li> +<p> +The original error produced by the operating system is lost. +</p> +</li> +</ul> +<p> +The latter was one of Peter Dimov's main objections (in a private +email discussion) to the original <tt>error_code</tt>-only design, and led to +the creation of <tt>error_condition</tt> in the first place. Specifically, +<tt>error_code</tt> and <tt>error_condition</tt> are intended to perform the following +roles: +</p> +<ul> +<li> +<tt>error_code</tt> holds the original error produced by the operating + system. +</li> +<li> +<tt>error_condition</tt> and the generic category provide a set of well + known error constants that error codes may be tested against. +</li> +</ul> +<p> +Any mapping determining correspondence of the returned error code to +the conditions listed in the error condition clause falls under the +"latitude" granted to implementors in 19.5.1.5 [syserr.errcat.objects]. +(Although obviously their latitude is restricted a little by the +need to match the right error condition when returning an error code +from a library function.) +</p> +<p> +It is important that this <tt>error_code/error_condition</tt> usage is done +correctly for the thread library since it is likely to set the +pattern for future TR libraries that interact with the operating +system. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +Move to Open, and recommend the issue be deferred until after the next +Committee Draft is issued. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 post-Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 30.2.2 [thread.req.exception]/2: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-2- <del>The <tt>error_category</tt> (19.5.1.1) of the <tt>error_code</tt> reported by +such an exception's <tt>code()</tt> member function +is as specified in the error condition Clause.</del> +<ins> +The <tt>error_code</tt> reported by such an exception's <tt>code()</tt> member +function shall compare equal to one of the conditions specified in +the function's error condition Clause. [<i>Example:</i> When the thread +constructor fails: +</ins> +</p> +<blockquote><pre><ins> +ec.category() == implementation-defined // probably system_category +ec == errc::resource_unavailable_try_again // holds true +</ins></pre></blockquote> + +<p><ins> +— <i>end example</i>] +</ins></p> + +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1110"></a>1110. Is <tt>for_each</tt> overconstrained?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.2.4 [alg.foreach] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-04-29 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#alg.foreach">issues</a> in [alg.foreach].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Quoting working paper for reference (25.2.4 [alg.foreach]): +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template<InputIterator Iter, Callable<auto, Iter::reference> Function> + requires CopyConstructible<Function> + Function for_each(Iter first, Iter last, Function f); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +1 Effects: Applies f to the result of dereferencing every iterator in the + range [first,last), starting from first and proceeding to last - 1. +</p> +<p> +2 Returns: f. +</p> +<p> +3 Complexity: Applies f exactly last - first times. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +P2 implies the passed object <tt>f</tt> should be invoked at each stage, rather than +some copy of <tt>f</tt>. This is important if the return value is to usefully +accumulate changes. So the requirements are an object of type <tt>Function</tt> can +be passed-by-value, invoked multiple times, and then return by value. In +this case, <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> is sufficient. This would open support for +move-only functors, which might become important in concurrent code as you +can assume there are no other references (copies) of a move-only type and so +freely use them concurrently without additional locks. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +See further discussion starting with c++std-lib-23686. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Pete suggests we may want to look at this in a broader context +involving other algorithms. +We should also consider the implications of parallelism. +</p> +<p> +Move to Open, and recommend the issue be deferred until after the next +Committee Draft is issued. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10-14 Daniel de-conceptified the proposed resolution. +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +The note in 25.1 [algorithms.general]/9 already says the right thing: +</p> +<blockquote> +Unless otherwise specified, algorithms that take function objects +as arguments are permitted to copy those function objects freely. +</blockquote> +<p> +So we only need to ensure that the wording for <tt>for_each</tt> is sufficiently +clear, which is the intend of the following rewording. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10-15 Daniel proposes: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<ul> +<li> +<p> +Add a new Requires clause just after the prototype declaration (25.2.4 [alg.foreach]): +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>Function</tt> shall be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> +( [moveconstructible]), <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> is not required.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</li> +<li> +<p> +Change 25.2.4 [alg.foreach]/2 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Returns:</i> <ins>std::move(</ins>f<ins>)</ins>. +</blockquote> +</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 post-Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Tentatively Ready, using Daniel's wording without the portion +saying "CopyConstructible is not required". +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10-27 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I see that during the Santa Cruz meeting the originally proposed addition +</p> + +<blockquote> +, <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> is not required. +</blockquote> + +<p> +was removed. I don't think that this removal was a good idea. The combination +of 25.1 [algorithms.general]/9 +</p> + +<blockquote> +[<i>Note:</i> Unless otherwise specified, algorithms that take function objects +as arguments are permitted to copy those function objects freely.[..] +</blockquote> + +<p> +with the fact that <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> is a refinement <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> +makes it necessary that such an explicit statement is given. Even the +existence of the usage of <tt>std::move</tt> in the <i>Returns</i> clause doesn't +help much, because this would still be well-formed for a <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> +without move constructor. Let me add that the originally proposed +addition reflects current practice in the standard, e.g. 25.3.9 [alg.unique]/5 +usages a similar terminology. +</p> + +<p> +For similar wording need in case for auto_ptr see <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#973">973</a>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Howard: Moved from Tentatively Ready to Open. +]</i></p> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-20 Howard restores "not <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>" to the spec. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-22 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<ul> +<li> +<p> +Add a new Requires clause just after the prototype declaration (25.2.4 [alg.foreach]): +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>Function</tt> shall meet the requirements of +<tt>MoveConstructible</tt> ( [moveconstructible]). +<tt>Function</tt> need not meet the requirements of +<tt>CopyConstructible</tt> ( [copyconstructible]).</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</li> +<li> +<p> +Change 25.2.4 [alg.foreach]/2 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Returns:</i> <ins>std::move(</ins>f<ins>)</ins>. +</blockquote> +</li> +</ul> + + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1113"></a>1113. <tt>bitset::to_string</tt> could be simplified</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.5 [template.bitset] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-05-09 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#template.bitset">issues</a> in [template.bitset].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#853">853</a> our resolution is changing the signature by adding two +defaulting arguments to 3 calls. In principle, this means that ABI breakage +is not an issue, while API is preserved. +</p> +<p> +With that observation, it would be very nice to use the new ability to +supply default template parameters to function templates to collapse all 3 +signatures into 1. In that spirit, this issue offers an alternative resolution +than that of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#853">853</a>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +Move to Open, +and look at the issue again after <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#853">853</a> has been accepted. +We further recommend this be deferred until after the next Committee Draft. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 post-Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<ol type="A"> +<li> +<p> +In 20.5 [template.bitset]/1 (class bitset) ammend: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>template <class charT <ins>= char</ins>, + class traits <ins>= char_traits<charT></ins>, + class Allocator <ins>= allocator<charT></ins>> + basic_string<charT, traits, Allocator> + to_string(charT zero = charT('0'), charT one = charT('1')) const; +<del>template <class charT, class traits> + basic_string<charT, traits, allocator<charT> > to_string() const; +template <class charT> + basic_string<charT, char_traits<charT>, allocator<charT> > to_string() const; +basic_string<char, char_traits<char>, allocator<char> > to_string() const;</del> +</pre></blockquote> +</li> +<li> +<p> +In 20.5.2 [bitset.members] prior to p35 ammend: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>template <class charT <ins>= char</ins>, + class traits <ins>= char_traits<charT></ins>, + class Allocator <ins>= allocator<charT></ins>> + basic_string<charT, traits, Allocator> + to_string(charT zero = charT('0'), charT one = charT('1')) const; +</pre></blockquote> +</li> +<li> +Strike 20.5.2 [bitset.members] paragraphs 37 -> 39 (including signature +above 37) +</li> +</ol> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1114"></a>1114. Type traits underspecified</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.7 [meta] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2009-05-12 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#meta">issues</a> in [meta].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p> +Related to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#975">975</a> and <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1023">1023</a>. +</p> + +<p> +The current wording in 20.7.1 [meta.rqmts] is still unclear concerning +it's requirements on the type traits classes regarding ambiguities. +Specifically it's unclear +</p> + +<ul> +<li> +if a predicate trait (20.7.4 [meta.unary], 20.7.6 [meta.rel]) could derive from both +<tt>true_type</tt>/<tt>false_type</tt>. +</li> +<li> +if any of the type traits (20.7.1 [meta.rqmts], 20.7.4 [meta.unary], 20.7.6 [meta.rel]) could ambiguously derive +from the same specified result type. +</li> +<li> +if any of the type traits (20.7.1 [meta.rqmts], 20.7.4 [meta.unary], 20.7.6 [meta.rel]) could derive from other +<tt>integral_constant</tt> types making the contained names ambiguous +</li> +<li> +if any of the type traits (20.7.1 [meta.rqmts], 20.7.4 [meta.unary], 20.7.6 [meta.rel]) could have other base +classes that contain members hiding the name of the result type members +or make the contained member names ambiguous. +</li> +</ul> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia (2009-05): +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Alisdair would prefer to factor some of the repeated text, +but modulo a corner case or two, +he believes the proposed wording is otherwise substantially correct. +</p> +<p> +Move to Open. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 post-Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p><i>[ +The usage of the notion of a <i>BaseCharacteristic</i> below might be +useful in other places - e.g. to define the base class relation in 20.8.4 [refwrap], 20.8.13 [func.memfn], or 20.8.14.2 [func.wrap.func]. In this case it's definition should probably +be moved to Clause 17 +]</i></p> + + +<ol> +<li> +<p> +Change 20.7.1 [meta.rqmts]/1 as indicated: +</p> +<blockquote> +[..] It shall be <tt>DefaultConstructible</tt>, <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>, and publicly +<ins>and unambiguously</ins> derived, directly or indirectly, from +<ins>its <i>BaseCharacteristic</i>, which is</ins> a specialization of the +template <tt>integral_constant</tt> (20.6.3), with the arguments to the template +<tt>integral_constant</tt> determined by the requirements for the particular +property being described. <ins>The member names of the +<i>BaseCharacteristic</i> shall be unhidden and unambiguously +available in the <i>UnaryTypeTrait</i>.</ins> +</blockquote> +</li> +<li> +<p> +Change 20.7.1 [meta.rqmts]/2 as indicated: +</p> +<blockquote> +[..] It shall be <tt>DefaultConstructible</tt>, <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>, and publicly +<ins>and unambiguously</ins> derived, directly or indirectly, from +<del>an instance</del> <ins>its <i>BaseCharacteristic</i>, which is a +specialization</ins> of the template <tt>integral_constant</tt> (20.6.3), with +the arguments to the template <tt>integral_constant</tt> determined by the +requirements for the particular relationship being described. <ins>The +member names of the <i>BaseCharacteristic</i> shall be unhidden +and unambiguously available in the <i>BinaryTypeTrait</i>.</ins> +</blockquote> +</li> +<li> +<p> +Change 20.7.4 [meta.unary]/2 as indicated: +</p> +<blockquote> +Each of these templates shall be a <i>UnaryTypeTrait</i> (20.6.1), +<del>publicly derived directly or indirectly from <tt>true_type</tt> if the +corresponding condition is true, otherwise from <tt>false_type</tt></del> +<ins>where its <i>BaseCharacteristic</i> shall be <tt>true_type</tt> if the +corresponding condition is true, otherwise <tt>false_type</tt></ins>. +</blockquote> +</li> +<li> +<p> +Change 20.7.6 [meta.rel]/2 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +Each of these templates shall be a <i>BinaryTypeTrait</i> (20.6.1), +<del>publicly derived directly or indirectly from <tt>true_type</tt> if the +corresponding condition is true, otherwise from <tt>false_type</tt></del> +<ins>where its <i>BaseCharacteristic</i> shall be <tt>true_type</tt> if the +corresponding condition is true, otherwise <tt>false_type</tt></ins>. +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1116"></a>1116. Literal constructors for tuple</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.4.2 [tuple.tuple] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-05-23 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-20</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#tuple.tuple">issues</a> in [tuple.tuple].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +It is not currently possible to construct <tt>tuple</tt> literal values, +even if the elements are all literal types. This is because parameters +are passed to constructor by reference. +</p> +<p> +An alternative would be to pass all constructor arguments by value, where it +is known that *all* elements are literal types. This can be determined with +concepts, although note that the negative constraint really requires +factoring out a separate concept, as there is no way to provide an 'any of +these fails' constraint inline. +</p> +<p> +Note that we will have similar issues with <tt>pair</tt> (and +<tt>tuple</tt> constructors from <tt>pair</tt>) although I am steering +clear of that class while other constructor-related issues settle. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<del>NAD Editorial</del><ins>Resolved</ins>. Solved by +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2994.html">N2994</a>. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Ammend the tuple class template declaration in 20.4.2 [tuple.tuple] as +follows +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Add the following concept: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>auto concept AllLiteral< typename ... Types > { + requires LiteralType<Types>...; +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +ammend the constructor +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>template <class... UTypes> + requires AllLiteral<Types...> + && Constructible<Types, UTypes>... + explicit tuple(UTypes...);</ins> + +template <class... UTypes> + requires <ins>!AllLiteral<Types...></ins> + <ins>&&</ins> Constructible<Types, UTypes&&>... + explicit tuple(UTypes&&...); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +ammend the constructor +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>template <class... UTypes> + requires AllLiteral<Types...> + && Constructible<Types, UTypes>... + tuple(tuple<UTypes...>);</ins> + +template <class... UTypes> + requires <ins>!AllLiteral<Types...></ins> + <ins>&&</ins> Constructible<Types, const UTypes&>... + tuple(const tuple<UTypes...>&); +</pre></blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +Update the same signatures in 20.4.2.1 [tuple.cnstr], paras 3 and 5. +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1117"></a>1117. tuple copy constructor</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.4.2.1 [tuple.cnstr] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-05-23 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-20</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#tuple.cnstr">issues</a> in [tuple.cnstr].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The copy constructor for the <tt>tuple</tt> template is constrained. This seems an +unusual strategy, as the copy constructor will be implicitly deleted if the +constraints are not met. This is exactly the same effect as requesting an +<tt>=default;</tt> constructor. The advantage of the latter is that it retains +triviality, and provides support for <tt>tuple</tt>s as literal types if issue +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1116">1116</a> is also accepted. +</p> +<p> +Actually, it might be worth checking with core if a constrained copy +constructor is treated as a constructor template, and as such does not +suppress the implicit generation of the copy constructor which would hide +the template in this case. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-27 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +This would solve one half of the suggested changes in <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#801">801</a>. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<del>NAD Editorial</del><ins>Resolved</ins>. Solved by +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2994.htm">N2994</a>. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 20.4.2 [tuple.tuple] and 20.4.2.1 [tuple.cnstr] p4: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>requires CopyConstructible<Types>...</del> tuple(const tuple&)<ins> = default</ins>; +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1118"></a>1118. tuple query APIs do not support cv-qualification</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.4.2.5 [tuple.helper] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-05-23 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#tuple.helper">issues</a> in [tuple.helper].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The APIs <tt>tuple_size</tt> and <tt>tuple_element</tt> do not support +cv-qualified <tt>tuple</tt>s, <tt>pair</tt>s or <tt>array</tt>s. +</p> +<p> +The most generic solution would be to supply partial specializations once +for each cv-type in the <tt>tuple</tt> header. However, requiring this header for +cv-qualified <tt>pair</tt>s/<tt>array</tt>s seems unhelpful. The BSI editorial +suggestion (UK-198/US-69, +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2533.html">N2533</a>) +to merge <tt>tuple</tt> into <tt><utility></tt> would help with <tt>pair</tt>, +but not <tt>array</tt>. That might be resolved by making a dependency between the +<tt><array></tt> header and <tt><utility></tt>, or simply recognising +the dependency be fulfilled in a Remark. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-24 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +All <tt>tuple_size</tt> templates with a base class need to derive publicly, e.g. +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <IdentityOf T> class tuple_size< const T > : + <ins>public</ins> tuple_size<T> {}; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +The same applies to the tuple_element class hierarchies. +</p> +<p> +What is actually meant with the comment +</p> +<blockquote> +this solution relies on 'metafunction forwarding' to inherit the +nested typename type +</blockquote> +<p> +? +</p> +<p> +I ask, because all base classes are currently unconstrained and their +instantiation is invalid in the constrained context of the <tt>tuple_element</tt> partial +template specializations. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-24 Alisdair adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I think a better solution might be to ask Pete editorially to change all +declarations of tupling APIs to use the struct specifier instead of class. +</p> +<p> +"metafunction forwarding" refers to the MPL metafunction protocol, where a +metafunction result is declared as a nested typedef with the name "type", +allowing metafunctions to be chained by means of inheritance. It is a +neater syntax than repeatedly declaring a typedef, and inheritance syntax is +slightly nicer when it comes to additional typename keywords. +</p> +<p> +The constrained template with an unconstrained base is a good observation +though. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 post-Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Open, Alisdair to provide wording. Once wording is +provided, Howard will move to Review. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-03-28 Daniel deconceptified wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Post-Rapperswil - Daniel provides wording: +]</i></p> + + +<p> +The below given P/R reflects the discussion from the Rapperswil meeting that the wording should not constrain +implementation freedom to realize the actual issue target. Thus the original code form was replaced by +normative words. +</p> +<p> +While preparing this wording it turned out that several <tt>tuple_size</tt> specializations as +that of <tt>pair</tt> and <tt>array</tt> are underspecified, because the underlying type of the member +value is not specified except that it is an integral type. For the specializations we could introduce a +canonical one - like <tt>size_t</tt> - or we could use the same type as the specialization of the +unqualified type uses. The following wording follows the second approach. +</p> +<p> +The wording refers to N3126. +</p> + +<blockquote> +Moved to Tentatively Ready after 6 positive votes on c++std-lib. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<ol> +<li>Change 20.4.1 [tuple.general]/2, header <tt><tuple></tt> synopsis, as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>// 20.4.2.5, tuple helper classes: +template <class T> class tuple_size; // undefined +<ins>template <class T> class tuple_size<const T>;</ins> +<ins>template <class T> class tuple_size<volatile T>;</ins> +<ins>template <class T> class tuple_size<const volatile T>;</ins> +<ins></ins> +template <class... Types> class tuple_size<tuple<Types...> >; + +template <size_t I, class T> class tuple_element; // undefined +<ins>template <size_t I, class T> class tuple_element<I, const T>;</ins> +<ins>template <size_t I, class T> class tuple_element<I, volatile T>;</ins> +<ins>template <size_t I, class T> class tuple_element<I, const volatile T>;</ins> +<ins></ins> +template <size_t I, class... Types> class tuple_element<I, tuple<Types...> >; +</pre></blockquote> +</li> +<li>Add the end of subclause 20.4.2.5 [tuple.helper] insert the following two paragraphs: +<blockquote><pre><ins>template <class T> class tuple_size<const T>;</ins> +<ins>template <class T> class tuple_size<volatile T>;</ins> +<ins>template <class T> class tuple_size<const volatile T>;</ins> +</pre><blockquote> +<ins>Let <em>TS</em> denote <tt>tuple_size<T></tt> of the <em>cv</em>-unqualified type <tt>T</tt>. +Then each of the three templates shall meet the UnaryTypeTrait requirements (20.7.1) with a BaseCharacteristic of +<tt>integral_constant<remove_cv<decltype(<em>TS</em>::value)>::type, <em>TS</em>::value></tt>.</ins> +</blockquote></blockquote> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>template <size_t I, class T> class tuple_element<I, const T>;</ins> +<ins>template <size_t I, class T> class tuple_element<I, volatile T>;</ins> +<ins>template <size_t I, class T> class tuple_element<I, const volatile T>;</ins> +</pre><blockquote> +<ins>Let <em>TE</em> denote <tt>tuple_element<I, T></tt> of the <em>cv</em>-unqualified type <tt>T</tt>. Then each of the +three templates shall meet the TransformationTrait requirements (20.7.1) with a member typedef <tt>type</tt> that shall name the +same type as the following type:</ins> +<ul> +<li><ins>for the first specialization, the type <tt>add_const<<em>TE</em>::type>::type</tt>,</ins></li> +<li><ins>for the second specialization, the type <tt>add_volatile<<em>TE</em>::type>::type</tt>, and</ins></li> +<li><ins>for the third specialization, the type <tt>add_cv<<em>TE</em>::type>::type</tt></ins></li> +</ul> +</blockquote></blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1122"></a>1122. Ratio values should be constexpr</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.6.1 [ratio.ratio] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-05-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-20</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#ratio.ratio">issues</a> in [ratio.ratio].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The values <tt>num</tt> and <tt>den</tt> in the <tt>ratio</tt> template +should be declared <tt>constexpr</tt>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<del>NAD Editorial</del><ins>Resolved</ins>. Solved by +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2994.htm">N2994</a>. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +20.6.1 [ratio.ratio] +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>namespace std { + template <intmax_t N, intmax_t D = 1> + class ratio { + public: + static const<ins>expr</ins> intmax_t num; + static const<ins>expr</ins> intmax_t den; + }; +} +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1123"></a>1123. no requirement that standard streams be flushed</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.5.2.1.6 [ios::Init] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> James Kanze <b>Opened:</b> 2009-05-14 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#ios::Init">issues</a> in [ios::Init].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +As currently formulated, the standard doesn't require that there +is ever a flush of <tt>cout</tt>, etc. (This implies, for example, that +the classical hello, world program may have no output.) In the +current draft +(<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2798.pdf">N2798</a>), +there is a requirement that the objects +be constructed before <tt>main</tt>, and before the dynamic +initialization of any non-local objects defined after the +inclusion of <tt><iostream></tt> in the same translation unit. The only +requirement that I can find concerning flushing, however, is in +27.5.2.1.6 [ios::Init], where the destructor of the last +<tt>std::ios_base::Init</tt> object flushes. But there is, as far as I +can see, no guarantee that such an object ever exists. +</p> +<p> +Also, the wording in [iostreams.objects] says that: +</p> +<blockquote> +The objects +are constructed and the associations are established at some +time prior to or during the first time an object of class +<tt>ios_base::Init</tt> is constructed, and in any case before the body +of main begins execution. +</blockquote> +<p> +In 27.5.2.1.6 [ios::Init], however, as an +effect of the constructor, it says that +</p> +<blockquote> +If <tt>init_cnt</tt> is zero, +the function stores the value one in <tt>init_cnt</tt>, then constructs +and initializes the objects <tt>cin</tt>, <tt>cout</tt>, <tt>cerr</tt>, <tt>clog</tt> +<tt>wcin</tt>, <tt>wcout</tt>, <tt>wcerr</tt>, and <tt>wclog</tt>" +</blockquote> + +<p> +which seems to forbid earlier +construction. +</p> + +<p> +(Note that with these changes, the exposition only "<tt>static +int init_cnt</tt>" in <tt>ios_base::Init</tt> can be dropped.) +</p> +<p> +Of course, a determined programmer can still inhibit the +flush with things like: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>new std::ios_base::Init ; // never deleted +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +or (in a function): +</p> +<blockquote><pre>std::ios_base::Init ensureConstruction ; +// ... +exit( EXIT_SUCCESS ) ; +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +Perhaps some words somewhere to the effect that all +<tt>std::ios_base::Init</tt> objects should have static lifetime +would be in order. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Ready. Some editorial changes are expected (in addition to the +proposed wording) to remove <tt>init_cnt</tt> from <tt>Init</tt>. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 27.4 [iostream.objects]/2: +</p> + +<blockquote> +-2- The objects are constructed and the associations are established at +some time prior to or during the first time an object of class +<tt>ios_base::Init</tt> is constructed, and in any case before the body +of main begins execution.<sup>292</sup> The objects are not destroyed +during program execution.<sup>293</sup> +<del>If a translation unit includes +<tt><iostream></tt> or explicitly constructs an +<tt>ios_base::Init</tt> object, these stream objects shall be +constructed before dynamic initialization of non-local objects defined +later in that translation unit.</del> +<ins>The results of including <tt><iostream></tt> in a translation +unit shall be as if <tt><iostream></tt> defined an instance of +<tt>ios_base::Init</tt> with static lifetime. Similarly, the entire +program shall behave as if there were at least one instance of +<tt>ios_base::Init</tt> with static lifetime.</ins> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 27.5.2.1.6 [ios::Init]/3: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>Init(); +</pre> +<blockquote> +-3- <i>Effects:</i> Constructs an object of class <tt>Init</tt>. +<del>If <tt>init_cnt</tt> is zero, the function stores the value one in +<tt>init_cnt</tt>, then constructs and initializes the objects +<tt>cin</tt>, <tt>cout</tt>, <tt>cerr</tt>, <tt>clog</tt> (27.4.1), +<tt>wcin</tt>, <tt>wcout</tt>, <tt>wcerr</tt>, and <tt>wclog</tt> +(27.4.2). In any case, the function then adds one to the value stored in +<tt>init_cnt</tt>.</del> +<ins>Constructs and initializes the objects <tt>cin</tt>, <tt>cout</tt>, +<tt>cerr</tt>, <tt>clog</tt>, <tt>wcin</tt>, <tt>wcout</tt>, +<tt>wcerr</tt> and <tt>wclog</tt> if they have not already been +constructed and initialized.</ins> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 27.5.2.1.6 [ios::Init]/4: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>~Init(); +</pre> +<blockquote> +-4- <i>Effects:</i> Destroys an object of class <tt>Init</tt>. +<del>The function subtracts one from the value stored in <tt>init_cnt</tt> and, +if the resulting stored value is one,</del> +<ins>If there are no other instances of the class still in +existance,</ins> +calls <tt>cout.flush()</tt>, +<tt>cerr.flush()</tt>, <tt>clog.flush()</tt>, <tt>wcout.flush()</tt>, +<tt>wcerr.flush()</tt>, <tt>wclog.flush()</tt>. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1126"></a>1126. <tt>istreambuff_iterator::equal</tt> needs a const & parameter</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 24.6.3.5 [istreambuf.iterator::equal] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-05-28 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#istreambuf.iterator::equal">issues</a> in [istreambuf.iterator::equal].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The <tt>equal</tt> member function of <tt>istreambuf_iterator</tt> is +declared <tt>const</tt>, but takes its argument by non-const reference. +</p> +<p> +This is not compatible with the <tt>operator==</tt> free function overload, which is +defined in terms of calling <tt>equal</tt> yet takes both arguments by reference to +const. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +The proposed wording is consistent with <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#110">110</a> with status TC1. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-02 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Set to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Ammend in both:<br> +24.6.3 [istreambuf.iterator]<br> +24.6.3.5 [istreambuf.iterator::equal]<br> +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>bool equal(<ins>const </ins>istreambuf_iterator& b) const; +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1130"></a>1130. <tt>copy_exception</tt> name misleading</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.8.5 [propagation] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Peter Dimov <b>Opened:</b> 2009-05-13 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index-open.html#propagation">active issues</a> in [propagation].</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#propagation">issues</a> in [propagation].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The naming of <tt>std::copy_exception</tt> misleads almost everyone +(experts included!) to think that it is the function that copies an +<tt>exception_ptr</tt>: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>exception_ptr p1 = current_exception(); +exception_ptr p2 = copy_exception( p1 ); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +But this is not at all what it does. The above actually creates an +<tt>exception_ptr p2</tt> that contains a copy of <tt>p1</tt>, not of +the exception to which <tt>p1</tt> refers! +</p> +<p> +This is, of course, all my fault; in my defence, I used <tt>copy_exception</tt> +because I was unable to think of a better name. +</p> +<p> +But I believe that, based on what we've seen so far, <em>any</em> other name would be better. +</p> +<p> +Therefore, I propose <tt>copy_exception</tt> to be renamed to +<tt>create_exception</tt>: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class E> exception_ptr create_exception(E e); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +with the following explanatory paragraph after it: +</p> + +<blockquote> +Creates an <tt>exception_ptr</tt> that refers to a copy of <tt>e</tt>. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-13 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +What about +</p> +<blockquote><pre>make_exception_ptr +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +in similarity to <tt>make_pair</tt> and <tt>make_tuple</tt>, <tt>make_error_code</tt> and +<tt>make_error_condition</tt>, or <tt>make_shared</tt>? Or, if a stronger symmetry to +<tt>current_exception</tt> is preferred: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>make_exception +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +We have not a single <tt>create_*</tt> function in the library, it was always +<tt>make_*</tt> used. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-05-13 Peter adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<tt>make_exception_ptr</tt> works for me. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-06-02 Thomas J. Gritzan adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +To avoid surprises and unwanted recursion, how about making a call to +<tt>std::make_exception_ptr</tt> with an <tt>exception_ptr</tt> illegal? +</p> +<p> +It might work like this: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>template<class E> +exception_ptr make_exception_ptr(E e); +template<> +exception_ptr make_exception_ptr<exception_ptr>(exception_ptr e) = delete; +</pre></blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Review for the time being. The subgroup thinks this is a good +idea, but doesn't want to break compatibility unnecessarily if someone +is already shipping this. Let's talk to Benjamin and PJP tomorrow to +make sure neither objects. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-16 Jonathan Wakely adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +GCC 4.4 shipped with <tt>copy_exception</tt> but we could certainly keep that +symbol in the library (but not the headers) so it can still be found +by any apps foolishly relying on the experimental C++0x mode being ABI +stable. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-16 Peter adopts wording supplied by Daniel. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-16 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<ol> +<li> +<p> +Change 18.8 [support.exception]/1, header <tt><exception></tt> +synopsis as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>exception_ptr current_exception(); +void rethrow_exception [[noreturn]] (exception_ptr p); +template<class E> exception_ptr <del>copy_exception</del><ins>make_exception_ptr</ins>(E e); +</pre></blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 18.8.5 [propagation]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template<class E> exception_ptr <del>copy_exception</del><ins>make_exception_ptr</ins>(E e); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-11- <i>Effects:</i> <ins>Creates an <tt>exception_ptr</tt> that refers +to a copy of <tt>e</tt>,</ins> as if +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>try { + throw e; +} catch(...) { + return current_exception(); +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p>...</p> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 30.6.5 [futures.promise]/7 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Effects:</i> if the associated state of <tt>*this</tt> is not ready, stores an exception +object of type <tt>future_error</tt> with an error code of <tt>broken_promise</tt> as if by +<tt>this->set_exception(<del>copy_exception</del><ins>make_exception_ptr</ins>( +future_error(future_errc::broken_promise))</tt>. Destroys ... +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1131"></a>1131. C++0x does not need <tt>alignment_of</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.7.4.3 [meta.unary.prop] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Niels Dekker <b>Opened:</b> 2009-06-01 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#meta.unary.prop">issues</a> in [meta.unary.prop].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The <tt>alignment_of</tt> template is no longer necessary, now that the +core language will provide <tt>alignof</tt>. Scott Meyers raised this +issue at comp.std.c++, +<a href="http://groups.google.com/group/comp.std.c++/browse_thread/thread/9b020306e803f08a">C++0x: alignof vs. alignment_of</a>, +May 21, 2009. In a reply, Daniel Krügler pointed out that +<tt>alignof</tt> was added to the working paper <i>after</i> +<tt>alignment_of</tt>. So it appears that <tt>alignment_of</tt> is only +part of the current Working Draft +(<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2857.pdf">N2857</a>) +because it is in TR1. +</p> +<p> +Having both <tt>alignof</tt> and <tt>alignment_of</tt> would cause +unwanted confusion. In general, I think TR1 functionality should not be +brought into C++0x if it is entirely redundant with other C++0x language +or library features. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-16 Chris adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I would like to suggest the following new wording for this issue, based on +recent discussions. Basically this doesn't delete <tt>alignment_of</tt>, it just +makes it clear that it is just a wrapper for <tt>alignof</tt>. This deletes the +first part of the proposed resolution, changes the second part by leaving in +<tt>alignof(T)</tt> but changing the precondition and leaves the 3rd part +unchanged. +</p> + +<p> +Suggested Resolution: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Change the first row of Table 44 ("Type property queries"), from Type properties +20.7.4.3 [meta.unary.prop]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 44 — Type property queries</caption> +<tbody><tr> +<td> +<tt>template <class T> struct alignment_of;</tt> +</td> +<td> +<tt>alignof(T)</tt>.<br> +<i>Precondition:</i> <del><tt>T</tt> shall be a complete type, a reference type, +or an array of unknown bound, but shall not be a function type or (possibly +cv-qualified) <tt>void</tt>.</del> <ins><tt>alignof(T)</tt> shall be defined</ins> +</td> +</tr> + +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change text in Table 51 ("Other transformations"), from Other transformations +20.7.7.6 [meta.trans.other], as follows: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 51 — Other transformations</caption> +<tbody><tr><td>...<tt>aligned_storage;</tt></td> +<td> +<tt>Len</tt> shall not be zero. <tt>Align</tt> shall be equal to +<tt><del>alignment_of<T>::value</del> <ins>alignof(T)</ins></tt> for some +type <tt>T</tt> or to <i>default-alignment</i>. +</td> +<td>...</td> +</tr></tbody></table> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-01-30 Alisdair proposes that Chris' wording be moved into the proposed wording +section and tweaks it on the way. +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Original proposed wording saved here: +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +Remove from Header <type_traits> synopsis 20.7.2 [meta.type.synop]: +</p> +<blockquote><pre><del>template <class T> struct alignment_of;</del> +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Remove the first row of Table 44 ("Type property queries"), from +Type properties 20.7.4.3 [meta.unary.prop]: +</p> +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 44 — Type property queries</caption> +<tbody><tr> +<td><del><tt>template <class T> struct alignment_of;</tt></del></td> +<td><del><tt>alignof(T)</tt>.</del><br> +<del><i>Precondition:</i> <tt>T</tt> shall be a complete type, a reference +type, or an array of unknown bound, but shall not be a function type or +(possibly cv-qualified) <tt>void</tt>.</del> +</td> +</tr> +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change text in Table 51 ("Other transformations"), from Other +transformations 20.7.7.6 [meta.trans.other], as follows: +</p> +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 51 — Other transformations</caption> +<tbody><tr><td>...<tt>aligned_storage;</tt></td> +<td> +<tt>Len</tt> shall not be zero. Align shall be equal to +<tt><del>alignment_of<T>::value</del> <ins>alignof(T)</ins></tt> for some +type <tt>T</tt> or to <i>default-alignment</i>. +</td> +<td>...</td> +</tr></tbody></table> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-01-30 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +Change the first row of Table 43 ("Type property queries"), from Type properties +20.7.4.3 [meta.unary.prop]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 43 — Type property queries</caption> +<tbody><tr> +<td> +<tt>template <class T> struct alignment_of;</tt> +</td> +<td> +<tt>alignof(T)</tt>.<br> +<i>Precondition:</i> <del><tt>T</tt> shall be a complete type, a reference type, +or an array of unknown bound, but shall not be a function type or (possibly +cv-qualified) <tt>void</tt>.</del> <ins><tt>alignof(T)</tt> is a valid +expression (5.3.6 [expr.alignof])</ins> +</td> +</tr> + +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change text in Table 51 ("Other transformations"), from Other transformations +20.7.7.6 [meta.trans.other], as follows: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 51 — Other transformations</caption> +<tbody><tr><td>...<tt>aligned_storage;</tt></td> +<td> +<tt>Len</tt> shall not be zero. <tt>Align</tt> shall be equal to +<tt><del>alignment_of<T>::value</del> <ins>alignof(T)</ins></tt> for some +type <tt>T</tt> or to <i>default-alignment</i>. +</td> +<td>...</td> +</tr></tbody></table> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1133"></a>1133. Does N2844 break current specification of list::splice?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.3.3.5 [forwardlist.ops], 23.3.4.4 [list.ops] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-05-09 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#forwardlist.ops">issues</a> in [forwardlist.ops].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +IIUC, +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2844.html">N2844</a> +means that lvalues will no longer bind to rvalue references. +Therefore, the current specification of <tt>list::splice</tt> (list +operations 23.3.4.4 [list.ops]) will be a breaking change of behaviour for existing +programs. That is because we changed the signature to swallow via an rvalue +reference rather than the lvalue reference used in 03. +</p> +<p> +Retaining this form would be safer, requiring an explicit move when splicing +from lvalues. However, this will break existing programs. +We have the same problem with <tt>forward_list</tt>, although without the risk of +breaking programs so here it might be viewed as a positive feature. +</p> +<p> +The problem signatures: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>void splice_after(const_iterator position, forward_list<T,Alloc>&& x); +void splice_after(const_iterator position, forward_list<T,Alloc>&& x, + const_iterator i); +void splice_after(const_iterator position, forward_list<T,Alloc>&& x, + const_iterator first, const_iterator last); + +void splice(const_iterator position, list<T,Alloc>&& x); +void splice(const_iterator position, list<T,Alloc>&& x, + const_iterator i); +void splice(const_iterator position, list<T,Alloc>&& x, + const_iterator first, const_iterator last); +</pre></blockquote> + +<b>Possible resolutions:</b> + +<p> +Option A. Add an additional (non-const) lvalue-reference +overload in each case +</p> +<p> +Option B. Change rvalue reference back to (non-const) +lvalue-reference overload in each case +</p> +<p> +Option C. Add an additional (non-const) lvalue-reference +overload in just the <tt>std::list</tt> cases +</p> +<p> +I think (B) would be very unfortunate, I really like the <tt>forward_list</tt> +behaviour in (C) but feel (A) is needed for consistency. +</p> +<p> +My actual preference would be NAD, ship with this as a breaking change as it +is a more explicit interface. I don't think that will fly though! +</p> + +<p> +See the thread starting with c++std-lib-23725 for more discussion. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10-27 Christopher Jefferson provides proposed wording for Option C. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-12-08 Jonathan Wakely adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +As Bill Plauger pointed out, <tt>list::merge</tt> needs similar treatment. +</p> +<p><i>[ +Wording updated. +]</i></p> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-12-13 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 23.3.4 [list] +</p> + +<p> +Add lvalue overloads before rvalue ones: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>void splice(const_iterator position, list<T,Allocator>& x);</ins> +void splice(const_iterator position, list<T,Allocator>&& x); +<ins>void splice(const_iterator position, list<T,Allocator>& x, const_iterator i);</ins> +void splice(const_iterator position, list<T,Allocator>&& x, const_iterator i); +<ins>void splice(const_iterator position, list<T,Allocator>& x, + const_iterator first, const_iterator last);</ins> +void splice(const_iterator position, list<T,Allocator>&& x, + const_iterator first, const_iterator last); +<ins>void merge(list<T,Allocator>& x); +template <class Compare> void merge(list<T,Allocator>& x, Compare comp);</ins> +void merge(list<T,Allocator>&& x); +template <class Compare> void merge(list<T,Allocator>&& x, Compare comp); + +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +In 23.3.4.4 [list.ops], similarly add lvalue overload before each rvalue one: +</p> +<p> +(After paragraph 2) +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>void splice(const_iterator position, list<T,Allocator>& x);</ins> +void splice(const_iterator position, list<T,Allocator>&& x); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +(After paragraph 6) +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>void splice(const_iterator position, list<T,Allocator>& x, const_iterator i);</ins> +void splice(const_iterator position, list<T,Allocator>&& x, <ins>const_</ins>iterator i); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +(After paragraph 10) +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>void splice(const_iterator position, list<T,Allocator>& x, + const_iterator first, const_iterator last);</ins> +void splice(const_iterator position, list<T,Allocator>&& x, + <ins>const_</ins>iterator first, <ins>const_</ins>iterator last); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +In 23.3.4.4 [list.ops], after paragraph 21 +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>void merge(list<T,Allocator>& x); +template <class Compare> void merge(list<T,Allocator>& x, Compare comp);</ins> +void merge(list<T,Allocator>&& x); +template <class Compare> void merge(list<T,Allocator>&& x, Compare comp); +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1134"></a>1134. Redundant specification of stdint.h, fenv.h, tgmath.h, and maybe complex.h</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> X [stdinth], X [fenv], 26.8 [c.math], X [cmplxh] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Robert Klarer <b>Opened:</b> 2009-05-26 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +This is probably editorial. +</p> +<p> +The following items should be removed from the draft, because they're +redundant with Annex D, and they arguably make some *.h headers +non-deprecated: +</p> +<p> +X [stdinth] (regarding <tt><stdint.h></tt>) +</p> +<p> +X [fenv] (regarding <tt><fenv.h></tt> +</p> +<p> +Line 3 of 26.8 [c.math] (regarding <tt><tgmath.h></tt>) +</p> +<p> +X [cmplxh] (regarding <tt><complex.h></tt>, though the note in this subclause is not redundant) +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-06-10 Ganesh adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +While searching for <tt>stdint</tt> in the CD, I found that <tt><stdint.h></tt> is also +mentioned in 3.9.1 [basic.fundamental] /5. It guess it should refer to +<tt><cstdint></tt> instead. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Real issue. Maybe just editorial, maybe not. Move to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Remove the section X [stdinth]. +</p> +<p> +Remove the section X [fenv]. +</p> +<p> +Remove 26.8 [c.math], p3: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<del>-3- The header <tt><tgmath.h></tt> effectively includes the headers <tt><complex.h></tt> +and <tt><math.h></tt>.</del> +</blockquote> +<p> +Remove the section X [cmplxh]. +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1135"></a>1135. <tt>exception_ptr</tt> should support contextual conversion to <tt>bool</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.8.5 [propagation] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2007-06-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-19</p> +<p><b>View other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index-open.html#propagation">active issues</a> in [propagation].</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#propagation">issues</a> in [propagation].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +As of +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2857.pdf">N2857</a> +18.8.5 [propagation]/5, the implementation-defined type +<tt>exception_ptr</tt> does provide the following ways to check whether +it is a null value: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>void f(std::exception_ptr p) { + p == nullptr; + p == 0; + p == exception_ptr(); +} +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +This is rather cumbersome way of checking for the null value +and I suggest to require support for evaluation in a boolean +context like so: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void g(std::exception_ptr p) { + if (p) {} + !p; +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. Note to editor: considering putting in a cross-reference +to 4 [conv], paragraph 3, which defines the phrase +"contextually converted to <tt>bool</tt>". +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-03-14 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +We moved +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3073.html">N3073</a> +to the formal motions page in Pittsburgh which should obsolete this issue. I've +moved this issue to NAD Editorial, solved by N3073. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +Solved by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3073.html">N3073</a>. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In section 18.8.5 [propagation] insert a new paragraph between p.5 and p.6: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<ins> +An object <tt>e</tt> of type <tt>exception_ptr</tt> can be contextually converted to <tt>bool</tt>. +The effect shall be as if <tt>e != exception_ptr()</tt> had been evaluated in place +of <tt>e</tt>. There shall be no implicit conversion to arithmetic type, to +enumeration type or to pointer type. +</ins> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1136"></a>1136. Incomplete specification of <tt>nested_exception::rethrow_nested()</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.8.6 [except.nested] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2007-06-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#except.nested">issues</a> in [except.nested].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +It was recently mentioned in a newsgroup article +<a href="http://groups.google.de/group/comp.std.c++/msg/f82022aff68edf3d">http://groups.google.de/group/comp.std.c++/msg/f82022aff68edf3d</a> +that the specification of the member function <tt>rethrow_nested()</tt> of the +class <tt>nested_exception</tt> is incomplete, specifically it remains unclear +what happens, if member <tt>nested_ptr()</tt> returns a null value. In +18.8.6 [except.nested] we find only the following paragraph related to that: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>void rethrow_nested() const; // [[noreturn]] +</pre> +<blockquote> +-4- <i>Throws:</i> the stored exception captured by this <tt>nested_exception</tt> object. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +<p> +This is a problem, because it is possible to create an object of +<tt>nested_exception</tt> with exactly such a state, e.g. +</p> +<blockquote><pre>#include <exception> +#include <iostream> + +int main() try { + std::nested_exception e; // OK, calls current_exception() and stores it's null value + e.rethrow_nested(); // ? + std::cout << "A" << std::endl; +} +catch(...) { + std::cout << "B" << std::endl; +} +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +I suggest to follow the proposal of the reporter, namely to invoke +<tt>terminate()</tt> if <tt>nested_ptr()</tt> return a null value of <tt>exception_ptr</tt> instead +of relying on the fallback position of undefined behavior. This would +be consistent to the behavior of a <tt>throw;</tt> statement when no +exception is being handled. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change around 18.8.6 [except.nested]/4 as indicated: +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +-4- <i>Throws:</i> the stored exception captured by this <tt>nested_exception</tt> +object<ins>, if <tt>nested_ptr() != nullptr</tt></ins> +</p> +<p> +<ins>- <i>Remarks:</i> If <tt>nested_ptr() == nullptr</tt>, <tt>terminate()</tt> +shall be called.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1137"></a>1137. Return type of <tt>conj</tt> and <tt>proj</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.4.9 [cmplx.over] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Marc Steinbach <b>Opened:</b> 2009-06-11 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#cmplx.over">issues</a> in [cmplx.over].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In clause 1, the Working Draft +(<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2857.pdf">N2857</a>) +specifies overloads of the +functions +</p> +<blockquote><pre>arg, conj, imag, norm, proj, real +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +for non-complex arithmetic types (<tt>float</tt>, <tt>double</tt>, +<tt>long double</tt>, and integers). +The only requirement (clause 2) specifies effective type promotion of arguments. +</p> +<p> +I strongly suggest to add the following requirement on the return types: +</p> +<blockquote> +All the specified overloads must return real (i.e., non-complex) values, +specifically, the nested <tt>value_type</tt> of effectively promoted arguments. +</blockquote> + +<p> +(This has no effect on <tt>arg</tt>, <tt>imag</tt>, <tt>norm</tt>, <tt>real</tt>: +they are real-valued anyway.) +</p> +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +Mathematically, <tt>conj()</tt> and <tt>proj()</tt>, like the transcendental functions, are +complex-valued in general but map the (extended) real line to itself. +In fact, both functions act as identity on the reals. +A typical user will expect <tt>conj()</tt> and <tt>proj()</tt> to preserve this essential +mathematical property in the same way as <tt>exp()</tt>, <tt>sin()</tt>, etc. +A typical use of <tt>conj()</tt>, e.g., is the generic scalar product of n-vectors: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<typename T> +inline T +scalar_product(size_t n, T const* x, T const* y) { + T result = 0; + for (size_t i = 0; i < n; ++i) + result += x[i] * std::conj(y[i]); + return result; +} +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +This will work equally well for real and complex floating-point types <tt>T</tt> if +<tt>conj()</tt> returns <tt>T</tt>. It will not work with real types if <tt>conj()</tt> +returns complex values. +</p> +<p> +Instead, the implementation of <tt>scalar_product</tt> becomes either less efficient +and less useful (if a complex result is always returned), or unnecessarily +complicated (if overloaded versions with proper return types are defined). +In the second case, the real-argument overload of <tt>conj()</tt> cannot be used. +In fact, it must be avoided. +</p> +<p> +Overloaded <tt>conj()</tt> and <tt>proj()</tt> are principally needed in generic programming. +All such use cases will benefit from the proposed return type requirement, +in a similar way as the <tt>scalar_product</tt> example. +The requirement will not harm use cases where a complex return value +is expected, because of implicit conversion to complex. +Without the proposed return type guarantee, I find overloaded versions +of <tt>conj()</tt> and <tt>proj()</tt> not only useless but actually troublesome. +</p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-11 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Insert a new paragraph after 26.4.9 [cmplx.over]/2: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<ins> +All of the specified overloads shall have a return type which is the nested <tt>value_type</tt> of +the effectively cast arguments. +</ins> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1138"></a>1138. unusual return value for operator+</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.4.8.1 [string::op+] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-06-12 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Many of the <tt>basic_string operator+</tt> overloads return an rvalue-reference. Is +that really intended? +</p> +<p> +I'm considering it might be a mild performance tweak to avoid making +un-necessary copies of a cheaply movable type, but it opens risk to dangling +references in code like: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>auto && s = string{"x"} + string{y}; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +and I'm not sure about: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>auto s = string{"x"} + string{y}; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10-11 Howard updated <i>Returns:</i> clause for each of these. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-05 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Strike the <tt>&&</tt> from the return type in the following function +signatures: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +21.3 [string.classes] p2 Header Synopsis +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class charT, class traits, class Allocator> + basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator><del>&&</del> + operator+(basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>&& lhs, + const basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>& rhs); + +template<class charT, class traits, class Allocator> + basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator><del>&&</del> + operator+(const basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>& lhs, + basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>&& rhs); + +template<class charT, class traits, class Allocator> + basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator><del>&&</del> + operator+(basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>&& lhs, + basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>&& rhs); + + +template<class charT, class traits, class Allocator> + basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator><del>&&</del> + operator+(const charT* lhs, + basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>&& rhs); + +template<class charT, class traits, class Allocator> + basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator><del>&&</del> + operator+(charT lhs, basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>&& rhs); + +template<class charT, class traits, class Allocator> + basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator><del>&&</del> + operator+(basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>&& lhs, + const charT* rhs); + +template<class charT, class traits, class Allocator> + basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator><del>&&</del> + operator+(basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>&& lhs, charT rhs); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +21.4.8.1 [string::op+] +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class charT, class traits, class Allocator> + basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator><del>&&</del> + operator+(basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>&& lhs, + const basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>& rhs); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt><ins>std::move(</ins>lhs.append(rhs)<ins>)</ins></tt> +</blockquote> +<pre>template<class charT, class traits, class Allocator> + basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator><del>&&</del> + operator+(const basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>& lhs, + basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>&& rhs); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt><ins>std::move(</ins>rhs.insert(0, lhs)<ins>)</ins></tt> +</blockquote> +<pre>template<class charT, class traits, class Allocator> + basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator><del>&&</del> + operator+(basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>&& lhs, + basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>&& rhs); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt><ins>std::move(</ins>lhs.append(rhs)<ins>)</ins></tt> [<i>Note:</i> Or equivalently +<tt><ins>std::move(</ins>rhs.insert(0, lhs)<ins>)</ins></tt> — <i>end note</i>] +</blockquote> +<pre>template<class charT, class traits, class Allocator> + basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator><del>&&</del> + operator+(const charT* lhs, + basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>&& rhs); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt><ins>std::move(</ins>rhs.insert(0, lhs)<ins>)</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +<pre>template<class charT, class traits, class Allocator> + basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator><del>&&</del> + operator+(charT lhs, basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>&& rhs); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt><ins>std::move(</ins>rhs.insert(0, 1, lhs)<ins>)</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +<pre>template<class charT, class traits, class Allocator> + basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator><del>&&</del> + operator+(basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>&& lhs, + const charT* rhs); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt><ins>std::move(</ins>lhs.append(rhs)<ins>)</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +<pre>template<class charT, class traits, class Allocator> + basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator><del>&&</del> + operator+(basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>&& lhs, charT rhs); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt><ins>std::move(</ins>lhs.append(1, rhs)<ins>)</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1144"></a>1144. "thread safe" is undefined</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.5 [support.start.term] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> LWG <b>Opened:</b> 2009-06-16 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#support.start.term">issues</a> in [support.start.term].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p><b>Addresses UK 187</b></p> + +<p> +The term "thread safe" is not defined nor used in this context +anywhere else in the standard. +</p> + +<p><b>Suggested action:</b></p> +<p> +Clarify the meaning of "thread safe". +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +The "thread safe" language has already been change in the WP. It was +changed to "happen before", but the current WP text is still a little +incomplete: "happen before" is binary, but the current WP text only +mentions one thing. +</p> +<p> +Move to Ready. +</p> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +For the following functions in 18.5 [support.start.term]. +</p> +<blockquote><pre><code> +extern "C" int at_quick_exit(void (*f)(void)); +extern "C++" int at_quick_exit(void (*f)(void)); +</code></pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Edit paragraph 10 as follows. +The intent is +to provide the other half of the happens before relation; +to note indeterminate ordering; +and to clean up some formatting. +</p> +<blockquote><p> +<i>Effects:</i> +The <code>at_quick_exit()</code> functions +register the function pointed to by <code>f</code> +to be called without arguments when <code>quick_exit</code> is called. +It is unspecified whether a call to <code>at_quick_exit()</code> +that does not <del>happen-before</del> <ins>happen before</ins> (1.10) +<ins>all calls to <code>quick_exit</code></ins> +will succeed. +[<i>Note:</i> +the <code>at_quick_exit()</code> functions +shall not introduce a data race (17.6.4.7). +<del>exitnote</del> +<ins>—<i>end note</i>]</ins> +<ins> +[<i>Note:</i> +The order of registration may be indeterminate +if <code>at_quick_exit</code> was called from more than one thread. +—<i>end note</i>] +</ins> +[<i>Note:</i> The <code>at_quick_exit</code> registrations +are distinct from the <code>atexit</code> registrations, +and applications may need to call both registration functions +with the same argument. +—<i>end note</i>] +</p></blockquote> + +<p> +For the following function. +</p> +<blockquote><pre><code> +void quick_exit [[noreturn]] (int status) +</code></pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Edit paragraph 13 as follows. +The intent is to note that thread-local variables may be different. +</p> +<blockquote><p> +<i>Effects:</i> +Functions registered by calls to <code>at_quick_exit</code> +are called in the reverse order of their registration, +except that a function shall be called +after any previously registered functions +that had already been called at the time it was registered. +Objects shall not be destroyed as a result of calling <code>quick_exit</code>. +If control leaves a registered function called by <code>quick_exit</code> +because the function does not provide a handler for a thrown exception, +<code>terminate()</code> shall be called. +<ins> +[<i>Note:</i> +Functions registered by one thread may be called by any thread, +and hence should not rely on the identity of thread-storage-duration objects. +—<i>end note</i>] +</ins> +After calling registered functions, +<code>quick_exit</code> shall call <code>_Exit(status)</code>. +[<i>Note:</i> +The standard file buffers are not flushed. +See: ISO C 7.20.4.4. +—<i>end note</i>] +</p></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1151"></a>1151. Behavior of the library in the presence of threads is incompletely specified</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17 [library] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> LWG <b>Opened:</b> 2009-06-28 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-19</p> +<p><b>View other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index-open.html#library">active issues</a> in [library].</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#library">issues</a> in [library].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses US 63</b></p> + + <p><b>Description</b></p> + <p>The behavior of the library in the presence of threads + is incompletely specified.</p> + <p>For example, if thread 1 assigns to <tt>X</tt>, then writes data + to file <tt>f</tt>, which is read by thread 2, and then accesses + variable <tt>X</tt>, is thread 2 guaranteed to be able to see the + value assigned to <tt>X</tt> by thread 1? In other words, does the + write of the data "happen before" the read?</p> + <p>Another example: does simultaneous access using <tt>operator + at()</tt> to different characters in the same non-const string + really introduce a data race?</p> +<p><b>Suggestion</b></p> +<p><b>Notes</b></p><p>17 SG: should go to threads group; misclassified in document +</p> + + <p>Concurrency SG: Create an issue. Hans will look into it.</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to "Open". Hans and the rest of the concurrency working group will +study this. We can't make progress without a thorough review and a +paper. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010 Pittsburgh: Moved to NAD Editorial. Rationale added below. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +Solved by +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3069.html">N3069</a>. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1152"></a>1152. expressions parsed differently than intended</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.2.2.2 [facet.num.put.virtuals] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Seungbeom Kim <b>Opened:</b> 2009-06-27 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#facet.num.put.virtuals">issues</a> in [facet.num.put.virtuals].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In Table 73 -- Floating-point conversions, 22.4.2.2.2 [facet.num.put.virtuals], +in +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2914.pdf">N2914</a>, +we have the following entries: +</p> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 73 — Floating-point conversions</caption> +<tbody><tr> +<th>State</th> <th><tt>stdio</tt> equivalent</th> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><tt>floatfield == ios_base::fixed | ios_base::scientific && !uppercase</tt></td> +<td align="center"><tt>%a</tt></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>floatfield == ios_base::fixed | ios_base::scientific</tt></td> +<td align="center"><tt>%A</tt></td> +</tr> +</tbody></table> + +<p> +These expressions are supposed to mean: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>floatfield == (ios_base::fixed | ios_base::scientific) && !uppercase +floatfield == (ios_base::fixed | ios_base::scientific) +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +but technically parsed as: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>((floatfield == ios_base::fixed) | ios_base::scientific) && (!uppercase) +((floatfield == ios_base::fixed) | ios_base::scientific) +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +and should be corrected with additional parentheses, as shown above. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10-28 Howard: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change Table 83 — Floating-point conversions in 22.4.2.2.2 [facet.num.put.virtuals]: +</p> + +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 83 — Floating-point conversions</caption> +<tbody><tr> +<th>State</th> <th><tt>stdio</tt> equivalent</th> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><tt>floatfield == <ins>(</ins>ios_base::fixed | ios_base::scientific<ins>)</ins> && !uppercase</tt></td> +<td align="center"><tt>%a</tt></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>floatfield == <ins>(</ins>ios_base::fixed | ios_base::scientific<ins>)</ins></tt></td> +<td align="center"><tt>%A</tt></td> +</tr> +</tbody></table> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1157"></a>1157. Local types can now instantiate templates</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17.6.3.2.1 [namespace.std] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> LWG <b>Opened:</b> 2009-06-28 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p><b>Addresses UK 175</b></p> + +<p><b>Description</b></p> + <p>Local types can + now be used to instantiate templates, but don't have + external linkage.</p> +<p><b>Suggestion</b></p> + <p>Remove the reference to external linkage.</p> + +<p><b>Notes</b></p> +<p>We accept the proposed solution. Martin will draft an issue.</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-07-28 Alisdair provided wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +17.6.3.2.1 [namespace.std] +</p> +<p> +Strike "of external linkage" in p1 and p2: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-1- The behavior of a C++ program is undefined if it adds declarations or +definitions to namespace <tt>std</tt> or to a namespace within namespace <tt>std</tt> +unless otherwise specified. A program may add a concept map for any +standard library concept or a template specialization for any standard +library template to namespace <tt>std</tt> only if the declaration depends on a +user-defined type <del>of external linkage</del> and the specialization meets the +standard library requirements for the original template and is not +explicitly prohibited.<sup>179</sup> +</p> + +<p> +-2- The behavior of a C++ program is undefined if it declares +</p> +<ul> +<li> +an explicit specialization of any member function of a standard library +class template, or +</li> +<li> +an explicit specialization of any member function template of a standard +library class or class template, or +</li> +<li> +an explicit or partial specialization of any member class template of a +standard library class or class template. +</li> +</ul> +<p> +A program may explicitly instantiate a template defined in the standard +library only if the declaration depends on the name of a user-defined +type <del>of external linkage</del> and the instantiation meets the standard +library requirements for the original template. +</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1158"></a>1158. Encouragement to use monotonic clock</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30.2.4 [thread.req.timing] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> LWG <b>Opened:</b> 2009-06-28 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#thread.req.timing">issues</a> in [thread.req.timing].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p><b>Addresses UK 322, US 96</b></p> + +<p><b>Description</b></p> + <p>Not all systems + can provide a monotonic clock. How are they expected to + treat a _for function?</p> +<p><b>Suggestion</b></p> + <p>Add at least a note explaining the intent + for systems that do not support a monotonic clock.</p> + +<p><b>Notes</b></p> +<p>Create an issue, together with UK 96. Note that the specification as is + already allows a non-monotonic clock due to the word “should” rather than + “shall”. If this wording is kept, a footnote should be added to make the + meaning clear.</p> + +<p><i>[ 2009-06-29 Beman provided a proposed resolution. ] </i></p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10-31 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Set to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-24 Pete moved to Open: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +LWG 1158's proposed resolution replaces the ISO-specified normative term +"should" with "are encouraged but not required to", which presumably means the +same thing, but has no ISO normative status. The WD used the latter formulation +in quite a few non-normative places, but only three normative ones. I've changed +all the normative uses to "should". +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-03-06 Beman updates wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010 Pittsburgh: Moved to Ready. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p><i>Change Timing specifications 30.2.4 [thread.req.timing] as indicated:</i></p> + +<p> +The member functions whose names end in <tt>_for</tt> take an argument that +specifies a relative time. Implementations should use a monotonic clock to +measure time for these functions. <ins>[<i>Note:</i> Implementations are not +required to use a monotonic clock because such a clock may be unavailable. +— <i>end note</i>]</ins> +</p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1159"></a>1159. Unclear spec for <tt>resource_deadlock_would_occur</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30.4.2.2.2 [thread.lock.unique.locking] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> LWG <b>Opened:</b> 2009-06-28 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#thread.lock.unique.locking">issues</a> in [thread.lock.unique.locking].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1219">1219</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p><b>Addresses UK 327, UK 328</b></p> + +<p><b>UK 327 Description</b></p> + <p>Not clear what + the specification for error condition + <tt>resource_deadlock_would_occur</tt> means. It is perfectly + possible for this thread to own the mutex without setting + owns to true on this specific lock object. It is also + possible for lock operations to succeed even if the thread + does own the mutex, if the mutex is recursive. Likewise, if + the mutex is not recursive and the mutex has been locked + externally, it is not always possible to know that this + error condition should be raised, depending on the host + operating system facilities. It is possible that 'i.e.' was + supposed to be 'e.g.' and that suggests that recursive + locks are not allowed. That makes sense, as the + exposition-only member owns is boolean and not a integer to + count recursive locks.</p> + +<p><b>UK 327 Suggestion</b></p> + <p>Add a precondition <tt>!owns</tt>. Change the 'i.e.' + in the error condition to be 'e.g.' to allow for this + condition to propogate deadlock detection by the host OS.</p> +<p><b>UK 327 Notes</b></p> +<p>Create an issue. Assigned to Lawrence Crowl. Note: not sure what try_lock + means for recursive locks when you are the owner. POSIX has language on + this, which should ideally be followed. Proposed fix is not quite right, for + example, try_lock should have different wording from lock.</p> + +<p><b>UK 328 Description</b></p> + + <p>There is a missing precondition that <tt>owns</tt> + is true, or an <tt>if(owns)</tt> test is missing from the effect + clause</p> +<p><b>UK 328 Suggestion</b></p> + <p>Add a + precondition that <tt>owns == true</tt>. Add an error condition to + detect a violation, rather than yield undefined behaviour.</p> +<p><b>UK 328 Notes</b></p> +<p>Handle in same issue as UK 327. Also uncertain that the proposed resolution + is the correct one.</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-11 Alisdair notes that this issue is very closely related to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1219">1219</a>, +if not a dup. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-12 Anthony provided wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010 Pittsburgh: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Wording updated and moved to Ready for Pittsburgh. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Modify 30.4.2.2.2 [thread.lock.unique.locking] p3 to say: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>void lock();</pre> +<blockquote> +<p>...</p> +<p> +3 <i>Throws:</i> <ins>Any exception thrown by <tt>pm->lock()</tt>. +<tt>std::system_error</tt> if an exception is required (30.2.2 [thread.req.exception]). +<tt>std::system_error</tt> with an error condition of +<tt>operation_not_permitted</tt> if <tt>pm</tt> is <tt>0</tt>. +<tt>std::system_error</tt> with an error condition of +<tt>resource_deadlock_would_occur</tt> if on entry <tt>owns</tt> is <tt>true</tt>.</ins> +<del><tt>std::system_error</tt> when the +postcondition cannot be achieved.</del> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Remove 30.4.2.2.2 [thread.lock.unique.locking] p4 (Error condition clause). +</p> + +<p> +Modify 30.4.2.2.2 [thread.lock.unique.locking] p8 to say: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>bool try_lock();</pre> +<blockquote> +<p>...</p> +<p> +8 <i>Throws:</i> <ins>Any exception thrown by <tt>pm->try_lock()</tt>. +<tt>std::system_error</tt> if an exception is required (30.2.2 [thread.req.exception]). +<tt>std::system_error</tt> with an error condition of +<tt>operation_not_permitted</tt> if <tt>pm</tt> is <tt>0</tt>. +<tt>std::system_error</tt> with an error condition of +<tt>resource_deadlock_would_occur</tt> if on entry <tt>owns</tt> is <tt>true</tt>.</ins> +<del><tt>std::system_error</tt> when the +postcondition cannot be achieved.</del> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Remove 30.4.2.2.2 [thread.lock.unique.locking] p9 (Error condition clause). +</p> + +<p> +Modify 30.4.2.2.2 [thread.lock.unique.locking] p13 to say: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template <class Clock, class Duration> + bool try_lock_until(const chrono::time_point<Clock, Duration>& abs_time);</pre> +<blockquote> +<p>...</p> +<p> +13 <i>Throws:</i> <ins>Any exception thrown by <tt>pm->try_lock_until()</tt>. +<tt>std::system_error</tt> if an exception is required (30.2.2 [thread.req.exception]). +<tt>std::system_error</tt> with an error condition of +<tt>operation_not_permitted</tt> if <tt>pm</tt> is <tt>0</tt>. +<tt>std::system_error</tt> with an error condition of +<tt>resource_deadlock_would_occur</tt> if on entry <tt>owns</tt> is <tt>true</tt>.</ins> +<del><tt>std::system_error</tt> when the +postcondition cannot be achieved.</del> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Remove 30.4.2.2.2 [thread.lock.unique.locking] p14 (Error condition clause). +</p> + +<p> +Modify 30.4.2.2.2 [thread.lock.unique.locking] p18 to say: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template <class Rep, class Period> + bool try_lock_for(const chrono::duration<Rep, Period>& rel_time);</pre> +<blockquote> +<p>...</p> +<p> +18 <i>Throws:</i> <ins>Any exception thrown by <tt>pm->try_lock_for()</tt>. +<tt>std::system_error</tt> if an exception is required (30.2.2 [thread.req.exception]). +<tt>std::system_error</tt> with an error condition of +<tt>operation_not_permitted</tt> if <tt>pm</tt> is <tt>0</tt>. +<tt>std::system_error</tt> with an error condition of +<tt>resource_deadlock_would_occur</tt> if on entry <tt>owns</tt> is <tt>true</tt>.</ins> +<del><tt>std::system_error</tt> when the +postcondition cannot be achieved.</del> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Remove 30.4.2.2.2 [thread.lock.unique.locking] p19 (Error condition clause). +</p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1170"></a>1170. String <i>char-like types</i> no longer PODs</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.1 [strings.general] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Beman Dawes <b>Opened:</b> 2009-06-22 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p><b>Addresses UK 218</b></p> + +<p>Prior to the introduction of constant expressions into the library, +<tt>basic_string</tt> elements had to be POD types, and thus had to be both trivially +copyable and standard-layout. This ensured that they could be memcpy'ed and +would be compatible with other libraries and languages, particularly the C +language and its library.</p> +<p> +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2349.pdf">N2349</a>, +Constant Expressions in the Standard Library Revision 2, changed the +requirement in 21/1 from "POD type" to "literal type". That change had the +effect of removing the trivially copyable and standard-layout requirements from +<tt>basic_string</tt> elements.</p> +<p>This means that <tt>basic_string</tt> elements no longer are guaranteed to be +memcpy'able, and are no longer guaranteed to be standard-layout types:</p> +<blockquote> + <p>3.9/p2 and 3.9/p3 both make it clear that a "trivially copyable type" is + required for memcpy to be guaranteed to work.</p> + <p>Literal types (3.9p12) may have a non-trivial copy assignment operator, and + that violates the trivially copyable requirements given in 9/p 6, bullet item + 2. </p> + <p>Literal types (3.9p12) have no standard-layout requirement, either.</p> +</blockquote> +<p>This situation probably arose because the wording for "Constant Expressions +in the Standard Library" was in process at the same time the C++ POD +deconstruction wording was in process. </p> +<p>Since trivially copyable types meet the C++0x requirements for literal types, +and thus work with constant expressions, it seems an easy fix to revert the +<tt>basic_string</tt> element wording to its original state.</p> + + <p><i>[ + 2009-07-28 Alisdair adds: + ]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +When looking for any resolution for this issue, consider the definition of +"character container type" in 17.3.5 [defns.character.container]. This +does require the character type to be a POD, and this term is used in a +number of places through clause 21 and 28. This suggests the PODness +constraint remains, but is much more subtle than before. Meanwhile, I +suspect the change from POD type to literal type was intentional with +the assumption that trivially copyable types with +non-trivial-but-constexpr constructors should serve as well. I don't +believe the current wording offers the right guarantees for either of +the above designs. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-04 Howard modifies proposed wording to disallow array types as +char-like types. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-01-23 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p><i>Change General 21.1 [strings.general] as indicated:</i></p> +<blockquote> +<p>This Clause describes components for manipulating sequences of any +<del>literal</del> <ins>non-array POD</ins> (3.9) type. In this Clause +such types are called <i>char-like types</i>, and objects of char-like +types are called <i>char-like objects</i> or simply +<i>characters</i>.</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1171"></a>1171. duration types should be literal</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.11.3 [time.duration] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-07-06 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#time.duration">issues</a> in [time.duration].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The <tt>duration</tt> types in 20.11.3 [time.duration] are exactly the sort of type +that should be "literal types" in the new standard. Likewise, +arithmetic operations on <tt>duration</tt>s should be declared <tt>constexpr</tt>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-09-21 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +An alternative (and possibly preferable solution for potentially +heap-allocating big_int representation types) would be to ask the core +language to allow references to <tt>const</tt> literal types as feasible +arguments for <tt>constexpr</tt> functions. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10-30 Alisdair adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I suggest this issue moves from New to Open. +</p> + +<p> +Half of this issue was dealt with in paper +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2994.html">n2994</a> +on constexpr constructors. +</p> + +<p> +The other half (duration arithmetic) is on hold pending Core support for +<tt>const &</tt> in <tt>constexpr</tt> functions. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-03-15 Alisdair updated wording to be consistent with +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3078.html">N3078</a>. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><i>[ +2010 Rapperswil: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +This issue was the motivation for Core adding the facility for <tt>constexpr</tt> functions to take parameters by <tt>const &</tt>. + +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add <tt>constexpr</tt> to declaration of following functions and constructors: +</p> +<p> +Modify p1 20.11 [time], and the prototype definitions in 20.11.3.5 [time.duration.nonmember], 20.11.3.6 [time.duration.comparisons], +and 20.11.3.7 [time.duration.cast]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<b>Header <tt><chrono></tt> synopsis</b> +</p> + +<pre><i>// duration arithmetic</i> +template <class Rep1, class Period1, class Rep2, class Period2> + typename common_type<duration<Rep1, Period1>, duration<Rep2, Period2>>::type + <ins>constexpr</ins> operator+(const duration<Rep1, Period1>& lhs, const duration<Rep2, Period2>& rhs); +template <class Rep1, class Period1, class Rep2, class Period2> + typename common_type<duration<Rep1, Period1>, duration<Rep2, Period2>>::type + <ins>constexpr</ins> operator-(const duration<Rep1, Period1>& lhs, const duration<Rep2, Period2>& rhs); +template <class Rep1, class Period, class Rep2> + duration<typename common_type<Rep1, Rep2>::type, Period> + <ins>constexpr</ins> operator*(const duration<Rep1, Period>& d, const Rep2& s); +template <class Rep1, class Period, class Rep2> + duration<typename common_type<Rep1, Rep2>::type, Period> + <ins>constexpr</ins> operator*(const Rep1& s, const duration<Rep2, Period>& d); +template <class Rep1, class Period, class Rep2> + duration<typename common_type<Rep1, Rep2>::type, Period> + <ins>constexpr</ins> operator/(const duration<Rep1, Period>& d, const Rep2& s); +template <class Rep1, class Period1, class Rep2, class Period2> + typename common_type<Rep1, Rep2>::type + <ins>constexpr</ins> operator/(const duration<Rep1, Period1>& lhs, const duration<Rep2, Period2>& rhs); + +<i>// duration comparisons</i> +template <class Rep1, class Period1, class Rep2, class Period2> + <ins>constexpr</ins> bool operator==(const duration<Rep1, Period1>& lhs, const duration<Rep2, Period2>& rhs); +template <class Rep1, class Period1, class Rep2, class Period2> + <ins>constexpr</ins> bool operator!=(const duration<Rep1, Period1>& lhs, const duration<Rep2, Period2>& rhs); +template <class Rep1, class Period1, class Rep2, class Period2> + <ins>constexpr</ins> bool operator< (const duration<Rep1, Period1>& lhs, const duration<Rep2, Period2>& rhs); +template <class Rep1, class Period1, class Rep2, class Period2> + <ins>constexpr</ins> bool operator<=(const duration<Rep1, Period1>& lhs, const duration<Rep2, Period2>& rhs); +template <class Rep1, class Period1, class Rep2, class Period2> + <ins>constexpr</ins> bool operator> (const duration<Rep1, Period1>& lhs, const duration<Rep2, Period2>& rhs); +template <class Rep1, class Period1, class Rep2, class Period2> + <ins>constexpr</ins> bool operator>=(const duration<Rep1, Period1>& lhs, const duration<Rep2, Period2>& rhs); + +<i>// duration_cast</i> +template <class ToDuration, class Rep, class Period> + <ins>constexpr</ins> ToDuration duration_cast(const duration<Rep, Period>& d); +</pre> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 20.11.3 [time.duration]: +</p> + +<blockquote> + +<pre>template <class Rep, class Period = ratio<1>> +class duration { + ... +public: + ... + <ins>constexpr</ins> duration(const duration&) = default; + ... + +}; +</pre> +</blockquote> +<p><i>[ +Note - this edit already seems assumed by definition of the duration static members <tt>zero/min/max</tt>. +They cannot meaningfully be <tt>constexpr</tt> without this change. +]</i></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1174"></a>1174. type property predicates</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.7.4.3 [meta.unary.prop] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Jason Merrill <b>Opened:</b> 2009-07-16 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-20</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#meta.unary.prop">issues</a> in [meta.unary.prop].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +I've been implementing compiler support for <tt>is_standard_layout</tt>, and +noticed a few nits about 20.7.4.3 [meta.unary.prop]: +</p> + +<ol> +<li> +There's no trait for "trivially copyable type", which is now the +property that lets you do bitwise copying of a type, and therefore seems +useful to be able to query. <tt>has_trivial_assign</tt> && +<tt>has_trivial_copy_constructor</tt> && <tt>has_trivial_destructor</tt> +is similar, but +not identical, specifically with respect to const types. +</li> +<li> +<tt>has_trivial_copy_constructor</tt> and <tt>has_trivial_assign</tt> lack the "or an +array of such a class type" language that most other traits in that +section, including <tt>has_nothrow_copy_constructor</tt> and <tt>has_nothrow_assign</tt>, +have; this seems like an oversight. +</li> +</ol> + +<p><i>[ +See the thread starting with c++std-lib-24420 for further discussion. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Addressed in <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2947.html">N2947</a>. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<del>NAD Editorial</del><ins>Resolved</ins>. Solved by +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2984.html">N2984</a>. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1177"></a>1177. Improve "diagnostic required" wording</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.11.3 [time.duration] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2009-07-18 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#time.duration">issues</a> in [time.duration].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +"diagnostic required" has been used (by me) for code words meaning "use +<tt>enable_if</tt> to constrain templated functions. This needs to be +improved by referring to the function signature as not participating in +the overload set, and moving this wording to a <i>Remarks</i> paragraph. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Ready. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-19 Pete opens: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Oh, and speaking of 1177, most of the changes result in rather convoluted prose. +Instead of saying +</p> + +<blockquote> +A shall be B, else C +</blockquote> + +<p> +it should be +</p> + +<blockquote> +C if A is not B +</blockquote> + +<p> +That is: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<tt>Rep2</tt> shall be implicitly convertible to <tt>CR(Rep1, Rep2)</tt>, else +this signature shall not participate in overload resolution. +</blockquote> + +<p> +should be +</p> + +<blockquote> +This signature shall not participate in overload resolution if <tt>Rep2</tt> is +not implicitly convertible to <tt>CR(Rep1, Rep2)</tt>. +</blockquote> + +<p> +That is clearer, and eliminates the false requirement that <tt>Rep2</tt> "shall +be" convertible. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-19 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +I've updated the wording to match Pete's suggestion and included bullet 16 +from <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1195">1195</a>. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-19 Jens adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Further wording suggestion using "unless": +</p> + +<blockquote> +This signature shall not participate in overload resolution unless <tt>Rep2</tt> +is implicitly convertible to <tt>CR(Rep1, Rep2)</tt>. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-20 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +I've updated the wording to match Jens' suggestion. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-22 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p><i>[ +This proposed resolution addresses <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#947">947</a> and <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#974">974</a>. +]</i></p> + + +<ol> +<li> +<p> +Change 20.11.3.1 [time.duration.cons] (and reorder the <i>Remarks</i> +paragraphs per 17.5.1.4 [structure.specifications]): +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template <class Rep2> + explicit duration(const Rep2& r); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i><del>Requires:</del> <ins>Remarks:</ins></i> <ins>This constructor shall not +participate in overload resolution unless</ins> <tt>Rep2</tt> <del>shall be</del> +<ins>is</ins> implicitly convertible to <tt>rep</tt> and +</p> +<ul> +<li> +<tt>treat_as_floating_point<rep>::value</tt> <del>shall be</del> +<ins>is</ins> <tt>true</tt><ins>,</ins> or +</li> +<li> +<tt>treat_as_floating_point<Rep2>::value</tt> <del>shall be</del> +<ins>is</ins> <tt>false</tt>. +</li> +</ul> +<p> +<del>Diagnostic required</del> [<i>Example:</i> +</p> +<blockquote><pre>duration<int, milli> d(3); // OK +duration<int, milli> d(3.5); // error +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +— <i>end example</i>] +</p> + +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Constructs an object of type <tt>duration</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +<i>Postcondition:</i> <tt>count() == static_cast<rep>(r)</tt>. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class Rep2, class Period2> + duration(const duration<Rep2, Period2>& d); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i><del>Requires:</del> <ins>Remarks:</ins></i> <ins>This constructor shall not +participate in overload resolution unless</ins> +<tt>treat_as_floating_point<rep>::value</tt> <del>shall be</del> +<ins>is</ins> <tt>true</tt> or <tt>ratio_divide<Period2, +period>::type::den</tt> <del>shall be</del> <ins>is</ins> 1. <del>Diagnostic +required.</del> [<i>Note:</i> This requirement prevents implicit truncation +error when converting between integral-based duration types. Such a construction +could easily lead to confusion about the value of the duration. — <i>end +note</i>] [<i>Example:</i> +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>duration<int, milli> ms(3); +duration<int, micro> us = ms; // OK +duration<int, milli> ms2 = us; // error +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +— <i>end example</i>] +</p> + +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Constructs an object of type <tt>duration</tt>, constructing +<tt>rep_</tt> from +<tt>duration_cast<duration>(d).count()</tt>. +</p> + +</blockquote> + + +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change the following paragraphs in 20.11.3.5 [time.duration.nonmember]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template <class Rep1, class Period, class Rep2> + duration<typename common_type<Rep1, Rep2>::type, Period> + operator*(const duration<Rep1, Period>& d, const Rep2& s); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<i><del>Requires</del> <ins>Remarks</ins>:</i> <ins>This operator shall not +participate in overload resolution unless</ins> <tt>Rep2</tt> <del>shall +be</del> <ins>is</ins> implicitly convertible to <tt>CR(Rep1, Rep2)</tt>. +<del>Diagnostic required.</del> +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class Rep1, class Period, class Rep2> + duration<typename common_type<Rep1, Rep2>::type, Period> + operator*(const Rep1& s, const duration<Rep2, Period>& d); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<i><del>Requires</del> <ins>Remarks</ins>:</i> <ins>This operator shall not +participate in overload resolution unless</ins> <tt>Rep1</tt> <del>shall +be</del> <ins>is</ins> implicitly convertible to <tt>CR(Rep1, Rep2)</tt>. +<del>Diagnostic required.</del> +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class Rep1, class Period, class Rep2> + duration<typename common_type<Rep1, Rep2>::type, Period> + operator/(const duration<Rep1, Period>& d, const Rep2& s); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<i><del>Requires</del> <ins>Remarks</ins>:</i> <ins>This operator shall not +participate in overload resolution unless</ins> <tt>Rep2</tt> <del>shall +be</del> <ins>is</ins> implicitly convertible to <tt>CR(Rep1, Rep2)</tt> and +<tt>Rep2</tt> <del>shall not be</del> <ins>is not</ins> an instantiation of +<tt>duration</tt>. <del>Diagnostic required.</del> +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class Rep1, class Period, class Rep2> + duration<typename common_type<Rep1, Rep2>::type, Period> + operator%(const duration<Rep1, Period>& d, const Rep2& s); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<i><del>Requires</del> <ins>Remarks</ins>:</i> <ins>This operator shall not +participate in overload resolution unless</ins> <tt>Rep2</tt> <del>shall +be</del> <ins>is</ins> implicitly convertible to <tt>CR(Rep1, Rep2)</tt> and +<tt>Rep2</tt> <del>shall not be</del> <ins>is not</ins> an instantiation of +<tt>duration</tt>. <del>Diagnostic required.</del> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change the following paragraphs in 20.11.3.7 [time.duration.cast]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class ToDuration, class Rep, class Period> + ToDuration duration_cast(const duration<Rep, Period>& d); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<i><del>Requires</del> <ins>Remarks</ins>:</i> <ins>This function shall not +participate in overload resolution unless</ins> <tt>ToDuration</tt> <del>shall +be</del> <ins>is</ins> an instantiation of <tt>duration</tt>. <del>Diagnostic +required.</del> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.11.4.1 [time.point.cons]/3 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<del><i>Requires:</i> <tt>Duration2</tt> shall be implicitly convertible to <tt>duration</tt>. +Diagnostic required.</del> +</p> + +<p> +<ins><i>Remarks:</i> This constructor shall not participate in overload +resolution unless <tt>Duration2</tt> is implicitly convertible to +<tt>duration</tt>.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> + +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change the following paragraphs in 20.11.4.7 [time.point.cast]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class ToDuration, class Clock, class Duration> + time_point<Clock, ToDuration> time_point_cast(const time_point<Clock, Duration>& t); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<i><del>Requires</del> <ins>Remarks</ins>:</i> <ins>This function shall not +participate in overload resolution unless</ins> <tt>ToDuration</tt> <del>shall +be</del> <ins>is</ins> an instantiation of <tt>duration</tt>. <del>Diagnostic +required.</del> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1178"></a>1178. Header dependencies</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17.6.4.2 [res.on.headers] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Beman Dawes <b>Opened:</b> 2009-07-18 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +See Frankfurt notes of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1001">1001</a>. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p><i>Change 17.6.4.2 [res.on.headers], Headers, paragraph 1, as indicated:</i></p> + +<blockquote> + +<p> +A C++ header may include other C++ +headers.<del><sup>[footnote]</sup></del> <ins>A C++ header shall provide +the declarations and definitions that appear in its synopsis +(3.2 [basic.def.odr]). A C++ header shown in its synopsis as including +other C++ headers shall provide the declarations and definitions that appear in +the synopses of those other headers.</ins> +</p> + + <p><del><sup>[footnote]</sup> C++ headers must include a C++ header that contains + any needed definition (3.2).</del></p> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1180"></a>1180. Missing string_type member typedef in class <tt>sub_match</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 28.9.1 [re.submatch.members] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2009-07-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The definition of class template <tt>sub_match</tt> is strongly dependent +on the type <tt>basic_string<value_type></tt>, both in interface and effects, +but does not provide a corresponding typedef <tt>string_type</tt>, as e.g. +class <tt>match_results</tt> does, which looks like an oversight to me that +should be fixed. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-15 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<ol> +<li> +<p> +In the class template <tt>sub_match</tt> synopsis 28.9 [re.submatch]/1 +change as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class BidirectionalIterator> +class sub_match : public std::pair<BidirectionalIterator, BidirectionalIterator> { +public: + typedef typename iterator_traits<BidirectionalIterator>::value_type value_type; + typedef typename iterator_traits<BidirectionalIterator>::difference_type difference_type; + typedef BidirectionalIterator iterator; + <ins>typedef basic_string<value_type> string_type;</ins> + + bool matched; + + difference_type length() const; + operator <del>basic_string<value_type></del><ins>string_type</ins>() const; + <del>basic_string<value_type></del><ins>string_type</ins> str() const; + int compare(const sub_match& s) const; + int compare(const <del>basic_string<value_type></del><ins>string_type</ins>& s) const; + int compare(const value_type* s) const; +}; +</pre></blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +In 28.9.1 [re.submatch.members]/2 change as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>operator <del>basic_string<value_type></del><ins>string_type</ins>() const; +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt>matched ? <del>basic_string<value_type></del> +<ins>string_type</ins>(first, second) : <del>basic_string<value_type></del> +<ins>string_type</ins>()</tt>. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +In 28.9.1 [re.submatch.members]/3 change as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>basic_string<value_type></del><ins>string_type</ins> str() const; +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt>matched ? <del>basic_string<value_type></del> +<ins>string_type</ins>(first, second) : <del>basic_string<value_type></del> +<ins>string_type</ins>()</tt>. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +In 28.9.1 [re.submatch.members]/5 change as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>int compare(const <del>basic_string<value_type></del><ins>string_type</ins>& s) const; +</pre></blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1181"></a>1181. Invalid <tt>sub_match</tt> comparison operators</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2009-07-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-24</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#re.submatch.op">issues</a> in [re.submatch.op].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Several heterogeneous comparison operators of class template +<tt>sub_match</tt> are specified by return clauses that are not valid +in general. E.g. 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/7: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class BiIter, class ST, class SA> +bool operator==( + const basic_string< + typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type, ST, SA>& lhs, + const sub_match<BiIter>& rhs); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt>lhs == rhs.str()</tt>. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +The returns clause would be ill-formed for all cases where +<tt>ST != std::char_traits<iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type></tt> +or <tt>SA != std::allocator<iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type></tt>. +</p> +<p> +The generic character of the comparison was intended, so +there are basically two approaches to fix the problem: The +first one would define the semantics of the comparison +using the traits class <tt>ST</tt> (The semantic of <tt>basic_string::compare</tt> +is defined in terms of the compare function of the corresponding +traits class), the second one would define the semantics of the +comparison using the traits class +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>std::char_traits<iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type> +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +which is essentially identical to +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>std::char_traits<sub_match<BiIter>::value_type> +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +I suggest to follow the second approach, because +this emphasizes the central role of the <tt>sub_match</tt> +object as part of the comparison and would also +make sure that a <tt>sub_match</tt> comparison using some +<tt>basic_string<char_t, ..></tt> always is equivalent to +a corresponding comparison with a string literal +because of the existence of further overloads (beginning +from 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/19). If users really want to +take advantage of their own <tt>traits::compare</tt>, they can +simply write a corresponding compare function that +does so. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Post-Rapperswil +]</i></p> + + +<p> +The following update is a result of the discussion during the Rapperswil meeting, the P/R expresses all comparisons by +delegating to sub_match's compare functions. The processing is rather mechanical: Only <tt>==</tt> and <tt><</tt> +where defined by referring to <tt>sub_match</tt>'s compare function, all remaining ones where replaced by the canonical +definitions in terms of these two. +</p> + +<blockquote> +Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +<i>The wording refers to N3126.</i> +</p> + +<ol> +<li>Change 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/7 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class BiIter, class ST, class SA> + bool operator==( + const basic_string< + typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type, ST, SA>& lhs, + const sub_match<BiIter>& rhs); +</pre> +7 <em>Returns</em>: <tt><del>lhs == rhs.str()</del><ins>rhs.compare(lhs.c_str()) == 0</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/8 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class BiIter, class ST, class SA> + bool operator!=( + const basic_string< + typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type, ST, SA>& lhs, + const sub_match<BiIter>& rhs); +</pre> +8 <em>Returns</em>: <tt><del>lhs != rhs.str()</del><ins>!(lhs == rhs)</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/9 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class BiIter, class ST, class SA> + bool operator<( + const basic_string< + typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type, ST, SA>& lhs, + const sub_match<BiIter>& rhs); +</pre> +9 <em>Returns</em>: <tt><del>lhs < rhs.str()</del><ins>rhs.compare(lhs.c_str()) > 0</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/10 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class BiIter, class ST, class SA> + bool operator>( + const basic_string< + typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type, ST, SA>& lhs, + const sub_match<BiIter>& rhs); +</pre> +10 <em>Returns</em>: <tt><del>lhs > rhs.str()</del><ins>rhs < lhs</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/11 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class BiIter, class ST, class SA> + bool operator>=( + const basic_string< + typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type, ST, SA>& lhs, + const sub_match<BiIter>& rhs); +</pre> +11 <em>Returns</em>: <tt><del>lhs >= rhs.str()</del><ins>!(lhs < rhs)</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/12 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class BiIter, class ST, class SA> + bool operator<=( + const basic_string< + typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type, ST, SA>& lhs, + const sub_match<BiIter>& rhs); +</pre> +12 <em>Returns</em>: <tt><del>lhs <= rhs.str()</del><ins>!(rhs < lhs)</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/13 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class BiIter, class ST, class SA> + bool operator==(const sub_match<BiIter>& lhs, + const basic_string< + typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type, ST, SA>& rhs); +</pre> +13 <em>Returns</em>: <tt><del>lhs.str() == rhs</del><ins>lhs.compare(rhs.c_str()) == 0</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/14 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class BiIter, class ST, class SA> + bool operator!=(const sub_match<BiIter>& lhs, + const basic_string< + typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type, ST, SA>& rhs); +</pre> +14 <em>Returns</em>: <tt><del>lhs.str() != rhs</del><ins>!(lhs == rhs)</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/15 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class BiIter, class ST, class SA> + bool operator<(const sub_match<BiIter>& lhs, + const basic_string< + typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type, ST, SA>& rhs); +</pre> +15 <em>Returns</em>: <tt><del>lhs.str() < rhs</del><ins>lhs.compare(rhs.c_str()) < 0</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/16 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class BiIter, class ST, class SA> + bool operator>(const sub_match<BiIter>& lhs, + const basic_string< + typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type, ST, SA>& rhs); +</pre> +16 <em>Returns</em>: <tt><del>lhs.str() > rhs</del><ins>rhs < lhs</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/17 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class BiIter, class ST, class SA> + bool operator>=(const sub_match<BiIter>& lhs, + const basic_string< + typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type, ST, SA>& rhs); +</pre> +17 <em>Returns</em>: <tt><del>lhs.str() >= rhs</del><ins>!(lhs < rhs)</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/18 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class BiIter, class ST, class SA> + bool operator<=(const sub_match<BiIter>& lhs, + const basic_string< + typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type, ST, SA>& rhs); +</pre> +18 <em>Returns</em>: <tt><del>lhs.str() <= rhs</del><ins>!(rhs < lhs)</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/19 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class BiIter> + bool operator==(typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type const* lhs, + const sub_match<BiIter>& rhs); +</pre> +19 <em>Returns</em>: <tt><del>lhs == rhs.str()</del><ins>rhs.compare(lhs) == 0</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/20 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class BiIter> + bool operator!=(typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type const* lhs, + const sub_match<BiIter>& rhs); +</pre> +20 <em>Returns</em>: <tt><del>lhs != rhs.str()</del><ins>!(lhs == rhs)</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/21 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class BiIter> + bool operator<(typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type const* lhs, + const sub_match<BiIter>& rhs); +</pre> +21 <em>Returns</em>: <tt><del>lhs < rhs.str()</del><ins>rhs.compare(lhs) > 0</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/22 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class BiIter> + bool operator>(typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type const* lhs, + const sub_match<BiIter>& rhs); +</pre> +22 <em>Returns</em>: <tt><del>lhs > rhs.str()</del><ins>rhs < lhs</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/23 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class BiIter> + bool operator>=(typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type const* lhs, + const sub_match<BiIter>& rhs); +</pre> +23 <em>Returns</em>: <tt><del>lhs >= rhs.str()</del><ins>!(lhs < rhs)</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/24 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class BiIter> + bool operator<=(typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type const* lhs, + const sub_match<BiIter>& rhs); +</pre> +24 <em>Returns</em>: <tt><del>lhs <= rhs.str()</del><ins>!(rhs < lhs)</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/25 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class BiIter> + bool operator==(const sub_match<BiIter>& lhs, + typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type const* rhs); +</pre> +25 <em>Returns</em>: <tt><del>lhs.str() == rhs</del><ins>lhs.compare(rhs) == 0</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/26 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class BiIter> + bool operator!=(const sub_match<BiIter>& lhs, + typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type const* rhs); +</pre> +26 <em>Returns</em>: <tt><del>lhs.str() != rhs</del><ins>!(lhs == rhs)</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/27 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class BiIter> + bool operator<(const sub_match<BiIter>& lhs, + typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type const* rhs); +</pre> +27 <em>Returns</em>: <tt><del>lhs.str() < rhs</del><ins>lhs.compare(rhs) < 0</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/28 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class BiIter> + bool operator>(const sub_match<BiIter>& lhs, + typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type const* rhs); +</pre> +28 <em>Returns</em>: <tt><del>lhs.str() > rhs</del><ins>rhs < lhs</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/29 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class BiIter> + bool operator>=(const sub_match<BiIter>& lhs, + typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type const* rhs); +</pre> +29 <em>Returns</em>: <tt><del>lhs.str() >= rhs</del><ins>!(lhs < rhs)</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/30 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class BiIter> + bool operator<=(const sub_match<BiIter>& lhs, + typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type const* rhs); +</pre> +30 <em>Returns</em>: <tt><del>lhs.str() <= rhs</del><ins>!(rhs < lhs)</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/31 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class BiIter> + bool operator==(typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type const& lhs, + const sub_match<BiIter>& rhs); +</pre> +<del>31 <em>Returns</em>: <tt>basic_string<typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type>(1, lhs) == rhs.str()</tt>.</del><br> +<ins>31 <em>Returns</em>: <tt>rhs.compare(typename sub_match<BiIter>::string_type(1, lhs)) == 0</tt>.</ins> +</blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/32 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class BiIter> + bool operator!=(typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type const& lhs, + const sub_match<BiIter>& rhs); +</pre> +32 <em>Returns</em>: <tt><del>basic_string<typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type>(1, lhs) != +rhs.str()</del><ins>!(lhs == rhs)</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/33 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class BiIter> + bool operator<(typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type const& lhs, + const sub_match<BiIter>& rhs); +</pre> +<del>33 <em>Returns</em>: <tt>basic_string<typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type>(1, lhs) < rhs.str()</tt>.</del><br> +<ins>33 <em>Returns</em>: <tt>rhs.compare(typename sub_match<BiIter>::string_type(1, lhs)) > 0</tt>.</ins> +</blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/34 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class BiIter> + bool operator>(typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type const& lhs, + const sub_match<BiIter>& rhs); +</pre> +34 <em>Returns</em>: <tt><del>basic_string<typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type>(1, lhs) > rhs.str()</del><ins>rhs < lhs</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/35 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class BiIter> + bool operator>=(typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type const& lhs, + const sub_match<BiIter>& rhs); +</pre> +35 <em>Returns</em>: <tt><del>basic_string<typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type>(1, lhs) >= rhs.str()</del><ins>!(lhs < rhs)</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/36 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class BiIter> + bool operator<=(typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type const& lhs, + const sub_match<BiIter>& rhs); +</pre> +36 <em>Returns</em>: <tt><del>basic_string<typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type>(1, lhs) <= rhs.str()</del><ins>!(rhs < lhs)</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/37 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class BiIter> + bool operator==(const sub_match<BiIter>& lhs, + typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type const& rhs); +</pre> +<del>37 <em>Returns</em>: <tt>lhs.str() == basic_string<typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type>(1, rhs)</tt>.</del><br> +<ins>37 <em>Returns</em>: <tt>lhs.compare(typename sub_match<BiIter>::string_type(1, rhs)) == 0</tt>.</ins> +</blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/38 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class BiIter> + bool operator!=(const sub_match<BiIter>& lhs, + typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type const& rhs); +</pre> +38 <em>Returns</em>: <tt><del>lhs.str() != basic_string<typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type>(1, rhs)</del><ins>!(lhs == rhs)</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/39 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class BiIter> + bool operator<(const sub_match<BiIter>& lhs, + typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type const& rhs); +</pre> +<del>39 <em>Returns</em>: <tt>lhs.str() < basic_string<typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type>(1, rhs)</tt>.</del><br> +<ins>39 <em>Returns</em>: <tt>lhs.compare(typename sub_match<BiIter>::string_type(1, rhs)) < 0</tt>.</ins> +</blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/40 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class BiIter> + bool operator>(const sub_match<BiIter>& lhs, + typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type const& rhs); +</pre> +40 <em>Returns</em>: <tt><del>lhs.str() > basic_string<typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type>(1, rhs)</del><ins>rhs < lhs</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/41 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class BiIter> + bool operator>=(const sub_match<BiIter>& lhs, + typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type const& rhs); +</pre> +41 <em>Returns</em>: <tt><del>lhs.str() >= basic_string<typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type>(1, rhs)</del><ins>!(lhs < rhs)</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 28.9.2 [re.submatch.op]/42 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class BiIter> + bool operator<=(const sub_match<BiIter>& lhs, + typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type const& rhs); +</pre> +42 <em>Returns</em>: <tt><del>lhs.str() <= basic_string<typename iterator_traits<BiIter>::value_type>(1, rhs)</del><ins>!(rhs < lhs)</ins></tt>. +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1182"></a>1182. Unfortunate hash dependencies</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8.15 [unord.hash] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-07-28 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#unord.hash">issues</a> in [unord.hash].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses UK 324</b></p> + +<p> +The implied library dependencies created by spelling out all the <tt>hash</tt> +template specializations in the <tt><functional></tt> synopsis are unfortunate. +The potential coupling is greatly reduced if the <tt>hash</tt> specialization is +declared in the appropriate header for each library type, as it is much +simpler to forward declare the primary template and provide a single +specialization than it is to implement a <tt>hash</tt> function for a <tt>string</tt> or +<tt>vector</tt> without providing a definition for the whole <tt>string/vector</tt> +template in order to access the necessary bits. +</p> + +<p> +Note that the proposed resolution purely involves moving the +declarations of a few specializations, it specifically does not make any +changes to 20.8.15 [unord.hash]. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-09-15 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +</blockquote> +<p> +I suggest to add to the current existing +proposed resolution the following items. +</p> + +<ul> +<li> +<p> +Add to the very first strike-list of the currently suggested resolution +the following lines: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>template <> struct hash<std::error_code>;</del> +<del>template <> struct hash<std::thread::id>;</del> +</pre></blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Add the following declarations to 19.5 [syserr], header +<tt><system_error></tt> synopsis after // 19.5.4: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins> +// 19.5.x hash support +template <class T> struct hash; +template <> struct hash<error_code>; +</ins> +</pre></blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Add a new clause 19.5.X (probably after 19.5.4): +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p><ins> +19.5.X Hash support [syserr.hash] +</ins></p> + +<pre><ins> +template <> struct hash<error_code>; +</ins></pre> + +<blockquote><ins> +An explicit specialization of the class template hash (20.8.15 [unord.hash]) +shall be provided +for the type <tt>error_code</tt> suitable for using this type as key in +unordered associative +containers (23.7 [unord]). +</ins></blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Add the following declarations to 30.3.1.1 [thread.thread.id] just after the +declaration of +the comparison operators: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins> +template <class T> struct hash; +template <> struct hash<thread::id>; +</ins></pre></blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Add a new paragraph at the end of 30.3.1.1 [thread.thread.id]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre><ins> +template <> struct hash<thread::id>; +</ins></pre> + +<blockquote><ins> +An explicit specialization of the class template hash (20.8.15 [unord.hash]) +shall be provided +for the type <tt>thread::id</tt> suitable for using this type as key in +unordered associative +containers (23.7 [unord]). +</ins></blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +Issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#889">889</a> independently suggests moving the specialization +<tt>std::hash<std::thread::id></tt> to header <tt><thread></tt>. +</li> +</ul> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-13 Alisdair adopts Daniel's suggestion and the extended note from +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#889">889</a>. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-01-31 Alisdair: related to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1245">1245</a> and <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#978">978</a>. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-07 Proposed wording updated by Beman, Daniel, Alisdair and Ganesh. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-09 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p><i>Strike the following specializations declared in the <tt><functional></tt> +synopsis p2 20.8 [function.objects] </i> </p> +<blockquote> + <pre><del>template <> struct hash<std::string>;</del> +<del>template <> struct hash<std::u16string>;</del> +<del>template <> struct hash<std::u32string>;</del> +<del>template <> struct hash<std::wstring>;</del> + +<del>template <> struct hash<std::error_code>;</del> +<del>template <> struct hash<std::thread::id>;</del> +<del>template <class Allocator> struct hash<std::vector<bool, Allocator> >;</del> +<del>template <std::size_t N> struct hash<std::bitset<N> >;</del></pre> +</blockquote> +<p><i>Add the following at the end of 20.8.15 [unord.hash]:</i></p> +<blockquote> + <pre><ins>template <> struct hash<bool>; +template <> struct hash<char>; +template <> struct hash<signed char>; +template <> struct hash<unsigned char>; +template <> struct hash<char16_t>; +template <> struct hash<char32_t>; +template <> struct hash<wchar_t>; +template <> struct hash<short>; +template <> struct hash<unsigned short>; +template <> struct hash<int>; +template <> struct hash<unsigned int>; +template <> struct hash<long>; +template <> struct hash<long long>; +template <> struct hash<unsigned long>; +template <> struct hash<unsigned long long>; +template <> struct hash<float>; +template <> struct hash<double>; +template <> struct hash<long double>; +template<class T> struct hash<T*>;</ins></pre> + <p><ins> + Specializations meeting the requirements of class template <tt>hash</tt> 20.8.15 [unord.hash].</ins></p> +</blockquote> +<p><i>Add the following declarations to 19.5 [syserr], header <tt><system_error></tt> +synopsis after // 19.5.4: </i> </p> +<blockquote> + <pre><ins>// [syserr.hash] hash support +template <class T> struct hash; +template <> struct hash<error_code>;</ins></pre> +</blockquote> +<p><i>Add a new clause 19.5.X (probably after 19.5.4): </i> </p> +<blockquote> + <p><ins>19.5.X Hash support [syserr.hash] </ins></p> + <pre><ins>template <> struct hash<error_code>;</ins></pre> + <p><ins>Specialization meeting the requirements of class template <tt>hash</tt> 20.8.15 [unord.hash].</ins></p> +</blockquote> +<p><i>Add the following declarations to the synopsis of <tt><string></tt> in 21.3 [string.classes] +</i> +</p> +<blockquote> + <pre><ins>// [basic.string.hash] hash support +template <class T> struct hash; +template <> struct hash<string>; +template <> struct hash<u16string>; +template <> struct hash<u32string>; +template <> struct hash<wstring>;</ins></pre> +</blockquote> +<p><i>Add a new clause 21.4.X </i> </p> +<blockquote> + <p><ins>21.4.X Hash support [basic.string.hash]></ins></p> + <pre><ins>template <> struct hash<string>; +template <> struct hash<u16string>; +template <> struct hash<u32string>; +template <> struct hash<wstring>;</ins></pre> + <p><ins>Specializations meeting the requirements of class template <tt>hash</tt> 20.8.15 [unord.hash].</ins></p> +</blockquote> +<p><i>Add the following declarations to the synopsis of <tt><vector></tt> in +23.3 [sequences]</i> </p> +<blockquote> + <pre><ins>// 21.4.x hash support +template <class T> struct hash; +template <class Allocator> struct hash<vector<bool, Allocator>>;</ins></pre> +</blockquote> +<p><i>Add a new paragraph to the end of 23.4.2 [vector.bool] </i> </p> +<blockquote> + <pre><ins>template <class Allocator> struct hash<vector<bool, Allocator>>;</ins></pre> + <p><ins>Specialization meeting the requirements of class template <tt>hash</tt> 20.8.15 [unord.hash].</ins></p> +</blockquote> +<p><i>Add the following declarations to the synopsis of <tt><bitset></tt> in 20.5 [template.bitset] </i> </p> +<blockquote> + <pre><ins>// [bitset.hash] hash support +template <class T> struct hash; +template <size_t N> struct hash<bitset<N> >;</ins></pre> +</blockquote> +<p><i>Add a new subclause 20.3.7.X [bitset.hash] </i> </p> +<blockquote> + <p><ins>20.3.7.X bitset hash support [bitset.hash]</ins></p> + <pre><ins>template <size_t N> struct hash<bitset<N> >;</ins></pre> + <p><ins>Specialization meeting the requirements of class template <tt>hash</tt> 20.8.15 [unord.hash].</ins></p> +</blockquote> +<p><i>Add the following declarations to 30.3.1.1 [thread.thread.id] synopsis just after the +declaration of the comparison operators: </i> </p> +<blockquote> + <pre><ins>template <class T> struct hash; +template <> struct hash<thread::id>;</ins></pre> +</blockquote> +<p><i>Add a new paragraph at the end of 30.3.1.1 [thread.thread.id]: </i> </p> +<blockquote> + <pre><ins>template <> struct hash<thread::id>;</ins></pre> + <p><ins>Specialization meeting the requirements of class template <tt>hash</tt> 20.8.15 [unord.hash].</ins></p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>Change Header <typeindex> synopsis 20.13.1 [type.index.synopsis] as +indicated:</i></p> +<blockquote> +<pre>namespace std { +class type_index; + <ins>// [type.index.hash] hash support</ins> + template <class T> struct hash; + template<> struct hash<type_index><ins>;</ins> <del> : public unary_function<type_index, size_t> { + size_t operator()(type_index index) const; + }</del> +}</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>Change Template specialization hash<type_index> [type.index.templ] + as indicated:</i></p> + +<blockquote> + + <p>20.11.4 <del>Template specialization hash<type_index> [type.index.templ]</del> + <ins>Hash support [type.index.hash]</ins></p> + + <pre><del>size_t operator()(type_index index) const;</del></pre> + <blockquote> + <p><del><i>Returns:</i> <tt>index.hash_code()</tt></del></p> + </blockquote> + + <pre><ins>template<> struct hash<type_index>;</ins></pre> + <p><ins>Specialization meeting the requirements of class template <tt>hash</tt> [unord.hash]. + For an object <tt>index</tt> of type <tt>type_index</tt>, <tt>hash<type_index>()(index)</tt> + shall evaluate to the same value as <tt>index.hash_code()</tt>.</ins></p> + +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1183"></a>1183. <tt>basic_ios::set_rdbuf</tt> may break class invariants</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.5.4.2 [basic.ios.members] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2009-07-28 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-24</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#basic.ios.members">issues</a> in [basic.ios.members].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The protected member function <tt>set_rdbuf</tt> had been added during the +process of adding move and swap semantics to IO classes. A relevant +property of this function is described by it's effects in +27.5.4.2 [basic.ios.members]/19: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Effects:</i> Associates the <tt>basic_streambuf</tt> object pointed to by sb with +this stream without calling <tt>clear()</tt>. +</blockquote> + +<p> +This means that implementors of or those who derive from existing IO classes +could cause an internal state where the stream buffer could be 0, but the +IO class has the state <tt>good()</tt>. This would break several currently existing +implementations which rely on the fact that setting a stream buffer via the +currently only ways, i.e. either by calling +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void init(basic_streambuf<charT,traits>* sb); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +or by calling +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>basic_streambuf<charT,traits>* rdbuf(basic_streambuf<charT,traits>* sb); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +to set <tt>rdstate()</tt> to <tt>badbit</tt>, if the buffer is 0. This has the effect that many +internal functions can simply check <tt>rdstate()</tt> instead of <tt>rdbuf()</tt> for being 0. +</p> + +<p> +I therefore suggest that a requirement is added for callers of <tt>set_rdbuf</tt> to +set a non-0 value. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Open. Martin volunteers to provide new wording, where +<tt>set_rdbuf()</tt> sets the <tt>badbit</tt> but does not cause an +exception to be thrown like a call to <tt>clear()</tt> would. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10-20 Martin provides wording: +]</i></p> + + +<p> +Change 27.5.4.2 [basic.ios.members] around p. 19 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void set_rdbuf(basic_streambuf<charT, traits>* sb); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p><del> +<i>Effects:</i> Associates the <tt>basic_streambuf</tt> object pointed +to by <tt>sb</tt> with this stream without calling <tt>clear()</tt>. +<i>Postconditions:</i> <tt>rdbuf() == sb</tt>. +</del></p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Effects:</i> As if: +</ins></p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins> +iostate state = rdstate(); +try { rdbuf(sb); } +catch(ios_base::failure) { + if (0 == (state & ios_base::badbit)) + unsetf(badbit); +} +</ins></pre></blockquote> + +<p> +<i>Throws:</i> Nothing. +</p> + +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +We need to be able to call <tt>set_rdbuf()</tt> on stream objects +for which (<tt>rdbuf() == 0</tt>) holds without causing <tt>ios_base::failure</tt> to +be thrown. We also don't want <tt>badbit</tt> to be set as a result of +setting <tt>rdbuf()</tt> to 0 if it wasn't set before the call. This changed +Effects clause maintains the current behavior (as of N2914) without +requiring that <tt>sb</tt> be non-null. + + +<p><i>[ +Post-Rapperswil +]</i></p> + + +<p> +Several reviewers and the submitter believe that the best solution would be to add a pre-condition that the +buffer shall not be a null pointer value. +</p> + +<blockquote> +Moved to Tentatively Ready with revised wording provided by Daniel after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<ol> +<li>Add a new pre-condition just before 27.5.4.2 [basic.ios.members]/23 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>void set_rdbuf(basic_streambuf<charT, traits>* sb); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<ins>?? <em>Requires</em>: <tt>sb != nullptr</tt>.</ins> +<p> +23 <em>Effects</em>: Associates the <tt>basic_streambuf</tt> object pointed to by <tt>sb</tt> with this stream without calling <tt>clear()</tt>. +</p> +<p> +24 <em>Postconditions</em>: <tt>rdbuf() == sb</tt>. +</p> +<p> +25 <em>Throws</em>: Nothing. +</p> +</blockquote></blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +We believe that setting a <tt>nullptr</tt> stream buffer can be prevented. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1187"></a>1187. std::decay</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.7.7.6 [meta.trans.other] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Jason Merrill <b>Opened:</b> 2009-08-07 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#meta.trans.other">issues</a> in [meta.trans.other].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +I notice that <tt>std::decay</tt> is specified to strip the cv-quals from +anything but an array or pointer. This seems incorrect for values of +class type, since class rvalues can have cv-qualified type (3.10 [basic.lval]/9). +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-08-09 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +See the thread starting with c++std-lib-24568 for further discussion. And +here is a convenience link to the +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2006/n2069.html">original proposal</a>. +Also see the closely related issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#705">705</a>. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010 Pittsburgh: Moved to Ready. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +Add a note to <tt>decay</tt> in 20.7.7.6 [meta.trans.other]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +[<i>Note:</i> This behavior is similar to the lvalue-to-rvalue (4.1), +array-to-pointer (4.2), and function-to-pointer (4.3) conversions +applied when an lvalue expression is used as an rvalue, but also strips +cv-qualifiers from class types in order to more closely model by-value +argument passing. — <i>end note</i>] +</blockquote> + + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1189"></a>1189. Awkward interface for changing the number of buckets in an unordered associative container</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2.5 [unord.req], 23.7 [unord] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 2009-08-10 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index-open.html#unord.req">active issues</a> in [unord.req].</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#unord.req">issues</a> in [unord.req].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Consider a typical use case: I create an <tt>unordered_map</tt> and then start +adding elements to it one at a time. I know that it will eventually need +to store a few million elements, so, for performance reasons, I would +like to reserve enough capacity that none of the calls to <tt>insert</tt> will +trigger a rehash. +</p> + +<p> +Unfortunately, the existing interface makes this awkward. The user +naturally sees the problem in terms of the number of elements, but the +interface presents it as buckets. If <tt>m</tt> is the map and <tt>n</tt> is the expected +number of elements, this operation is written <tt>m.rehash(n / +m.max_load_factor())</tt> — not very novice friendly. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-09-30 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +I recommend to replace "<tt>resize</tt>" by a different name like +"<tt>reserve</tt>", because that would better match the intended +use-case. Rational: Any existing resize function has the on-success +post-condition that the provided size is equal to <tt>size()</tt>, which +is not satisfied for the proposal. Reserve seems to fit the purpose of +the actual renaming suggestion. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10-28 Ganesh summarizes alternative resolutions and expresses a +strong preference for the second (and opposition to the first): +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<ol> +<li> +<p> +In the unordered associative container requirements (23.2.5 [unord.req]), +remove the row for +rehash and replace it with: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 87 — Unordered associative container requirements +(in addition to container)</caption> + +<tbody><tr> +<th>Expression</th><th>Return type</th><th>Assertion/note pre-/post-condition</th> +<th>Complexity</th> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><tt>a.<del>rehash</del><ins>reserve</ins>(n)</tt></td> +<td><tt>void</tt></td> +<td> +Post: <tt>a.bucket_count > <ins>max(</ins>a.size()<ins>, n)</ins> +/ a.max_load_factor()</tt><del> and <tt>a.bucket_count() +>= n</tt></del>. +</td> +<td> +Average case linear in <tt>a.size()</tt>, worst case quadratic. +</td> +</tr> +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Make the corresponding change in the class synopses in 23.7.1 [unord.map], 23.7.2 [unord.multimap], 23.7.3 [unord.set], and 23.7.4 [unord.multiset]. +</p> +</li> +<li> + +<p> +In 23.2.5 [unord.req]/9, table 98, append a new row after the last one: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 87 — Unordered associative container requirements +(in addition to container)</caption> + +<tbody><tr> +<th>Expression</th><th>Return type</th><th>Assertion/note pre-/post-condition</th> +<th>Complexity</th> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><tt>a.rehash(n)</tt></td> +<td><tt>void</tt></td> +<td> +Post: <tt>a.bucket_count > a.size() +/ a.max_load_factor()</tt> and <tt>a.bucket_count() +>= n</tt>. +</td> +<td> +Average case linear in <tt>a.size()</tt>, worst case quadratic. +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><ins> +<tt>a.reserve(n)</tt> +</ins></td> +<td><ins> +<tt>void</tt> +</ins></td> +<td><ins> +Same as <tt>a.rehash(ceil(n / a.max_load_factor()))</tt> +</ins></td> +<td><ins> +Average case linear in <tt>a.size()</tt>, worst case quadratic. +</ins></td> +</tr> +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + +<p> +In 23.7.1 [unord.map]/3 in the definition of class template <tt>unordered_map</tt>, in +23.7.2 [unord.multimap]/3 in the definition of class template <tt>unordered_multimap</tt>, in +23.7.3 [unord.set]/3 in the definition of class template <tt>unordered_set</tt> and in +23.7.4 [unord.multiset]/3 in the definition of class template <tt>unordered_multiset</tt>, add the +following line after member function <tt>rehash()</tt>: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void reserve(size_type n); +</pre></blockquote> + +</li> +</ol> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10-28 Howard: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 votes in favor of Ganesh's option 2 above. +The original proposed wording now appears here: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Informally: instead of providing <tt>rehash(n)</tt> provide <tt>resize(n)</tt>, with the +semantics "make the container a good size for <tt>n</tt> elements". +</p> + +<p> +In the unordered associative container requirements (23.2.5 [unord.req]), +remove the row for +rehash and replace it with: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 87 — Unordered associative container requirements +(in addition to container)</caption> + +<tbody><tr> +<th>Expression</th><th>Return type</th><th>Assertion/note pre-/post-condition</th> +<th>Complexity</th> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><tt>a.<del>rehash</del><ins>resize</ins>(n)</tt></td> +<td><tt>void</tt></td> +<td> +Post: <tt>a.bucket_count > <ins>max(</ins>a.size()<ins>, n)</ins> +/ a.max_load_factor()</tt><del> and <tt>a.bucket_count() +>= n</tt></del>. +</td> +<td> +Average case linear in <tt>a.size()</tt>, worst case quadratic. +</td> +</tr> +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Make the corresponding change in the class synopses in 23.7.1 [unord.map], 23.7.2 [unord.multimap], 23.7.3 [unord.set], and 23.7.4 [unord.multiset]. +</p> + +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 23.2.5 [unord.req]/9, table 98, append a new row after the last one: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 87 — Unordered associative container requirements +(in addition to container)</caption> + +<tbody><tr> +<th>Expression</th><th>Return type</th><th>Assertion/note pre-/post-condition</th> +<th>Complexity</th> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><tt>a.rehash(n)</tt></td> +<td><tt>void</tt></td> +<td> +Post: <tt>a.bucket_count > a.size() +/ a.max_load_factor()</tt> and <tt>a.bucket_count() +>= n</tt>. +</td> +<td> +Average case linear in <tt>a.size()</tt>, worst case quadratic. +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><ins> +<tt>a.reserve(n)</tt> +</ins></td> +<td><ins> +<tt>void</tt> +</ins></td> +<td><ins> +Same as <tt>a.rehash(ceil(n / a.max_load_factor()))</tt> +</ins></td> +<td><ins> +Average case linear in <tt>a.size()</tt>, worst case quadratic. +</ins></td> +</tr> +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + +<p> +In 23.7.1 [unord.map]/3 in the definition of class template <tt>unordered_map</tt>, in +23.7.2 [unord.multimap]/3 in the definition of class template <tt>unordered_multimap</tt>, in +23.7.3 [unord.set]/3 in the definition of class template <tt>unordered_set</tt> and in +23.7.4 [unord.multiset]/3 in the definition of class template <tt>unordered_multiset</tt>, add the +following line after member function <tt>rehash()</tt>: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void reserve(size_type n); +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1191"></a>1191. <tt>tuple get</tt> API should respect rvalues</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.4.2.6 [tuple.elem] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-08-18 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-23</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The <tt>tuple get</tt> API should respect rvalues. This would allow for moving a +single element out of a <tt>tuple</tt>-like type. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10-30 Alisdair adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +The issue of rvalue overloads of get for tuple-like types was briefly +discussed in Santa Cruz. +</p> + +<p> +The feedback was this would be welcome, but we need full wording for the +other types (<tt>pair</tt> and <tt>array</tt>) before advancing. +</p> + +<p> +I suggest the issue moves to Open from New as it has been considered, +feedback given, and it has not (yet) been rejected as NAD. +</p> +</blockquote> + + +<p><i>[ +2010 Rapperswil: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Note that wording has been provided, and this issue becomes more important now that we have added a function to support forwarding argument lists as <tt>tuple</tt>s. + +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add the following signature to p2 20.4.1 [tuple.general] +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins> +template <size_t I, class ... Types> +typename tuple_element<I, tuple<Types...> >::type&& get(tuple<Types...> &&); +</ins></pre></blockquote> + +<p> +And again to 20.4.2.6 [tuple.elem]. +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins> +template <size_t I, class ... Types> +typename tuple_element<I, tuple<Types...> >::type&& get(tuple<Types...>&& t); +</ins></pre> + +<blockquote> +<p><ins> +<i>Effects:</i> Equivalent to <tt>return std::forward<typename tuple_element<I, tuple<Types...> >::type&&>(get<I>(t));</tt> +</ins></p> + + +<p><ins> +[<i>Note:</i> If a <tt>T</tt> in <tt>Types</tt> is some reference type <tt>X&</tt>, +the return type is <tt>X&</tt>, not <tt>X&&</tt>. +However, if the element type is non-reference type <tt>T</tt>, +the return type is <tt>T&&</tt>. — <i>end note</i>] +</ins></p> + +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Add the following signature to p1 20.3 [utility] +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins> +template <size_t I, class T1, class T2> +typename tuple_element<I, pair<T1,T2> >::type&& get(pair<T1, T2>&&); +</ins></pre></blockquote> + +<p> +And to p5 20.3.5.4 [pair.astuple] +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins> +template <size_t I, class T1, class T2> +typename tuple_element<I, pair<T1,T2> >::type&& get(pair<T1, T2>&& p); +</ins></pre> + +<blockquote> +<p><ins> +<i>Returns:</i> If <tt>I == 0</tt> returns <tt>std::forward<T1&&>(p.first)</tt>; +if <tt>I == 1</tt> +returns <tt>std::forward<T2&&>(p.second)</tt>; otherwise the program is ill-formed. +</ins></p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Throws:</i> Nothing. +</ins></p> + +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +Add the following signature to 23.3 [sequences] <tt><array></tt> synopsis +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>template <size_t I, class T, size_t N> +T&& get(array<T,N> &&); +</ins></pre></blockquote> + +<p> +And after p8 23.3.1.8 [array.tuple] +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>template <size_t I, class T, size_t N> +T&& get(array<T,N> && a); +</ins></pre> + +<blockquote><ins> +<i>Effects:</i> Equivalent to <tt>return std::move(get<I>(a));</tt> +</ins></blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1192"></a>1192. <tt>basic_string</tt> missing definitions for <tt>cbegin</tt> / <tt>cend</tt> / <tt>crbegin</tt> / <tt>crend</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.4.3 [string.iterators] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Jonathan Wakely <b>Opened:</b> 2009-08-14 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Unlike the containers in clause 23, <tt>basic_string</tt> has definitions for +<tt>begin()</tt> and <tt>end()</tt>, but these have not been updated to include <tt>cbegin</tt>, +<tt>cend</tt>, <tt>crbegin</tt> and <tt>crend</tt>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10-28 Howard: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Tentatively NAD after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. Added +rationale. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10-28 Alisdair disagrees: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I'm going to have to speak up as the dissenting voice. +</p> + +<p> +I agree the issue could be handled editorially, and that would be my +preference if Pete feels this is appropriate. Failing that, I really +think this issue should be accepted and moved to ready. The other +begin/end functions all have a semantic definition for this template, +and it is confusing if a small few are missing. +</p> + +<p> +I agree that an alternative would be to strike <em>all</em> the definitions for +<tt>begin/end/rbegin/rend</tt> and defer completely to the requirements tables in +clause 23. I think that might be confusing without a forward reference +though, as those tables are defined in a *later* clause than the +basic_string template itself. If someone wants to pursue this I would +support it, but recommend it as a separate issue. +</p> + +<p> +So my preference is strongly to move Ready over NAD, and a stronger +preference for NAD Editorial if Pete is happy to make these changes. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10-29 Howard: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. Removed +rationale to mark it NAD. :-) +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add to 21.4.3 [string.iterators] +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>iterator begin(); +const_iterator begin() const; +<ins>const_iterator cbegin() const;</ins> +</pre> + +<p>...</p> + +<pre>iterator end(); +const_iterator end() const; +<ins>const_iterator cend() const;</ins> +</pre> + +<p>...</p> + +<pre>reverse_iterator rbegin(); +const_reverse_iterator rbegin() const; +<ins>const_reverse_iterator crbegin() const;</ins> +</pre> + +<p>...</p> + +<pre>reverse_iterator rend(); +const_reverse_iterator rend() const; +<ins>const_reverse_iterator crend() const;</ins> +</pre> + +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1193"></a>1193. <tt>default_delete</tt> cannot be instantiated with incomplete types</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.9.1 [unique.ptr.dltr] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2009-08-18 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +According to the general rules of 17.6.3.8 [res.on.functions]/2 b 5 the effects +are undefined, if an incomplete type is used to instantiate a library template. But neither in +20.9.9.1 [unique.ptr.dltr] nor +in any other place of the standard such explicit allowance is given. +Since this template is intended to be instantiated with incomplete +types, this must +be fixed. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-15 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-17 Alisdair Opens: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +LWG 1193 tries to support unique_ptr for incomplete types. I believe the +proposed wording goes too far: +</p> + +<blockquote> +The template parameter <tt>T</tt> of <tt>default_delete</tt> may be an +incomplete type. +</blockquote> + +<p> +Do we really want to support <tt>cv-void</tt>? Suggested ammendment: +</p> + +<blockquote> +The template parameter <tt>T</tt> of <tt>default_delete</tt> may be an +incomplete type <ins>other than <tt>cv-void</tt></ins>. +</blockquote> + +<p> +We might also consider saying something about arrays of incomplete types. +</p> + +<p> +Did we lose support for <tt>unique_ptr<function-type></tt> when the +concept-enabled work was shelved? If so, we might want a +<tt>default_delete</tt> partial specialization for function types that does +nothing. Alternatively, function types should <em>not</em> be supported by +default, but there is no reason a user cannot support them via their own +deletion policy. +</p> + +<p> +Function-type support might also lead to conditionally supporting a +function-call operator in the general case, and that seems way too inventive at +this stage to me, even if we could largely steal wording directly from +<tt>reference_wrapper</tt>. <tt>shared_ptr</tt> would have similar problems +too. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-01-24 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add two new paragraphs directly to 20.9.9.1 [unique.ptr.dltr] (before +20.9.9.1.2 [unique.ptr.dltr.dflt]) with the following +content: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p><ins> +The class template <tt>default_delete</tt> serves as the default deleter (destruction policy) for +the class template <tt>unique_ptr</tt>. +</ins></p> + +<p><ins> +The template parameter <tt>T</tt> of <tt>default_delete</tt> may be an incomplete type. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1194"></a>1194. Unintended <tt>queue</tt> constructor</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.5 [container.adaptors] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2009-08-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#container.adaptors">issues</a> in [container.adaptors].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +23.5.1.1 [queue.defn] has the following <tt>queue</tt> constructor: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class Alloc> explicit queue(const Alloc&); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +This will be implemented like so: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class Alloc> explicit queue(const Alloc& a) : c(a) {} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +The issue is that <tt>Alloc</tt> can be anything that a container will construct +from, for example an <tt>int</tt>. Is this intended to compile? +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>queue<int> q(5); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Before the addition of this constructor, <tt>queue<int>(5)</tt> would not compile. +I ask, not because this crashes, but because it is new and appears to be +unintended. We do not want to be in a position of accidently introducing this +"feature" in C++0X and later attempting to remove it. +</p> + +<p> +I've picked on <tt>queue</tt>. <tt>priority_queue</tt> and <tt>stack</tt> have +the same issue. Is it useful to create a <tt>priority_queue</tt> of 5 +identical elements? +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Daniel, Howard and Pablo collaborated on the proposed wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p><i>[ +This resolution includes a semi-editorial clean up, giving definitions to members +which in some cases weren't defined since C++98. +This resolution also offers editorially different wording for <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#976">976</a>, +and it also provides wording for <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1196">1196</a>. +]</i></p> + + +<p> +Change container.adaptors, p1: +</p> + +<blockquote> +The container adaptors each take a <tt>Container</tt> template parameter, and +each constructor takes a <tt>Container</tt> reference argument. This container is +copied into the <tt>Container</tt> member of each adaptor. If the container takes +an allocator, then a compatible allocator may be passed in to the +adaptor's constructor. Otherwise, normal copy or move construction is +used for the container argument. <del>[<i>Note:</i> it is not necessary for an +implementation to distinguish between the one-argument constructor that +takes a <tt>Container</tt> and the one- argument constructor that takes an +allocator_type. Both forms use their argument to construct an instance +of the container. — <i>end note</i>]</del> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change queue.defn, p1: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T, class Container = deque<T> > +class queue { +public: + typedef typename Container::value_type value_type; + typedef typename Container::reference reference; + typedef typename Container::const_reference const_reference; + typedef typename Container::size_type size_type; + typedef Container container_type; +protected: + Container c; + +public: + explicit queue(const Container&); + explicit queue(Container&& = Container()); + queue(queue&& q)<ins>;</ins><del> : c(std::move(q.c)) {}</del> + template <class Alloc> explicit queue(const Alloc&); + template <class Alloc> queue(const Container&, const Alloc&); + template <class Alloc> queue(Container&&, const Alloc&); + template <class Alloc> queue(queue&&, const Alloc&); + queue& operator=(queue&& q)<ins>;</ins><del> { c = std::move(q.c); return *this; }</del> + + bool empty() const { return c.empty(); } + ... +}; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Add a new section after 23.5.1.1 [queue.defn], [queue.cons]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p><b><tt>queue</tt> constructors [queue.cons]</b></p> + +<pre>explicit queue(const Container& cont); +</pre> + +<blockquote> + +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Initializes <tt>c</tt> with <tt>cont</tt>. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<pre>explicit queue(Container&& cont = Container()); +</pre> + +<blockquote> + +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Initializes <tt>c</tt> with <tt>std::move(cont)</tt>. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<pre>queue(queue&& q) +</pre> + +<blockquote> + +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Initializes <tt>c</tt> with <tt>std::move(q.c)</tt>. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +For each of the following constructors, +if <tt>uses_allocator<container_type, Alloc>::value</tt> is <tt>false</tt>, +then the constructor shall not participate in overload resolution. +</p> + +<pre>template <class Alloc> + explicit queue(const Alloc& a); +</pre> + +<blockquote> + +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Initializes <tt>c</tt> with <tt>a</tt>. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class Alloc> + queue(const container_type& cont, const Alloc& a); +</pre> + +<blockquote> + +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Initializes <tt>c</tt> with <tt>cont</tt> as the first +argument and <tt>a</tt> as the second argument. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class Alloc> + queue(container_type&& cont, const Alloc& a); +</pre> + +<blockquote> + +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Initializes <tt>c</tt> with <tt>std::move(cont)</tt> as the +first argument and <tt>a</tt> as the second argument. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class Alloc> + queue(queue&& q, const Alloc& a); +</pre> + +<blockquote> + +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Initializes <tt>c</tt> with <tt>std::move(q.c)</tt> as the +first argument and <tt>a</tt> as the second argument. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<pre>queue& operator=(queue&& q); +</pre> + +<blockquote> + +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Assigns <tt>c</tt> with <tt>std::move(q.c)</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt>*this</tt>. +</p> + +</blockquote> + + + +</blockquote> + +<p> +Add to 23.5.2.1 [priqueue.cons]: +</p> + +<blockquote> + +<pre>priority_queue(priority_queue&& q); +</pre> + +<blockquote> + +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Initializes <tt>c</tt> with <tt>std::move(q.c)</tt> and +initializes <tt>comp</tt> with <tt>std::move(q.comp)</tt>. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +For each of the following constructors, +if <tt>uses_allocator<container_type, Alloc>::value</tt> is <tt>false</tt>, +then the constructor shall not participate in overload resolution. +</p> + +<pre>template <class Alloc> + explicit priority_queue(const Alloc& a); +</pre> + +<blockquote> + +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Initializes <tt>c</tt> with <tt>a</tt> and value-initializes <tt>comp</tt>. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class Alloc> + priority_queue(const Compare& compare, const Alloc& a); +</pre> + +<blockquote> + +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Initializes <tt>c</tt> with <tt>a</tt> and initializes <tt>comp</tt> +with <tt>compare</tt>. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class Alloc> + priority_queue(const Compare& compare, const Container& cont, const Alloc& a); +</pre> + +<blockquote> + +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Initializes <tt>c</tt> with <tt>cont</tt> as the first argument +and <tt>a</tt> as the second argument, +and initializes <tt>comp</tt> with <tt>compare</tt>. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class Alloc> + priority_queue(const Compare& compare, Container&& cont, const Alloc& a); +</pre> + +<blockquote> + +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Initializes <tt>c</tt> with <tt>std::move(cont)</tt> as +the first argument and <tt>a</tt> as the second argument, +and initializes <tt>comp</tt> with <tt>compare</tt>. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class Alloc> + priority_queue(priority_queue&& q, const Alloc& a); +</pre> + +<blockquote> + +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Initializes <tt>c</tt> with <tt>std::move(q.c)</tt> as the +first argument and <tt>a</tt> as the second argument, +and initializes <tt>comp</tt> with <tt>std::move(q.comp)</tt>. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<pre>priority_queue& operator=(priority_queue&& q); +</pre> + +<blockquote> + +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Assigns <tt>c</tt> with <tt>std::move(q.c)</tt> and +assigns <tt>comp</tt> with <tt>std::move(q.comp)</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt>*this</tt>. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + + + + +<p> +Change 23.5.3.1 [stack.defn]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T, class Container = deque<T> > +class stack { +public: + typedef typename Container::value_type value_type; + typedef typename Container::reference reference; + typedef typename Container::const_reference const_reference; + typedef typename Container::size_type size_type; + typedef Container container_type; +protected: + Container c; + +public: + explicit stack(const Container&); + explicit stack(Container&& = Container()); + <ins>stack(stack&& s);</ins> + template <class Alloc> explicit stack(const Alloc&); + template <class Alloc> stack(const Container&, const Alloc&); + template <class Alloc> stack(Container&&, const Alloc&); + template <class Alloc> stack(stack&&, const Alloc&); + <ins>stack& operator=(stack&& s);</ins> + + bool empty() const { return c.empty(); } + ... +}; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Add a new section after 23.5.3.1 [stack.defn], [stack.cons]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p><b><tt>stack</tt> constructors [stack.cons]</b></p> + +<pre>stack(stack&& s); +</pre> + +<blockquote> + +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Initializes <tt>c</tt> with <tt>std::move(s.c)</tt>. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +For each of the following constructors, +if <tt>uses_allocator<container_type, Alloc>::value</tt> is <tt>false</tt>, +then the constructor shall not participate in overload resolution. +</p> + +<pre>template <class Alloc> + explicit stack(const Alloc& a); +</pre> + +<blockquote> + +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Initializes <tt>c</tt> with <tt>a</tt>. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class Alloc> + stack(const container_type& cont, const Alloc& a); +</pre> + +<blockquote> + +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Initializes <tt>c</tt> with <tt>cont</tt> as the +first argument and <tt>a</tt> as the second argument. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class Alloc> + stack(container_type&& cont, const Alloc& a); +</pre> + +<blockquote> + +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Initializes <tt>c</tt> with <tt>std::move(cont)</tt> as the +first argument and <tt>a</tt> as the second argument. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class Alloc> + stack(stack&& s, const Alloc& a); +</pre> + +<blockquote> + +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Initializes <tt>c</tt> with <tt>std::move(s.c)</tt> as the +first argument and <tt>a</tt> as the second argument. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<pre>stack& operator=(stack&& s); +</pre> + +<blockquote> + +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> Assigns <tt>c</tt> with <tt>std::move(s.c)</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt>*this</tt>. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1195"></a>1195. "Diagnostic required" wording is insufficient to prevent UB</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17 [library] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2009-08-18 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index-open.html#library">active issues</a> in [library].</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#library">issues</a> in [library].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Several parts of the library use the notion of "Diagnostic required" +to indicate that +in the corresponding situation an error diagnostic should occur, e.g. +20.9.9.1.2 [unique.ptr.dltr.dflt]/2 +</p> +<blockquote><pre>void operator()(T *ptr) const; +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<i>Effects:</i> calls <tt>delete</tt> on <tt>ptr</tt>. A diagnostic is required if <tt>T</tt> is an +incomplete type. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +The problem with this approach is that such a requirement is +insufficient to prevent +undefined behavior, if this situation occurs. According to 1.3.6 [defns.diagnostic] +a <i>diagnostic message</i> is defined as +</p> + +<blockquote> +a message belonging to an implementation-defined subset of the +implementation's output messages. +</blockquote> + +<p> +which doesn't indicate any relation to an ill-formed program. In fact, +"compiler warnings" +are a typical expression of such diagnostics. This means that above +wording can be interpreted +by compiler writers that they satisfy the requirements of the standard +if they just produce +such a "warning", if the compiler happens to compile code like this: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>#include <memory> + +struct Ukn; // defined somewhere else +Ukn* create_ukn(); // defined somewhere else + +int main() { + std::default_delete<Ukn>()(create_ukn()); +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +In this and other examples discussed here it was the authors intent to +guarantee that the +program is ill-formed with a required diagnostic, therefore such +wording should be used instead. +According to the general rules outlined in 1.4 [intro.compliance] it +should be sufficient +to require that these situations produce an ill-formed program and the +"diagnostic +required" part should be implied. The proposed resolution also +suggests to remove +several <i>redundant</i> wording of "Diagnostics required" to ensure that +the absence of +such saying does not cause a misleading interpretation. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Move to NAD. +</p> +<p> +It's not clear that there's any important difference between +"ill-formed" and "diagnostic required". From 1.4 [intro.compliance], 1.3.9 [defns.ill.formed], and 1.3.26 [defns.well.formed] it appears that an ill-formed program is one +that is not correctly constructed according to the syntax rules and +diagnosable semantic rules, which means that... "a conforming +implementation shall issue at least one diagnostic message." The +author's intent seems to be that we should be requiring a fatal error +instead of a mere warning, but the standard just doesn't have language +to express that distinction. The strongest thing we can ever require is +a "diagnostic". +</p> +<p> +The proposed rewording may be a clearer way of expressing the same thing +that the WP already says, but such a rewording is editorial. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Considered again. Group disagrees that the change is technical, but likes +it editorially. Moved to NAD Editorial. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-19: Moved from NAD Editorial to Open. Please see the thread starting +with Message c++std-lib-25916. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-20 Daniel updated wording. +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +The following resolution differs from the previous one by avoiding the unusual +and misleading term "shall be ill-formed", which does also not follow the core +language style. This resolution has the advantage of a minimum impact on the +current wording, but I would like to mention that a more intrusive solution +might be preferrable - at least as a long-term solution: Jens Maurer suggested +the following approach to get rid of the usage of the term "ill-formed" from the +library by introducing a new category to existing elements to the list of 17.5.1.4 [structure.specifications]/3, e.g. "type requirements" or "static +constraints" that define conditions that can be checked during compile-time and +any violation would make the program ill-formed. As an example, the currently +existing phrase 20.4.2.5 [tuple.helper]/1 +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Requires:</i> <tt>I < sizeof...(Types)</tt>. The program is ill-formed if +<tt>I</tt> is out of bounds. +</blockquote> + +<p> +could then be written as +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Static constraints:</i> <tt>I < sizeof...(Types)</tt>. +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-21 Daniel updated wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-22 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<ol> +<li> +<p> +Change 20.6 [ratio]/2 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +Throughout this subclause, <ins>if</ins> the template argument types <tt>R1</tt> +and <tt>R2</tt> <del>shall be</del> <ins>are not</ins> specializations of the +<tt>ratio</tt> template<ins>, the program is ill-formed</ins>. <del>Diagnostic +required.</del> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.6.1 [ratio.ratio]/1 as indicated: +</p> + +<p> +<ins>If t</ins><del>T</del>he template argument <tt>D</tt> <del>shall not +be</del> <ins>is</ins> zero<del>, and</del> <ins>or</ins> the absolute values of +the template arguments <tt>N</tt> and <tt>D</tt> <del>shall be</del> <ins>are +not</ins> representable by type <tt>intmax_t</tt><ins>, the program is +ill-formed</ins>. <del>Diagnostic required.</del> [..] +</p> + +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.6.2 [ratio.arithmetic]/1 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +Implementations may use other algorithms to compute these values. If overflow +occurs, <ins>the program is ill-formed</ins> <del>a diagnostic shall be +issued</del>. +</blockquote> + +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.6.3 [ratio.comparison]/2 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +[...] Implementations may use other algorithms to compute this relationship to +avoid overflow. If overflow occurs, <ins>the program is ill-formed</ins> <del>a +diagnostic is required</del>. +</blockquote> + +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.9.9.1.2 [unique.ptr.dltr.dflt]/2 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> calls <tt>delete</tt> on <tt>ptr</tt>. <del>A diagnostic is +required if <tt>T</tt> is an incomplete type.</del> +</p> + +<p> +<ins><i>Remarks:</i> If <tt>T</tt> is an incomplete type, the program is +ill-formed.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> + +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.9.9.1.3 [unique.ptr.dltr.dflt1]/1 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void operator()(T* ptr) const; +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins><i>Effects:</i></ins> <del><tt>operator()</tt></del> calls +<tt>delete[]</tt> on <tt>ptr</tt>. <del>A diagnostic is required if <tt>T</tt> +is an incomplete type.</del> +</p> +<p> +<ins><i>Remarks:</i> If <tt>T</tt> is an incomplete type, the program is +ill-formed.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.9.9.2.1 [unique.ptr.single.ctor] as indicated: <i>[Note: This +editorially improves the currently suggested wording of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#932">932</a> by +replacing</i> +</p> +<blockquote> +<i>"shall be ill-formed" by "is ill-formed"]</i> +</blockquote> + +<p> +<i>[If +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n3025.html">N3025</a> +is accepted this bullet is applied identically in that paper as well.]</i> +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +-1- <i>Requires:</i> <tt>D</tt> shall be default constructible, and that +construction shall not throw an exception. <del><tt>D</tt> shall not be a +reference type or pointer type (diagnostic required).</del> +</p> + +<p>...</p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Remarks:</i> If this constructor is instantiated with a pointer type +or reference type for the template argument <tt>D</tt>, the program is +ill-formed. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> + +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.9.9.2.1 [unique.ptr.single.ctor]/8 as indicated: <i>[Note: This +editorially improves the currently suggested wording of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#932">932</a> by +replacing</i> +</p> +<blockquote> +<i>"shall be ill-formed" by "is ill-formed"]</i> +</blockquote> + +<p> +<i>[If +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n3025.html">N3025</a> +is accepted this bullet is applied identically in that paper as well.]</i> +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>unique_ptr(pointer p); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p>...</p> +<p><ins> +<i>Remarks:</i> If this constructor is instantiated with a pointer type +or reference type for the template argument <tt>D</tt>, the program is +ill-formed. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.9.9.2.1 [unique.ptr.single.ctor]/13 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +[..] If <tt>d</tt> is an rvalue, it will bind to the second constructor of this +pair <ins>and the program is ill-formed</ins>. <del>That constructor shall emit +a diagnostic.</del> [<i>Note:</i> The diagnostic could be implemented using a +<tt>static_assert</tt> which assures that <tt>D</tt> is not a reference type. +— <i>end note</i>] Else <tt>d</tt> is an lvalue and will bind to the first +constructor of this pair. [..] +</blockquote> + +</li> + +<li> +20.9.9.2.1 [unique.ptr.single.ctor]/20: Solved by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#950">950</a>. +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.9.9.3 [unique.ptr.runtime]/1 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +A specialization for array types is provided with a slightly altered interface. +</p> +<ul> +<li> +Conversions among different types of <tt>unique_ptr<T[], D></tt> or to or +from the non-array forms of <tt>unique_ptr</tt> <del>are disallowed (diagnostic +required)</del> <ins>produce an ill-formed program</ins>. +</li> +<li>...</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.11.3 [time.duration]/2-4 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +2 <i>Requires:</i> <tt>Rep</tt> shall be an arithmetic type or a class emulating +an arithmetic type. <del>If a program instantiates <tt>duration</tt> with a +<tt>duration</tt> type for the template argument <tt>Rep</tt> a diagnostic is +required.</del> +</p> +<p> +<ins>3 <i>Remarks:</i> If <tt>duration</tt> is instantiated with a +<tt>duration</tt> type for the template argument <tt>Rep</tt>, the program is +ill-formed.</ins> +</p> + +<p> +<del>3</del> <ins>4</ins> <i><del>Requires</del> <ins>Remarks</ins>:</i> +<ins>If</ins> <tt>Period</tt> <del>shall be</del> <ins>is not</ins> a +specialization of <tt>ratio</tt>, <del>diagnostic required</del> <ins>the +program is ill-formed</ins>. +</p> + +<p> +<del>4</del> <ins>5</ins> <i><del>Requires</del> <ins>Remarks</ins>:</i> +<ins>If</ins> <tt>Period::num</tt> <del>shall be</del> <ins>is not</ins> +positive, <del>diagnostic required</del> <ins>the program is ill-formed</ins>. +</p> +</blockquote> + +</li> + +<li> +20.11.3.1 [time.duration.cons]/1+4: Apply <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1177">1177</a> +</li> + +<li> +20.11.3.5 [time.duration.nonmember]/4+6+8+11: Apply <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1177">1177</a> +</li> + +<li> +20.11.3.7 [time.duration.cast]/1: Apply <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1177">1177</a> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.11.4 [time.point]/2 as indicated: +</p> +<blockquote> +<ins>If</ins> <tt>Duration</tt> <del>shall be</del> <ins>is not</ins> an +instance of <tt>duration</tt><ins>, the program is ill-formed</ins>. +<del>Diagnostic required.</del> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +20.11.4.1 [time.point.cons]/3: Apply <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1177">1177</a> +</li> + +<li> +20.11.4.7 [time.point.cast]/1: Apply <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1177">1177</a> +</li> + +</ol> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1197"></a>1197. Can unordered containers have <tt>bucket_count() == 0</tt>?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2.5 [unord.req] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2009-08-24 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index-open.html#unord.req">active issues</a> in [unord.req].</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#unord.req">issues</a> in [unord.req].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Table 97 "Unordered associative container requirements" in +23.2.5 [unord.req] says: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 97 — Unordered associative container requirements +(in addition to container)</caption> + +<tbody><tr> +<th>Expression</th> +<th>Return type</th> +<th>Assertion/note pre-/post-condition</th> +<th>Complexity</th> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>b.bucket(k)</tt></td> +<td><tt>size_type</tt></td> +<td>Returns the index of the bucket in which elements with keys +equivalent to <tt>k</tt> would be found, +if any such element existed. +Post: the return value shall be +in the range <tt>[0, +b.bucket_count())</tt>.</td> +<td>Constant</td> +</tr> + +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + +<p> +What should <tt>b.bucket(k)</tt> return if <tt>b.bucket_count() == 0</tt>? +</p> + +<p> +I believe allowing <tt>b.bucket_count() == 0</tt> is important. It is a +very reasonable post-condition of the default constructor, or of a moved-from +container. +</p> + +<p> +I can think of several reasonable results from <tt>b.bucket(k)</tt> when +<tt>b.bucket_count() == 0</tt>: +</p> + +<ol> +<li> +Return 0. +</li> +<li> +Return <tt>numeric_limits<size_type>::max()</tt>. +</li> +<li> +Throw a <tt>domain_error</tt>. +</li> +<li> +Requires: <tt>b.bucket_count() != 0</tt>. +</li> +</ol> + +<p><i>[ +2009-08-26 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +A forth choice would be to add the pre-condition "<tt>b.bucket_count() != 0</tt>" +and thus imply undefined behavior if this is violated. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Howard: I like this option too, added to the list. +]</i></p> + + +<p> +Further on here my own favorite solution (rationale see below): +</p> + +<p><b>Suggested resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +[Rationale: I suggest to follow choice (1). The main reason is +that all associative container functions which take a key argument, +are basically free of pre-conditions and non-disrupting, therefore +excluding choices (3) and (4). Option (2) seems a bit unexpected +to me. It would be more natural, if several similar functions +would exist which would also justify the existence of a symbolic +constant like npos for this situation. The value 0 is both simple +and consistent, it has exactly the same role as a past-the-end +iterator value. A typical use-case is: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>size_type pos = m.bucket(key); +if (pos != m.bucket_count()) { + ... +} else { + ... +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p>— end Rationale]</p> + +<p> +- Change Table 97 in 23.2.5 [unord.req] as follows (Row b.bucket(k), Column "Assertion/..."): +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 97 — Unordered associative container requirements +(in addition to container)</caption> + +<tbody><tr> +<th>Expression</th> +<th>Return type</th> +<th>Assertion/note pre-/post-condition</th> +<th>Complexity</th> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>b.bucket(k)</tt></td> +<td><tt>size_type</tt></td> +<td>Returns the index of the bucket in which elements with keys +equivalent to <tt>k</tt> would be found, +if any such element existed. +Post: <ins>if b.bucket_count() != 0, </ins>the return value shall be +in the range <tt>[0, +b.bucket_count())</tt><ins>, otherwise 0</ins>.</td> +<td>Constant</td> +</tr> + +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-01-25 Choice 4 put into proposed resolution section. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-01-31 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change Table 97 in 23.2.5 [unord.req] as follows (Row b.bucket(k), Column +"Assertion/..."): +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 97 — Unordered associative container requirements +(in addition to container)</caption> + +<tbody><tr> +<th>Expression</th> +<th>Return type</th> +<th>Assertion/note pre-/post-condition</th> +<th>Complexity</th> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>b.bucket(k)</tt></td> +<td><tt>size_type</tt></td> +<td><ins>Pre: <tt>b.bucket_count() > 0</tt></ins> Returns the index of the +bucket in which elements with keys equivalent to <tt>k</tt> would be found, if +any such element existed. Post: the return value shall be in the range <tt>[0, +b.bucket_count())</tt>.</td> +<td>Constant</td> +</tr> + +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1198"></a>1198. Container adaptor swap: member or non-member?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.5 [container.adaptors] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Pablo Halpern <b>Opened:</b> 2009-08-26 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-24</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#container.adaptors">issues</a> in [container.adaptors].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Under 23.5 [container.adaptors] of +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2914.pdf">N2914</a> +the member function of <tt>swap</tt> of <tt>queue</tt> and <tt>stack</tt> call: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>swap(c, q.c); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +But under 23.5 [container.adaptors] of +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2723.pdf">N2723</a> +these members are specified to call: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>c.swap(q.c); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Neither draft specifies the semantics of member <tt>swap</tt> for +<tt>priority_queue</tt> though it is declared. +</p> + +<p> +Although the distinction between member <tt>swap</tt> and non-member +<tt>swap</tt> is not important when these adaptors are adapting standard +containers, it may be important for user-defined containers. +</p> +<p> +We (Pablo and Howard) feel that +it is more likely for a user-defined container to support a namespace scope +<tt>swap</tt> than a member <tt>swap</tt>, and therefore these adaptors +should use the container's namespace scope <tt>swap</tt>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-09-30 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +The outcome of this issue should be considered with the outcome of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#774">774</a> both in style and in content (e.g. <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#774">774</a> bullet 9 +suggests to define the semantic of <tt>void +priority_queue::swap(priority_queue&)</tt> in terms of the member +<tt>swap</tt> of the container). +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-03-28 Daniel update to diff against N3092. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><i>[ +2010 Rapperswil: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Preference to move the wording into normative text, rather than inline function definitions in the class synopsis. + +Move to Tenatively Ready. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +Change 23.5.1.1 [queue.defn]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T, class Container = deque<T> > +class queue { + ... + void swap(queue& q) { <ins>using std::swap;</ins> + <del>c.</del>swap(<ins>c, </ins>q.c); } + ... +}; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Change 23.5.2 [priority.queue]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T, class Container = vector<T>, + class Compare = less<typename Container::value_type> > +class priority_queue { + ... + void swap(priority_queue& <ins>q</ins>)<del>;</del> <ins>{ using std::swap;</ins> + <ins>swap(c, q.c);</ins> + <ins>swap(comp, q.comp); }</ins> + ... +}; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Change 23.5.3.1 [stack.defn]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T, class Container = deque<T> > +class stack { + ... + void swap(stack& s) { <ins>using std::swap;</ins> + <del>c.</del>swap(<ins>c, </ins>s.c); } + ... +}; +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1199"></a>1199. Missing extended copy constructor in container adaptors</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.5 [container.adaptors] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Pablo Halpern <b>Opened:</b> 2009-08-26 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#container.adaptors">issues</a> in [container.adaptors].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +<tt>queue</tt> has a constructor: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class Alloc> + queue(queue&&, const Alloc&); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +but it is missing a corresponding constructor: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class Alloc> + queue(const queue&, const Alloc&); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +The same is true of <tt>priority_queue</tt>, and <tt>stack</tt>. This +"extended copy constructor" is needed for consistency and to ensure that the +user of a container adaptor can always specify the allocator for his adaptor. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-01 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p><i>[ +This resolution has been harmonized with the proposed resolution to issue +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1194">1194</a> +]</i></p> + + +<p>Change 23.5.1.1 [queue.defn], p1:</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T, class Container = deque<T> > +class queue { +public: + typedef typename Container::value_type value_type; + typedef typename Container::reference reference; + typedef typename Container::const_reference const_reference; + typedef typename Container::size_type size_type; + typedef Container container_type; +protected: + Container c; + +public: + explicit queue(const Container&); + explicit queue(Container&& = Container()); + queue(queue&& q); + + template <class Alloc> explicit queue(const Alloc&); + template <class Alloc> queue(const Container&, const Alloc&); + template <class Alloc> queue(Container&&, const Alloc&); + <ins>template <class Alloc> queue(const queue&, const Alloc&);</ins> + template <class Alloc> queue(queue&&, const Alloc&); + queue& operator=(queue&& q); + + bool empty() const { return c.empty(); } + ... +}; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +To the new section 23.5.1.2 [queue.cons], introduced +in <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1194">1194</a>, add: +</p> + +<blockquote> + +<pre>template <class Alloc> + queue(const queue& q, const Alloc& a); +</pre> + +<blockquote><p> +<i>Effects:</i> Initializes <tt>c</tt> with <tt>q.c</tt> as the +first argument and <tt>a</tt> as the second argument. +</p></blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p>Change 23.5.2 [priority.queue] as follows (I've an included an editorial change to + move the poorly-placed move-assignment operator):</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T, class Container = vector<T>, + class Compare = less<typename Container::value_type> > +class priority_queue { +public: + typedef typename Container::value_type value_type; + typedef typename Container::reference reference; + typedef typename Container::const_reference const_reference; + typedef typename Container::size_type size_type; + typedef Container container_type; +protected: + Container c; + Compare comp; + +public: + priority_queue(const Compare& x, const Container&); + explicit priority_queue(const Compare& x = Compare(), Container&& = Container()); + template <class InputIterator> + priority_queue(InputIterator first, InputIterator last, + const Compare& x, const Container&); + template <class InputIterator> + priority_queue(InputIterator first, InputIterator last, + const Compare& x = Compare(), Container&& = Container()); + priority_queue(priority_queue&&); + <del>priority_queue& operator=(priority_queue&&);</del> + template <class Alloc> explicit priority_queue(const Alloc&); + template <class Alloc> priority_queue(const Compare&, const Alloc&); + template <class Alloc> priority_queue(const Compare&, + const Container&, const Alloc&); + template <class Alloc> priority_queue(const Compare&, + Container&&, const Alloc&); + <ins>template <class Alloc> priority_queue(const priority_queue&, const Alloc&);</ins> + template <class Alloc> priority_queue(priority_queue&&, const Alloc&); + + <ins>priority_queue& operator=(priority_queue&&);</ins> + ... +}; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Add to 23.5.2.1 [priqueue.cons]: +</p> + +<blockquote> + +<pre>template <class Alloc> + priority_queue(const priority_queue& q, const Alloc& a); +</pre> + +<blockquote><p> +<i>Effects:</i> Initializes <tt>c</tt> with <tt>q.c</tt> as the +first argument and <tt>a</tt> as the second argument, +and initializes <tt>comp</tt> with <tt>q.comp</tt>. +</p></blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 23.5.3.1 [stack.defn]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T, class Container = deque<T> > +class stack { +public: + typedef typename Container::value_type value_type; + typedef typename Container::reference reference; + typedef typename Container::const_reference const_reference; + typedef typename Container::size_type size_type; + typedef Container container_type; +protected: + Container c; + +public: + explicit stack(const Container&); + explicit stack(Container&& = Container()); + stack(stack&& s); + + template <class Alloc> explicit stack(const Alloc&); + template <class Alloc> stack(const Container&, const Alloc&); + template <class Alloc> stack(Container&&, const Alloc&); + <ins>template <class Alloc> stack(const stack&, const Alloc&);</ins> + template <class Alloc> stack(stack&&, const Alloc&); + stack& operator=(stack&& s); + + bool empty() const { return c.empty(); } + ... +}; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +To the new section 23.5.3.2 [stack.cons], introduced +in <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1194">1194</a>, add: +</p> + +<blockquote> + +<pre>template <class Alloc> + stack(const stack& s, const Alloc& a); +</pre> + +<blockquote><p> +<i>Effects:</i> Initializes <tt>c</tt> with <tt>s.c</tt> as the +first argument and <tt>a</tt> as the second argument. +</p></blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1204"></a>1204. Global permission to move</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17.6.3.9 [res.on.arguments] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2009-09-12 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#res.on.arguments">issues</a> in [res.on.arguments].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +When a library function binds an rvalue reference parameter to an argument, the +library must be able to assume that the bound argument is a temporary, and not +a moved-from lvalue. The reason for this is that the library function must be +able to modify that argument without concern that such modifications will corrupt +the logic of the calling code. For example: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T, class A> +void +vector<T, A>::push_back(value_type&& v) +{ + <font color="#C80000">// This function should move from v, potentially modifying</font> + <font color="#C80000">// the object v is bound to.</font> +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +If <tt>v</tt> is truly bound to a temporary, then <tt>push_back</tt> has the +<em>only</em> reference to this temporary in the entire program. Thus any +modifications will be invisible to the rest of the program. +</p> + +<p> +If the client supplies <tt>std::move(x)</tt> to <tt>push_back</tt>, the onus is +on the client to ensure that the value of <tt>x</tt> is no longer important to +the logic of his program after this statement. I.e. the client is making a statement +that <tt>push_back</tt> may treat <tt>x</tt> as a temporary. +</p> + +<blockquote><em> +The above statement is the very foundation upon which move semantics is based. +</em></blockquote> + +<p> +The standard is currently lacking a global statement to this effect. I propose +the following addition to 17.6.3.9 [res.on.arguments]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Each of the following statements applies to all arguments to functions +defined in the C++ standard library, unless explicitly stated otherwise. +</p> +<ul> +<li> +If an argument to a function has an invalid value (such as a value +outside the domain of the function, or a pointer invalid for its +intended use), the behavior is undefined. +</li> +<li> +If a function argument is described as being an array, the pointer +actually passed to the function shall have a value such that all address +computations and accesses to objects (that would be valid if the pointer +did point to the first element of such an array) are in fact valid. +</li> +<li><ins> +If a function argument binds to an rvalue reference parameter, the C++ +standard library may assume that this parameter is a unique reference +to this argument. If the parameter is a generic parameter of the +form <tt>T&&</tt>, and an lvalue of type <tt>A</tt> is bound, +then the binding is considered to be to an lvalue reference +(14.8.2.1 [temp.deduct.call]) and thus not covered by this clause. +[<i>Note:</i> +If a program casts an lvalue to an rvalue while passing that lvalue to +a library function (e.g. <tt>move(x)</tt>), then the program is effectively +asking the library to treat that lvalue as a temporary. The library is at +liberty to optimize away aliasing checks which might be needed if the argument +were an lvalue. +— <i>end note</i>] +</ins></li> +</ul> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +Such a global statement will eliminate the need for piecemeal statements such as +23.2.1 [container.requirements.general]/13: +</p> + +<blockquote> +An object bound to an rvalue reference parameter of a member function of +a container shall not be an element of that container; no diagnostic +required. +</blockquote> + +<p> +Additionally this clarifies that move assignment operators need not perform the +traditional <tt>if (this != &rhs)</tt> test commonly found (and needed) in +copy assignment operators. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-09-13 Niels adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Note: This resolution supports the change of 27.9.1.3 [filebuf.assign]/1, +proposed by LWG <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#900">900</a>. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add a bullet to 17.6.3.9 [res.on.arguments]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Each of the following statements applies to all arguments to functions +defined in the C++ standard library, unless explicitly stated otherwise. +</p> +<ul> +<li> +If an argument to a function has an invalid value (such as a value +outside the domain of the function, or a pointer invalid for its +intended use), the behavior is undefined. +</li> +<li> +If a function argument is described as being an array, the pointer +actually passed to the function shall have a value such that all address +computations and accesses to objects (that would be valid if the pointer +did point to the first element of such an array) are in fact valid. +</li> +<li><ins> +If a function argument binds to an rvalue reference parameter, the C++ +standard library may assume that this parameter is a unique reference +to this argument. If the parameter is a generic parameter of the +form <tt>T&&</tt>, and an lvalue of type <tt>A</tt> is bound, +then the binding is considered to be to an lvalue reference +(14.8.2.1 [temp.deduct.call]) and thus not covered by this clause. +[<i>Note:</i> +If a program casts an lvalue to an rvalue while passing that lvalue to +a library function (e.g. <tt>move(x)</tt>), then the program is effectively +asking the library to treat that lvalue as a temporary. The library is at +liberty to optimize away aliasing checks which might be needed if the argument +were an lvalue. +— <i>end note</i>] +</ins></li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Delete 23.2.1 [container.requirements.general]/13: +</p> + +<blockquote><del> +An object bound to an rvalue reference parameter of a member function of +a container shall not be an element of that container; no diagnostic +required. +</del></blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1205"></a>1205. Some algorithms could more clearly document their handling of empty ranges</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25 [algorithms] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-09-13 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#algorithms">issues</a> in [algorithms].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +There are a number of algorithms whose result might depend on the +handling of an empty range. In some cases the result is not clear, +while in others it would help readers to clearly mention the result +rather than require some subtle intuition of the supplied wording. +</p> + +<p> +25.2.1 [alg.all_of] +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt>true</tt> if <tt>pred(*i)</tt> is <tt>true</tt> for every +iterator <tt>i</tt> in the range <tt>[first,last)</tt>, ... +</blockquote> + +<p> +What does this mean if the range is empty? +</p> + +<p> +I believe that we intend this to be <tt>true</tt> and suggest a +non-normative note to clarify: +</p> + +<p> +Add to p1 25.2.1 [alg.all_of]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +[<i>Note:</i> Returns <tt>true</tt> if <tt>[first,last)</tt> is empty. +— <i>end note</i>] +</blockquote> + +<p> +25.2.3 [alg.none_of] +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt>true</tt> if <tt>pred(*i)</tt> is <tt>false</tt> for every +iterator <tt>i</tt> in the range <tt>[first,last)</tt>, ... +</blockquote> + +<p> +What does this mean if the range empty? +</p> + +<p> +I believe that we intend this to be <tt>true</tt> and suggest a +non-normative note to clarify: +</p> + +<p> +Add to p1 25.2.3 [alg.none_of]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +[<i>Note:</i> Returns <tt>true</tt> if <tt>[first,last)</tt> is empty. +— <i>end note</i>] +</blockquote> + +<p> +25.2.2 [alg.any_of] +</p> + +<p> +The specification for an empty range is actually fairly clear in this +case, but a note wouldn't hurt and would be consistent with proposals +for <tt>all_of</tt>/<tt>none_of</tt> algorithms. +</p> + +<p> +Add to p1 25.2.2 [alg.any_of]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +[<i>Note:</i> Returns <tt>false</tt> if <tt>[first,last)</tt> is empty. +— <i>end note</i>] +</blockquote> + +<p> +25.2.6 [alg.find.end] +</p> + +<p> +what does this mean if <tt>[first2,last2)</tt> is empty? +</p> + +<p> +I believe the wording suggests the algorithm should return +<tt>last1</tt> in this case, but am not 100% sure. Is this in fact the +correct result anyway? Surely an empty range should always match and the +naive expected result would be <tt>first1</tt>? +</p> + +<p> +My proposed wording is a note to clarify the current semantic: +</p> + +<p> +Add to p2 25.2.6 [alg.find.end]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +[<i>Note:</i> Returns <tt>last1</tt> if <tt>[first2,last2)</tt> is +empty. — <i>end note</i>] +</blockquote> + +<p> +I would prefer a normative wording treating empty ranges specially, but +do not believe we can change semantics at this point in the process, +unless existing implementations actually yield this result: +</p> + +<p> +Alternative wording: (NOT a note) +</p> +<p> +Add to p2 25.2.6 [alg.find.end]: +</p> +<blockquote> +Returns <tt>first1</tt> if <tt>[first2,last2)</tt> is empty. +</blockquote> + +<p> +25.2.7 [alg.find.first.of] +</p> + +<p> +The phrasing seems precise when <tt>[first2, last2)</tt> is empty, but a small +note to confirm the reader's understanding might still help. +</p> + +<p> +Add to p2 25.2.7 [alg.find.first.of] +</p> +<blockquote> +[<i>Note:</i> Returns <tt>last1</tt> if <tt>[first2,last2)</tt> is +empty. — <i>end note</i>] +</blockquote> + +<p> +25.2.13 [alg.search] +</p> + +<p> +What is the expected result if <tt>[first2, last2)</tt> is empty? +</p> + +<p> +I believe the wording suggests the algorithm should return <tt>last1</tt> in this +case, but am not 100% sure. Is this in fact the correct result anyway? +Surely an empty range should always match and the naive expected result +would be <tt>first1</tt>? +</p> + +<p> +My proposed wording is a note to clarify the current semantic: +</p> + +<p> +Add to p2 25.2.13 [alg.search]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +[<i>Note:</i> Returns <tt>last1</tt> if <tt>[first2,last2)</tt> is +empty. — <i>end note</i>] +</blockquote> + +<p> +Again, I would prefer a normative wording treating empty ranges +specially, but do not believe we can change semantics at this point in +the process, unless existing implementations actually yield this result: +</p> + +<p> +Alternative wording: (NOT a note) +</p> +<p> +Add to p2 25.2.13 [alg.search]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +Returns <tt>first1</tt> if <tt>[first2,last2)</tt> is empty. +</blockquote> + +<p> +25.3.13 [alg.partitions] +</p> + +<p> +Is an empty range partitioned or not? +</p> + +<p> +Proposed wording: +</p> + +<p> +Add to p1 25.3.13 [alg.partitions]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +[<i>Note:</i> Returns <tt>true</tt> if <tt>[first,last)</tt> is empty. +— <i>end note</i>] +</blockquote> + +<p> +25.4.5.1 [includes] +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt>true</tt> if every element in the range +<tt>[first2,last2)</tt> is contained in the range +<tt>[first1,last1)</tt>. ... +</blockquote> + +<p> +I really don't know what this means if <tt>[first2,last2)</tt> is empty. +I could loosely guess that this implies empty ranges always match, and +my proposed wording is to clarify exactly that: +</p> + +<p> +Add to p1 25.4.5.1 [includes]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +[<i>Note:</i> Returns <tt>true</tt> if <tt>[first2,last2)</tt> is empty. +— <i>end note</i>] +</blockquote> + +<p> +25.4.6.2 [pop.heap] +</p> + +<p> +The effects clause is invalid if the range <tt>[first,last)</tt> is empty, unlike +all the other heap alogorithms. The should be called out in the +requirements. +</p> + +<p> +Proposed wording: +</p> +<p> +Revise p2 25.4.6.2 [pop.heap] +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Requires:</i> The range <tt>[first,last)</tt> shall be a valid +<ins>non-empty</ins> heap. +</blockquote> + +<p> +[Editorial] Reverse order of 25.4.6.2 [pop.heap] p1 and p2. +</p> + +<p> +25.4.7 [alg.min.max] +</p> + +<p> +<tt>minmax_element</tt> does not clearly specify behaviour for an empty +range in the same way that <tt>min_element</tt> and <tt>max_element</tt> do. +</p> + +<p> +Add to p31 25.4.7 [alg.min.max]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +Returns <tt>make_pair(first, first)</tt> if <tt>first == last</tt>. +</blockquote> + +<p> +25.4.8 [alg.lex.comparison] +</p> + +<p> +The wording here seems quite clear, especially with the sample algorithm +implementation. A note is recommended purely for consistency with the +rest of these issue resolutions: +</p> + +<p> +Add to p1 25.4.8 [alg.lex.comparison]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +[<i>Note:</i> An empty sequence is lexicographically less than any other +non-empty sequence, but not to another empty sequence. — <i>end note</i>] +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-11 Howard changes Notes to Remarks and changed <tt>search</tt> to +return <tt>first1</tt> instead of <tt>last1</tt>. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-11 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add to 25.2.1 [alg.all_of]: +</p> +<blockquote><ins> +<i>Remarks:</i> Returns <tt>true</tt> if <tt>[first,last)</tt> is empty. +</ins></blockquote> + +<p> +Add to 25.2.2 [alg.any_of]: +</p> + +<blockquote><ins> +<i>Remarks:</i> Returns <tt>false</tt> if <tt>[first,last)</tt> is empty. +</ins></blockquote> + +<p> +Add to 25.2.3 [alg.none_of]: +</p> +<blockquote><ins> +<i>Remarks:</i> Returns <tt>true</tt> if <tt>[first,last)</tt> is empty. +</ins></blockquote> + +<p> +Add to 25.2.6 [alg.find.end]: +</p> +<blockquote><ins> +<i>Remarks:</i> Returns <tt>last1</tt> if <tt>[first2,last2)</tt> is +empty. +</ins></blockquote> + +<p> +Add to 25.2.7 [alg.find.first.of] +</p> +<blockquote><ins> +<i>Remarks:</i> Returns <tt>last1</tt> if <tt>[first2,last2)</tt> is +empty. +</ins></blockquote> + +<p> +Add to 25.2.13 [alg.search]: +</p> +<blockquote><ins> +<i>Remarks:</i> Returns <tt>first1</tt> if <tt>[first2,last2)</tt> is +empty. +</ins></blockquote> + +<p> +Add to 25.3.13 [alg.partitions]: +</p> +<blockquote><ins> +<i>Remarks:</i> Returns <tt>true</tt> if <tt>[first,last)</tt> is empty. +</ins></blockquote> + +<p> +Add to 25.4.5.1 [includes]: +</p> +<blockquote><ins> +<i>Remarks:</i> Returns <tt>true</tt> if <tt>[first2,last2)</tt> is empty. +</ins></blockquote> + +<p> +Revise p2 25.4.6.2 [pop.heap] +</p> +<blockquote> +<i>Requires:</i> The range <tt>[first,last)</tt> shall be a valid +<ins>non-empty</ins> heap. +</blockquote> + +<p> +[Editorial] +</p> +<blockquote> +Reverse order of 25.4.6.2 [pop.heap] p1 and p2. +</blockquote> + +<p> +Add to p35 25.4.7 [alg.min.max]: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>template<class ForwardIterator, class Compare> + pair<ForwardIterator, ForwardIterator> + minmax_element(ForwardIterator first, ForwardIterator last, Compare comp); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<i>Returns:</i> <tt>make_pair(m, M)</tt>, where <tt>m</tt> is the first iterator in +<tt>[first,last)</tt> such that no iterator in the range refers to a smaller +element, and where <tt>M</tt> is the last iterator in <tt>[first,last)</tt> such that no +iterator in the range refers to a larger element. +<ins>Returns <tt>make_pair(first, first)</tt> if <tt>first == last</tt>.</ins> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Add to 25.4.8 [alg.lex.comparison]: +</p> +<blockquote><ins> +<i>Remarks:</i> An empty sequence is lexicographically less than any other +non-empty sequence, but not less than another empty sequence. +</ins></blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1206"></a>1206. Incorrect requires for <tt>move_backward</tt> and <tt>copy_backward</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.3.2 [alg.move] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2009-09-13 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +25.3.2 [alg.move], p6 says: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template<class BidirectionalIterator1, class BidirectionalIterator2> + BidirectionalIterator2 + move_backward(BidirectionalIterator1 first, + BidirectionalIterator1 last, + BidirectionalIterator2 result); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p>...</p> +<p> +<i>Requires:</i> <tt>result</tt> shall not be in the range +<tt>[first,last)</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +This is essentially an "off-by-one" error. +</p> + +<p> +When <tt>result == last</tt>, which +<em>is</em> allowed by this specification, then the range <tt>[first, last)</tt> +is being move assigned into the range <tt>[first, last)</tt>. The <tt>move</tt> +(forward) algorithm doesn't allow self move assignment, and neither should +<tt>move_backward</tt>. So <tt>last</tt> should be included in the range which +<tt>result</tt> can not be in. +</p> + +<p> +Conversely, when <tt>result == first</tt>, which <em>is not</em> allowed by this +specification, then the range <tt>[first, last)</tt> +is being move assigned into the range <tt>[first - (last-first), first)</tt>. +I.e. into a <em>non-overlapping</em> range. Therefore <tt>first</tt> should +not be included in the range which <tt>result</tt> can not be in. +</p> + +<p> +The same argument applies to <tt>copy_backward</tt> though copy assigning elements +to themselves (<tt>result == last</tt>) should be harmless (though is disallowed +by <tt>copy</tt>). +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010 Pittsburgh: Moved to Ready. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 25.3.2 [alg.move], p6: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template<class BidirectionalIterator1, class BidirectionalIterator2> + BidirectionalIterator2 + move_backward(BidirectionalIterator1 first, + BidirectionalIterator1 last, + BidirectionalIterator2 result); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p>...</p> +<p> +<i>Requires:</i> <tt>result</tt> shall not be in the range +<tt><del>[</del><ins>(</ins>first,last<ins>]</ins><del>)</del></tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 25.3.1 [alg.copy], p13: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template<class BidirectionalIterator1, class BidirectionalIterator2> + BidirectionalIterator2 + copy_backward(BidirectionalIterator1 first, + BidirectionalIterator1 last, + BidirectionalIterator2 result); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p>...</p> +<p> +<i>Requires:</i> <tt>result</tt> shall not be in the range +<tt><del>[</del><ins>(</ins>first,last<ins>]</ins><del>)</del></tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1207"></a>1207. Underspecified std::list operations?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.3.4.4 [list.ops] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Loďc Joly <b>Opened:</b> 2009-09-13 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-24</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#list.ops">issues</a> in [list.ops].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +It looks to me like some operations of <tt>std::list</tt> +(<tt>sort</tt>, <tt>reverse</tt>, <tt>remove</tt>, <tt>unique</tt> & +<tt>merge</tt>) do not specify the validity of iterators, pointers & +references to elements of the list after those operations. Is it implied +by some other text in the standard? +</p> + +<p> +I believe <tt>sort</tt> & <tt>reverse</tt> do not invalidating +anything, <tt>remove</tt> & <tt>unique</tt> only invalidates what +refers to erased elements, <tt>merge</tt> does not invalidate anything +(with the same precision as <tt>splice</tt> for elements who changed of +container). Are those assumptions correct ? +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-12-08 Jonathan Wakely adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +23.2.1 [container.requirements.general] paragraph 11 says iterators +aren't invalidated unless specified, so I don't think it needs to be repeated on +every function that doesn't invalidate iterators. <tt>list::unique</tt> says it +"eliminates" elements, that should probably be "erases" because IMHO that term +is used elsewhere and so makes it clearer that iterators to the erased elements +are invalidated. +</p> + +<p> +<tt>list::merge</tt> coud use the same wording as <tt>list::splice</tt> w.r.t +iterators and references to moved elements. +</p> + +<p> +Suggested resolution: +</p> + +<p> +In 23.3.4.4 [list.ops] change paragraph 19 +</p> + +<blockquote><pre> void unique(); +template <class BinaryPredicate> void unique(BinaryPredicate binary_pred); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<i>Effects:</i> <del>Eliminates</del> <ins>Erases</ins> all but the first +element from every consecutive group ... +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Add to the end of paragraph 23 +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void merge(list<T,Allocator>&& x); +template <class Compare> void merge(list<T,Allocator>&& x, Compare comp); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p>...</p> +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> ... that is, for every iterator <tt>i</tt>, in the range other +than the first, the condition <tt>comp(*i, *(i - 1)</tt> will be false. +<ins>Pointers and references to the moved elements of <tt>x</tt> now refer to +those same elements but as members of <tt>*this</tt>. Iterators referring to the +moved elements will continue to refer to their elements, but they now behave as +iterators into <tt>*this</tt>, not into <tt>x</tt>.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-12-12 Loďc adds wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-10 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-10 Alisdair opens: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I object to the current resolution of #1207. I believe it is overly strict with +regard to <tt>list</tt> end iterators, being the only mutating operations to +require such stability. +</p> + +<p> +More importantly, the same edits need to be applied to <tt>forward_list</tt>, +which uses slightly different words to describe some of these operations so may +require subtly different edits (not checked.) +</p> + +<p> +I am prepared to pick up the <tt>end()</tt> iterator as a separate (new) issue, +as part of the FCD ballot review (BSI might tell me 'no' first ;~) but I do want +to see <tt>forward_list</tt> adjusted at the same time. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-03-28 Daniel adds the first 5 bullets in an attempt to address Alisdair's +concerns. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><i>[ +2010 Rapperswil: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +The wording looks good. + +Move to Tentatively Ready. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<ol> + +<li> +<p> +Change 23.3.3.5 [forwardlist.ops]/12 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void remove(const T& value); +template <class Predicate> void remove_if(Predicate pred); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +12 <i>Effects:</i> Erases all the elements in the list referred by a list +iterator <tt>i</tt> for which the following conditions hold: <tt>*i == value +(for remove()), pred(*i)</tt> is true (<tt>for remove_if()</tt>). This operation +shall be stable: the relative order of the elements that are not removed is the +same as their relative order in the original list. <ins>Invalidates only the +iterators and references to the erased elements.</ins> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 23.3.3.5 [forwardlist.ops]/15 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class BinaryPredicate> void unique(BinaryPredicate pred); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +15 <i>Effects:</i>: <del>Eliminates</del><ins>Erases</ins> all but the first +element from every consecutive group of equal elements referred to by the +iterator <tt>i</tt> in the range <tt>[first + 1,last)</tt> for which <tt>*i == +*(i-1)</tt> (for the version with no arguments) or <tt>pred(*i, *(i - 1))</tt> +(for the version with a predicate argument) holds. <ins>Invalidates only the +iterators and references to the erased elements.</ins> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 23.3.3.5 [forwardlist.ops]/19 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void merge(forward_list<T,Allocator>&& x); +template <class Compare> void merge(forward_list<T,Allocator>&& x, Compare comp) +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +[..] +</p> + +<p> +19 <i>Effects:</i>: Merges <tt>x</tt> into <tt>*this</tt>. This operation shall +be stable: for equivalent elements in the two lists, the elements from +<tt>*this</tt> shall always precede the elements from <tt>x</tt>. <tt>x</tt> is +empty after the merge. If an exception is thrown other than by a comparison +there are no effects. <ins>Pointers and references to the moved elements of +<tt>x</tt> now refer to those same elements but as members of <tt>*this</tt>. +Iterators referring to the moved elements will continue to refer to their +elements, but they now behave as iterators into <tt>*this</tt>, not into +<tt>x</tt>.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 23.3.3.5 [forwardlist.ops]/22 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void sort(); +template <class Compare> void sort(Compare comp); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +[..] +</p> + +<p> +22 <i>Effects:</i>: Sorts the list according to the <tt>operator<</tt> or the +<tt>comp</tt> function object. This operation shall be stable: the relative +order of the equivalent elements is preserved. If an exception is thrown the +order of the elements in <tt>*this</tt> is unspecified. <ins>Does not affect the +validity of iterators and references.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 23.3.3.5 [forwardlist.ops]/24 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void reverse(); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +24 <i>Effects:</i>: Reverses the order of the elements in the list. <ins>Does +not affect the validity of iterators and references.</ins> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 23.3.4.4 [list.ops], p15: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre> void remove(const T& value); +template <class Predicate> void remove_if(Predicate pred); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<i>Effects:</i> Erases all the elements in the list referred by a list iterator +<tt>i</tt> for which the following conditions hold: <tt>*i == value, pred(*i) != +false</tt>. <ins>Invalidates only the iterators and references to the erased +elements.</ins> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 23.3.4.4 [list.ops], p19: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre> void unique(); +template <class BinaryPredicate> void unique(BinaryPredicate binary_pred); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<i>Effects:</i> <del>Eliminates</del> <ins>Erases</ins> all but the first +element from every consecutive group of equal elements referred to by the +iterator <tt>i</tt> in the range <tt>[first + 1,last)</tt> for which <tt>*i == +*(i-1)</tt> (for the version of <tt>unique</tt> with no arguments) or +<tt>pred(*i, *(i - 1))</tt> (for the version of <tt>unique</tt> with a predicate +argument) holds. <ins>Invalidates only the iterators and references to the +erased elements.</ins> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 23.3.4.4 [list.ops], p23: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void merge(list<T,Allocator>&& x); +template <class Compare> void merge(list<T,Allocator>&& x, Compare comp); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<i>Effects:</i> If <tt>(&x == this)</tt> does nothing; otherwise, merges the +two sorted ranges <tt>[begin(), end())</tt> and <tt>[x.begin(), x.end())</tt>. +The result is a range in which the elements will be sorted in non-decreasing +order according to the ordering defined by <tt>comp</tt>; that is, for every +iterator <tt>i</tt>, in the range other than the first, the condition +<tt>comp(*i, *(i - 1)</tt> will be false. +<ins>Pointers and references to the moved elements of <tt>x</tt> now refer to +those same elements but as members of <tt>*this</tt>. Iterators referring to the +moved elements will continue to refer to their elements, but they now behave as +iterators into <tt>*this</tt>, not into <tt>x</tt>.</ins> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 23.3.4.4 [list.ops], p26: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void reverse(); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<i>Effects:</i> Reverses the order of the elements in the list. +<ins>Does not affect the validity of iterators and references.</ins> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 23.3.4.4 [list.ops], p30: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre> void sort(); +template <class Compare> void sort(Compare comp); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<i>Effects:</i> Sorts the list according to the <tt>operator<</tt> or a +<tt>Compare</tt> function object. +<ins>Does not affect the validity of iterators and references.</ins> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +</ol> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1208"></a>1208. valarray initializer_list constructor has incorrect effects</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.6.2.1 [valarray.cons] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2009-09-23 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#valarray.cons">issues</a> in [valarray.cons].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +26.6.2.1 [valarray.cons] says: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>valarray(initializer_list<T> il); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<i>Effects:</i> Same as <tt>valarray(il.begin(), il.end())</tt>. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +But there is no <tt>valarray</tt> constructor taking two <tt>const T*</tt>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10-29 Howard: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Tentatively Ready after 6 positive votes on c++std-lib. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 26.6.2.1 [valarray.cons]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>valarray(initializer_list<T> il); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<i>Effects:</i> Same as <tt>valarray(il.begin(), il.<del>end</del><ins>size</ins>())</tt>. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1209"></a>1209. match_results should be moveable</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 28.10.1 [re.results.const] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Stephan T. Lavavej <b>Opened:</b> 2009-09-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In Working Draft +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2914.pdf">N2914</a>, +<tt>match_results</tt> lacks a move constructor and move +assignment operator. Because it owns dynamically allocated memory, it +should be moveable. +</p> + +<p> +As far as I can tell, this isn't tracked by an active issue yet; Library +Issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#723">723</a> doesn't talk about <tt>match_results</tt>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-09-21 Daniel provided wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-18: Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<ol> +<li> +<p> +Add the following member declarations to 28.10 [re.results]/3: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>// 28.10.1, construct/copy/destroy: +explicit match_results(const Allocator& a = Allocator()); +match_results(const match_results& m); +<ins>match_results(match_results&& m);</ins> +match_results& operator=(const match_results& m); +<ins>match_results& operator=(match_results&& m);</ins> +~match_results(); +</pre></blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Add the following new prototype descriptions to 28.10.1 [re.results.const] +using the table numbering of +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n3000.pdf">N3000</a> +(referring to the table titled "<tt>match_results</tt> assignment operator effects"): +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>match_results(const match_results& m); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +4 <i>Effects:</i> Constructs an object of class <tt>match_results</tt>, as a +copy of <tt>m</tt>. +</blockquote> + +<pre><ins>match_results(match_results&& m);</ins> +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins>5 <i>Effects:</i> Move-constructs an object of class <tt>match_results</tt> +from <tt>m</tt> satisfying the same postconditions as Table 131. Additionally +the stored <tt>Allocator</tt> value is move constructed from <tt>m.get_allocator()</tt>. +After the initialization of <tt>*this</tt> sets <tt>m</tt> to an unspecified but valid +state.</ins> +</p> + +<p> +<ins>6 <i>Throws:</i> Nothing if the allocator's move constructor throws nothing.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> + +<pre>match_results& operator=(const match_results& m); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +7 <i>Effects:</i> Assigns <tt>m</tt> to <tt>*this</tt>. The postconditions of this function are +indicated in Table 131. +</blockquote> + +<pre><ins>match_results& operator=(match_results&& m);</ins> +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins>8 <i>Effects:</i> Move-assigns <tt>m</tt> to <tt>*this</tt>. The postconditions of this +function are indicated in Table 131. After the assignment, <tt>m</tt> is in +a valid but unspecified state.</ins> +</p> + +<p> +<ins>9 <i>Throws:</i> Nothing.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +</ol> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1216"></a>1216. LWG 1066 Incomplete?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.8.6 [except.nested] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Pete Becker <b>Opened:</b> 2009-09-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#except.nested">issues</a> in [except.nested].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +LWG <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1066">1066</a> adds <tt>[[noreturn]]</tt> to a bunch of things. +It doesn't add it to <tt>rethrow_nested()</tt>, which seems like an obvious +candidate. I've made the changes indicated in the issue, and haven't +changed <tt>rethrow_nested()</tt>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Move to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add <tt>[[noreturn]]</tt> to <tt>rethrow_nested()</tt> in 18.8.6 [except.nested]. +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1218"></a>1218. mutex destructor synchronization</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30.4.1 [thread.mutex.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Jeffrey Yasskin <b>Opened:</b> 2009-09-30 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#thread.mutex.requirements">issues</a> in [thread.mutex.requirements].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +If an object <tt>*o</tt> contains a mutex <tt>mu</tt> and a +correctly-maintained reference count <tt>c</tt>, is the following code +safe? +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>o->mu.lock(); +bool del = (--(o->c) == 0); +o->mu.unlock(); +if (del) { delete o; } +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +If the implementation of <tt>mutex::unlock()</tt> can touch the mutex's +memory after the moment it becomes free, this wouldn't be safe, and +"Construction and destruction of an object of a Mutex type need not be +thread-safe" 30.4.1 [thread.mutex.requirements] may imply that +it's not safe. Still, it's useful to allow mutexes to guard reference +counts, and if it's not allowed, users are likely to write bugs. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-18: Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<ul> +<li> +<p> +Add a new paragraph after 30.4.1.2.1 [thread.mutex.class] p1: +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +1 The class <tt>mutex</tt> provides a non-recursive mutex ... +</p> +<p><ins> +[<i>Note:</i> After a thread <tt>A</tt> has called <tt>unlock()</tt>, releasing +the mutex, it is possible for another thread <tt>B</tt> to lock the same mutex, +observe that it is no longer in use, unlock and destroy it, before thread +<tt>A</tt> appears to have returned from its unlock call. Implementations are +required to handle such scenarios correctly, as long as thread <tt>A</tt> +doesn't access the mutex after the unlock call returns. These cases typically +occur when a reference-counted object contains a mutex that is used to protect +the reference count. — <i>end note</i>] +</ins></p> +</blockquote> +</li> + +</ul> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1220"></a>1220. What does condition_variable wait on?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30.5 [thread.condition] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Jeffrey Yasskin <b>Opened:</b> 2009-09-30 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#thread.condition">issues</a> in [thread.condition].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +"Class <tt>condition_variable</tt> provides a condition variable that can only +wait on an object of type <tt>unique_lock</tt>" should say "...object of type +<tt>unique_lock<mutex></tt>" +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-06 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 30.5 [thread.condition], p1: +</p> + +<blockquote> +Condition variables provide synchronization primitives used to block a +thread until notified by some other thread that some condition is met or +until a system time is reached. Class <tt>condition_variable</tt> +provides a condition variable that can only wait on an object of type +<tt>unique_lock<ins><mutex></ins></tt>, allowing maximum +efficiency on some platforms. Class <tt>condition_variable_any</tt> +provides a general condition variable that can wait on objects of +user-supplied lock types. +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1221"></a>1221. condition_variable wording</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30.5.1 [thread.condition.condvar] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Jeffrey Yasskin <b>Opened:</b> 2009-09-30 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#thread.condition.condvar">issues</a> in [thread.condition.condvar].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +30.5.1 [thread.condition.condvar] says: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>~condition_variable(); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<i>Precondition:</i> There shall be no thread blocked on <tt>*this</tt>. +[<i>Note:</i> That is, all threads shall have been notified; they may +subsequently block on the lock specified in the wait. Beware that +destroying a <tt>condition_variable</tt> object while the corresponding +predicate is <tt>false</tt> is likely to lead to undefined behavior. +— <i>end note</i>] +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +The text hasn't introduced the notion of a "corresponding predicate" +yet. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-11 Anthony provided wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-12 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Modify 30.5.1 [thread.condition.condvar]p4 as follows: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>~condition_variable();</pre> +<blockquote> +4 <i>Precondition:</i> There shall be no thread blocked on <tt>*this</tt>. +[<i>Note:</i> That is, all threads shall have been notified; they may +subsequently block on the lock specified in the wait. <del>Beware that +destroying a <tt>condition_variable</tt> object while the corresponding +predicate is false is likely to lead to undefined behavior.</del> <ins>The user +must take care to ensure that no threads wait on <tt>*this</tt> once the +destructor has been started, especially when the waiting threads are calling the +wait functions in a loop or using the overloads of <tt>wait</tt>, +<tt>wait_for</tt> or <tt>wait_until</tt> that take a predicate.</ins> — +<i>end note</i>] +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1222"></a>1222. condition_variable incorrect effects for exception safety</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30.5 [thread.condition] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Jeffrey Yasskin <b>Opened:</b> 2009-09-30 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#thread.condition">issues</a> in [thread.condition].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +30.5.1 [thread.condition.condvar] says: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>void wait(unique_lock<mutex>& lock); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p>...</p> +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> +</p> +<ul> +<li>...</li> +<li> +If the function exits via an exception, <tt>lock.unlock()</tt> shall be +called prior to exiting the function scope. +</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Should that be <tt>lock.lock()</tt>? +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-17 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +Change 30.5.1 [thread.condition.condvar] p10: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>void wait(unique_lock<mutex>& lock); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p>...</p> +<p> +<i>Effects:</i> +</p> +<ul> +<li>...</li> +<li> +If the function exits via an exception, <tt>lock.<del>un</del>lock()</tt> shall be +called prior to exiting the function scope. +</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +And make a similar change in p16, and in 30.5.2 [thread.condition.condvarany], +p8 and p13. +</p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1227"></a>1227. <tt><bitset></tt> synopsis overspecified</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.5 [template.bitset] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Bo Persson <b>Opened:</b> 2009-10-05 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#template.bitset">issues</a> in [template.bitset].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The resolutions to some library defect reports, like <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1178">1178</a> +requires that <tt>#includes</tt> in each synopsis should be taken +literally. This means that the <tt><bitset></tt> header now +<em>must</em> include <tt><stdexcept></tt>, even though none of the +exceptions are mentioned in the <tt><bitset></tt> header. +</p> +<p> +Many other classes are required to throw exceptions like +<tt>invalid_argument</tt> and <tt>out_of_range</tt>, without explicitly +including <tt><stdexcept></tt> in their synopsis. It is totally +possible for implementations to throw the needed exceptions from utility +functions, whose implementations are not visible in the headers. +</p> +<p> +I propose that <tt><stdexcept></tt> is removed from the +<tt><bitset></tt> header. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 20.5 [template.bitset]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>#include <cstddef> // for size_t +#include <string> +<del>#include <stdexcept> // for invalid_argument,</del> + <del>// out_of_range, overflow_error</del> +#include <iosfwd> // for istream, ostream +namespace std { +... +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1231"></a>1231. <tt>weak_ptr</tt> comparisons incompletely resolved</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.10.3.5 [util.smartptr.weak.obs] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2009-10-10 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2637.pdf">n2637</a> +paper suggested several updates of the ordering semantics of +<tt>shared_ptr</tt> +and <tt>weak_ptr</tt>, among those the explicit comparison operators of <tt>weak_ptr</tt> were +removed/deleted, instead a corresponding functor <tt>owner_less</tt> was added. +The problem +is that +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2637.pdf">n2637</a> +did not clearly enough specify, how the previous wording +parts describing +the comparison semantics of <tt>weak_ptr</tt> should be removed. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-06 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<ol> +<li> +<p> +Change 20.9.10.3 [util.smartptr.weak]/2 as described, the intention is to fix +the now no longer valid +requirement that <tt>weak_ptr</tt> is <tt>LessComparable</tt> [Note the deleted comma]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +Specializations of <tt>weak_ptr</tt> shall be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt><del>,</del> +<ins>and</ins> <tt>CopyAssignable</tt>, +<del>and <tt>LessThanComparable</tt>,</del> allowing their use in standard containers. +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +In 20.9.10.3.5 [util.smartptr.weak.obs] remove the paragraphs 9-11 including prototype: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<del>template<class T, class U> bool operator<(const weak_ptr<T>& a, const weak_ptr<U>& b);</del> + +<p> +<del><i>Returns:</i> an unspecified value such that</del> +</p> +<ul> +<li> +<del><tt>operator<</tt> is a strict weak ordering as described in 25.4;</del> +</li> +<li> +<del>under the equivalence relation defined by <tt>operator<</tt>, <tt>!(a +< b) && !(b < a)</tt>, two <tt>weak_ptr</tt> instances are +equivalent if and only if they share ownership or are both empty.</del> +</li> +</ul> + +<p> +<del><i>Throws:</i> nothing.</del> +</p> + +<p> +<del>[<i>Note:</i> Allows <tt>weak_ptr</tt> objects to be used as keys in associative +containers. — <i>end note</i>]</del> +</p> +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1234"></a>1234. "Do the right thing" and NULL</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2.3 [sequence.reqmts] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 2009-10-09 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-24</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#sequence.reqmts">issues</a> in [sequence.reqmts].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +On g++ 4.2.4 (x86_64-linux-gnu), the following file gives a compile +error: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>#include <vector> +void foo() { std::vector<int*> v(500l, NULL); } +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Is this supposed to work? +</p> + +<p> +The issue: if <tt>NULL</tt> happens to be defined as <tt>0l</tt>, this is an invocation of +the constructor with two arguments of the same integral type. +23.2.3 [sequence.reqmts]/14 +(<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3035.pdf">N3035</a>) +says that this will behave as if the the +overloaded constructor +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>X(size_type, const value_type& = value_type(), + const allocator_type& = allocator_type()) +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +were called instead, with the arguments +<tt>static_cast<size_type>(first)</tt>, <tt>last</tt> and +<tt>alloc</tt>, respectively. However, it does not say whether this +actually means invoking that constructor with the exact textual form of +the arguments as supplied by the user, or whether the standard permits +an implementation to invoke that constructor with variables of the same +type and value as what the user passed in. In most cases this is a +distinction without a difference. In this particular case it does make a +difference, since one of those things is a null pointer constant and the +other is not. +</p> + +<p> +Note that an implementation based on forwarding functions will use the +latter interpretation. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010 Pittsburgh: Moved to Open. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-03-19 Daniel provides wording. +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<ul> +<li> +Adapts the numbering used in the discussion to the recent working paper +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3035.pdf">N3035</a>. +</li> + +<li> +Proposes a resolution that requires implementations to use sfinae-like means to +possibly filter away the too generic template c'tor. In fact this resolution is +equivalent to that used for the <tt>pair-NULL</tt> problem (<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#811">811</a>), +the only difference is, that issue 1234 was already a C++03 problem. +</li> +</ul> + +<p> +This issue can be considered as a refinement of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#438">438</a>. +</p> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Post-Rapperswil +]</i></p> + + +<p> +Wording was verified to match with the most recent WP. Jonathan Wakely and Alberto Barbati observed that the current +WP has a defect that should be fixed here as well: The functions signatures <tt>fx1</tt> and <tt>fx3</tt> are +incorrectly referring to <tt>iterator</tt> instead of <tt>const_iterator</tt>. +</p> + +<blockquote> +Moved to Tentatively Ready with revised wording after 7 positive votes on c++std-lib. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + + +<p> +Change 23.2.3 [sequence.reqmts]/14+15 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +14 For every sequence container defined in this Clause and in Clause 21: +</p> + +<ul> +<li> +<p> +If the constructor +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class InputIterator> +X(InputIterator first, InputIterator last, + const allocator_type& alloc = allocator_type()) + +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +is called with a type <tt>InputIterator</tt> that does not qualify as an input +iterator, then the constructor <ins>shall not participate in overload +resolution.</ins><del>will +behave as if the overloaded constructor:</del> +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del> +X(size_type, const value_type& = value_type(), + const allocator_type& = allocator_type()) +</del></pre></blockquote> + +<p> +<del>were called instead, with the arguments +<tt>static_cast<size_type>(first)</tt>, <tt>last</tt> and <tt>alloc</tt>, +respectively</del>. +</p> +</li> + +<li> + +<p> +If the member functions of the forms: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class InputIterator> <i>// such as insert()</i> +rt fx1(<ins>const_</ins>iterator p, InputIterator first, InputIterator last); + +template <class InputIterator> <i>// such as append(), assign()</i> +rt fx2(InputIterator first, InputIterator last); + +template <class InputIterator> <i>// such as replace()</i> +rt fx3(<ins>const_</ins>iterator i1, <ins>const_</ins>iterator i2, InputIterator first, InputIterator last); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +are called with a type <tt>InputIterator</tt> that does not qualify as an input +iterator, then these functions <ins>shall not participate in overload +resolution.</ins><del>will behave as if the overloaded member functions:</del> +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>rt fx1(iterator, size_type, const value_type&);</del> + +<del>rt fx2(size_type, const value_type&);</del> + +<del>rt fx3(iterator, iterator, size_type, const value_type&);</del> +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +<del>were called instead, with the same arguments.</del> +</p> +</li> + +</ul> + +<p><del> +15 In the previous paragraph the alternative binding will fail if <tt>first</tt> +is not implicitly convertible to <tt>X::size_type</tt> or if <tt>last</tt> is +not implicitly convertible to <tt>X::value_type</tt>. +</del></p> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1237"></a>1237. Constrained error_code/error_condition members</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 19.5 [syserr] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2009-10-14 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#syserr">issues</a> in [syserr].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +I'm just reflecting on the now SFINAE-constrained constructors +and assignment operators of <tt>error_code</tt> and <tt>error_condition</tt>: +</p> +<p> +These are the <em>only</em> library components that are pro-actively +announcing that they are using <tt>std::enable_if</tt> as constraining tool, +which has IMO several disadvantages: +</p> + +<ol> +<li> +<p> +With the availability of template default arguments and +decltype, using <tt>enable_if</tt> in C++0x standard library, seems +unnecessary restricting implementation freedom. E.g. there +should be not need for a useless specification of a dummy +default function argument, which only confuses the reader. +A more reasonable implementation could e.g. be +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class ErrorCodeEnum + class = typename enable_if<is_error_code_enum<ErrorCodeEnum>::value>::type> +error_code(ErrorCodeEnum e); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +As currently specified, the function signatures are so unreadable, +that errors quite easily happen, see e.g. <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1229">1229</a>. +</p> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +We have a <em>lot</em> of constrained functions in other places, that +now have a standard phrase that is easily understandable: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Remarks:</i> This constructor/function shall participate in overload +resolution if and only if X. +</blockquote> + +<p> +where X describes the condition. Why should these components deviate? +</p> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +If <tt>enable_if</tt> would <em>not</em> be explicitly specified, the standard library +is much better prepared for the future. It would also be possible, that +libraries with partial support for not-yet-standard-concepts could provide +a much better diagnostic as is possible with <tt>enable_if</tt>. This again +would allow for experimental concept implementations in the wild, +which as a result would make concept standardization a much more +natural thing, similar to the way as templates were standardized +in C++. +</p> + +<p> +In summary: I consider it as a library defect that <tt>error_code</tt> and +<tt>error_condition</tt> explicitly require a dependency to <tt>enable_if</tt> and +do limit implementation freedom and I volunteer to prepare a +corresponding resolution. +</p> +</li> +</ol> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10-18 Beman adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +I support this proposed resolution, and thank Daniel for writing it up. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10 Santa Cruz: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p><i>[ +Should this resolution be accepted, I recommend to resolve <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1229">1229</a> as NAD +]</i></p> + + +<ol> +<li> +<p> +In 19.5.2.1 [syserr.errcode.overview]/1, class <tt>error_code</tt>, +change as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>// 19.5.2.2 constructors: +error_code(); +error_code(int val, const error_category& cat); +template <class ErrorCodeEnum> + error_code(ErrorCodeEnum e<del>, + typename enable_if<is_error_code_enum<ErrorCodeEnum>::value>::type * = 0</del>); + +// 19.5.2.3 modifiers: +void assign(int val, const error_category& cat); +template <class ErrorCodeEnum> + <del>typename enable_if<is_error_code_enum<ErrorCodeEnum>::value>::type</del><ins>error_code</ins>& + operator=(ErrorCodeEnum e); +void clear(); +</pre></blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 19.5.2.2 [syserr.errcode.constructors] around the prototype before p. 7: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class ErrorCodeEnum> +error_code(ErrorCodeEnum e<del>, + typename enable_if<is_error_code_enum<ErrorCodeEnum>::value>::type * = 0</del>); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins><i>Remarks:</i> This constructor shall not participate in overload +resolution, unless +<tt>is_error_code_enum<ErrorCodeEnum>::value == true</tt>.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 19.5.2.3 [syserr.errcode.modifiers] around the prototype before p. 3: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class ErrorCodeEnum> + <del>typename enable_if<is_error_code_enum<ErrorCodeEnum>::value>::type</del><ins>error_code</ins>& + operator=(ErrorCodeEnum e); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<ins><i>Remarks:</i> This operator shall not participate in overload resolution, unless +<tt>is_error_code_enum<ErrorCodeEnum>::value == true</tt>.</ins> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +In 19.5.3.1 [syserr.errcondition.overview]/1, class <tt>error_condition</tt>, change +as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>// 19.5.3.2 constructors: +error_condition(); +error_condition(int val, const error_category& cat); +template <class ErrorConditionEnum> + error_condition(ErrorConditionEnum e<del>, + typename enable_if<is_error_condition_enum<ErrorConditionEnum>::type* = 0</del>); + +// 19.5.3.3 modifiers: +void assign(int val, const error_category& cat); +template<<del>typename</del><ins>class</ins> ErrorConditionEnum> + <del>typename enable_if<is_error_condition_enum<ErrorConditionEnum>, error_code>::type</del><ins>error_condition</ins> & + operator=( ErrorConditionEnum e ); +void clear(); +</pre></blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 19.5.3.2 [syserr.errcondition.constructors] around the +prototype before p. 7: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class ErrorConditionEnum> + error_condition(ErrorConditionEnum e<del>, + typename enable_if<is_error_condition_enum<ErrorConditionEnum>::value>::type* = 0</del>); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<ins><i>Remarks:</i> This constructor shall not participate in overload +resolution, unless +<tt>is_error_condition_enum<ErrorConditionEnum>::value == true</tt>.</ins> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 19.5.3.3 [syserr.errcondition.modifiers] around the +prototype before p. 3: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class ErrorConditionEnum> + <del>typename enable_if<is_error_condition_enum<ErrorConditionEnum>::value>::type</del><ins>error_condition</ins>& + operator=(ErrorConditionEnum e); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins><i>Remarks:</i> This operator shall not participate in overload resolution, unless +<tt>is_error_condition_enum<ErrorConditionEnum>::value == true</tt>.</ins> +</p> + +<p> +<i>Postcondition:</i> <tt>*this == make_error_condition(e)</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +<ins><i>Returns:</i> <tt>*this</tt></ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +</li> +</ol> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1240"></a>1240. Deleted comparison functions of std::function not needed</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8.14.2 [func.wrap.func] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2009-10-18 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#func.wrap.func">issues</a> in [func.wrap.func].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The class template <tt>std::function</tt> contains the following member +declarations: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>// deleted overloads close possible hole in the type system +template<class R2, class... ArgTypes2> + bool operator==(const function<R2(ArgTypes2...)>&) = delete; +template<class R2, class... ArgTypes2> + bool operator!=(const function<R2(ArgTypes2...)>&) = delete; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +The leading comment here is part of the history of <tt>std::function</tt>, which +was introduced with <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2002/n1402.html#undefined_operators">N1402</a>. +During that time no explicit conversion functions existed, and the +"safe-bool" idiom (based on pointers-to-member) was a popular +technique. The only disadvantage of this idiom was that given two +objects <tt>f1</tt> and <tt>f2</tt> of type <tt>std::function</tt> the expression +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>f1 == f2; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +was well-formed, just because the built-in <tt>operator==</tt> for pointer to member +was considered after a single user-defined conversion. To fix this, an +overload set of <em>undefined</em> comparison functions was added, +such that overload resolution would prefer those ending up in a linkage error. +The new language facility of deleted functions provided a much better +diagnostic mechanism to fix this issue. +</p> + +<p> +The central point of this issue is, that with the replacement of the +safe-bool idiom by explicit conversion to bool the original "hole in the +type system" does no longer exist and therefore the comment is wrong and +the superfluous function definitions should be removed as well. An +explicit conversion function is considered in direct-initialization +situations only, which indirectly contain the so-called "contextual +conversion to bool" (4 [conv]/3). These conversions are not considered for +<tt>==</tt> or <tt>!=</tt> as defined by the core language. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Post-Rapperswil +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 20.8.14.2 [func.wrap.func]/1, class function change as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>// 20.7.15.2.3, function capacity: +explicit operator bool() const; + +<del>// deleted overloads close possible hole in the type system</del> +<del>template<class R2, class... ArgTypes2></del> + <del>bool operator==(const function<R2(ArgTypes2...)>&) = delete;</del> +<del>template<class R2, class... ArgTypes2></del> + <del>bool operator!=(const function<R2(ArgTypes2...)>&) = delete;</del> +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1241"></a>1241. unique_copy needs to require EquivalenceRelation</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.3.9 [alg.unique] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2009-10-17 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#alg.unique">issues</a> in [alg.unique].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +A lot of fixes were silently applied during concept-time and we should +not lose them again. The Requires clause of 25.3.9 [alg.unique]/5 +doesn't mention that <tt>==</tt> and the predicate need to satisfy an +<tt>EquivalenceRelation</tt>, as it is correctly said for +<tt>unique</tt>. This was intentionally fixed during conceptification, +were we had: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<InputIterator InIter, class OutIter> + requires OutputIterator<OutIter, RvalueOf<InIter::value_type>::type> + && EqualityComparable<InIter::value_type> + && HasAssign<InIter::value_type, InIter::reference> + && Constructible<InIter::value_type, InIter::reference> + OutIter unique_copy(InIter first, InIter last, OutIter result); + +template<InputIterator InIter, class OutIter, + EquivalenceRelation<auto, InIter::value_type> Pred> + requires OutputIterator<OutIter, RvalueOf<InIter::value_type>::type> + && HasAssign<InIter::value_type, InIter::reference> + && Constructible<InIter::value_type, InIter::reference> + && CopyConstructible<Pred> + OutIter unique_copy(InIter first, InIter last, OutIter result, Pred pred); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Note that EqualityComparable implied an equivalence relation. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +N.B. <tt>adjacent_find</tt> was also specified to require +<tt>EquivalenceRelation</tt>, but that was considered as a defect in +concepts, see <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1000">1000</a> +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-10-31 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 25.3.9 [alg.unique]/5 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class InputIterator, class OutputIterator> + OutputIterator + unique_copy(InputIterator first, InputIterator last, OutputIterator result); + +template<class InputIterator, class OutputIterator, class BinaryPredicate> + OutputIterator + unique_copy(InputIterator first, InputIterator last, + OutputIterator result, BinaryPredicate pred); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<i>Requires:</i> <ins>The comparison function shall be an equivalence +relation.</ins> The ranges <tt>[first,last)</tt> and +<tt>[result,result+(last-first))</tt> shall not overlap. The expression +<tt>*result = *first</tt> shall be valid. If neither +<tt>InputIterator</tt> nor <tt>OutputIterator</tt> meets the +requirements of forward iterator then the value type of +<tt>InputIterator</tt> shall be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> (34) and +<tt>CopyAssignable</tt> (table 36). Otherwise <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> +is not required. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1245"></a>1245. <tt>std::hash<string></tt> & co</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8.15 [unord.hash] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Paolo Carlini <b>Opened:</b> 2009-10-22 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#unord.hash">issues</a> in [unord.hash].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In 20.8.15 [unord.hash], <tt>operator()</tt> is specified as +taking the argument by value. Moreover, it is said that <tt>operator()</tt> shall +not throw exceptions. +</p> + +<p> +However, for the specializations for class types, like <tt>string</tt>, <tt>wstring</tt>, +etc, the former requirement seems suboptimal from the performance point +of view (a specific PR has been filed about this in the GCC Bugzilla) +and, together with the latter requirement, hard if not impossible to +fulfill. It looks like pass by const reference should be allowed in such +cases. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-18: Ganesh updates wording. +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +I've removed the list of types for which <tt>hash</tt> shall be instantiated +because it's already explicit in the synopsis of header +<tt><functional></tt> in 20.8 [function.objects]/2. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-18: Original wording here: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote class="note"> +<p> +Add to 20.8.15 [unord.hash]/2: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>namespace std { + template <class T> + struct hash : public std::unary_function<T, std::size_t> { + std::size_t operator()(T val) const; + }; +} +</pre> + +<p> +The return value of <tt>operator()</tt> is unspecified, except that +equal arguments shall yield the same result. <tt>operator()</tt> shall +not throw exceptions. <ins>It is also unspecified whether +<tt>operator()</tt> of <tt>std::hash</tt> specializations for class +types takes its argument by value or const reference.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-19 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-24 Ville Opens: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +I have received community requests to ask for this issue to be reopened. +Some users feel that mandating the inheritance is overly constraining. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-01-31 Alisdair: related to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#978">978</a> and <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1182">1182</a>. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-07 Proposed resolution updated by Beman, Daniel and Ganesh. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-09 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + <p><i>Insert a new subclause either before or after the current 20.2.5 [allocator.requirements]:</i></p> +<blockquote> + + <h3><tt>Hash</tt> Requirements [hash.requirements]</h3> + + <p align="left">This subclause defines the named requirement <tt>Hash</tt>, + used in several clauses of the C++ standard library. A type <tt>H</tt> meets the <tt>Hash</tt> requirement if</p> + + <ul> + <li> + + <p align="left">it is a function object type (20.8 [function.objects]).</p> + + </li> + <li> + + <p align="left">it satisfies the requirements of <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>, and + <tt>Destructible</tt> (20.2.1 [utility.arg.requirements]),</p> + + </li> + <li> + + <p align="left">the expressions shown in the following table are valid and have the + indicated semantics, and</p> + + </li> + <li> + + <p align="left">it satisfies all other requirements of this subclause.</p> + + </li> + </ul> + + <p align="left">Given <tt>Key</tt> is an argument type for function objects of + type <tt>H</tt>, in the table below <tt>h</tt> is a value of type (possibly <tt>const</tt>) + <tt>H</tt>, <tt>u</tt> is an lvalue of type <tt>Key</tt>, and <tt> + k</tt> + is a value of a type convertible to (possibly <tt>const</tt>) <tt>Key</tt>:</p> + + <p align="center">Table ? - <tt>Hash</tt> requirements</p> +<table border="1" cellpadding="5" cellspacing="1" style="border-collapse: collapse" bordercolor="#111111"> + <tbody><tr> + <td>Expression</td> + <td>Return type</td> + <td>Requirement</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td valign="top"><tt>h(k)</tt></td> + <td valign="top"><tt>size_t</tt></td> + <td valign="top">Shall not throw exceptions. The value returned shall depend only on +the argument <tt>k</tt>. [<i>Note:</i> Thus all evaluations of the expression <tt> + h(k)</tt> with the + same value for <tt>k</tt> yield the same result. <i>— end note</i>] [<i>Note: + </i>For <tt>t1</tt> and <tt>t2</tt> of different values, the probability that + <tt>h(t1)</tt> + and <tt>h(t2)</tt> compare equal should be very small, approaching <tt>(1.0/numeric_limits<size_t>::max())</tt>. + <i>— end note</i>] <i><span style="background-color: #C0C0C0">Comment + (not to go in WP): The wording for the second note is based on a similar + note in 22.4.4.1.2 [locale.collate.virtuals]/3</span></i></td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td valign="top"><tt>h(u)</tt></td> + <td valign="top"><tt>size_t</tt></td> + <td valign="top">Shall not modify <tt>u</tt>.</td> + </tr> + </tbody></table> + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>Change 20.8.15 [unord.hash] as indicated: </i> +</p> +<blockquote> + <p>1 The unordered associative containers defined in Clause 23.7 [unord] use + specializations of <ins>the class template</ins> <tt>hash</tt> as the default + hash function. <ins>For all object types <tt>T</tt> for which there exists a + specialization <tt>hash<T></tt>, the instantiation <tt>hash<T></tt> shall:</ins></p> + <ul> + <li> <ins>satisfy the <tt>Hash</tt> requirements([hash.requirements]), with <tt>T</tt> as the + function call argument type, the <tt> + DefaultConstructible</tt> requirements ([defaultconstructible]), the <tt>CopyAssignable</tt> + requirements ([copyassignable]), and the <tt> + Swappable</tt> requirements ([swappable]),</ins> + </li> + <li> <ins>provide two nested types <tt>result_type</tt> and <tt>argument_type</tt> which shall + be synonyms for <tt>size_t</tt> and <tt>T</tt>, respectively,</ins></li> + <li> <ins>satisfy the + requirement that if <tt>k1 == k2</tt> is <tt>true</tt>, <tt>h(k1) == h(k2)</tt> + is <tt>true</tt>, where <tt>h</tt> is an object of type <tt>hash<T></tt>, and + <tt>k1</tt>, <tt>k2</tt> are objects of type <tt>T</tt>.</ins></li> + </ul> + <p> <del>This class template is only required to be instantiable + for integer types (3.9.1 [basic.fundamental]), floating-point types (3.9.1 [basic.fundamental]), + pointer types (8.3.1 [dcl.ptr]), and <tt>std::string</tt>, <tt>std::u16string</tt>, + <tt>std::u32string</tt>, <tt>std::wstring</tt>, <tt>std::error_code</tt>, <tt> + std::thread::id</tt>, <tt>std::bitset</tt>, and <tt>std::vector<bool></tt>.</del> </p> + <blockquote> + <pre><del>namespace std { + template <class T> + struct hash : public std::unary_function<T, std::size_t> { + std::size_t operator()(T val) const; + }; +}</del></pre> + </blockquote> + <p><del>2 The return value of <tt>operator()</tt> is unspecified, except that + equal arguments shall yield the same result. <tt>operator()</tt> shall not + throw exceptions. </del></p> + +</blockquote> + + <p><i>Change Unordered associative containers 23.2.5 [unord.req] as indicated:</i></p> +<blockquote> + <p>Each unordered associative container is parameterized by <tt>Key</tt>, by a + function object <ins>type</ins> <tt>Hash</tt><ins>([hash.requirements])</ins> that acts as a hash + function for <ins>argument</ins> values of type <tt>Key</tt>, + and by a binary predicate <tt>Pred</tt> that induces an equivalence relation + on values of type <tt>Key</tt>. Additionally, <tt>unordered_map</tt> and <tt> + unordered_multimap</tt> associate an arbitrary mapped type <tt>T</tt> with the + <tt>Key</tt>.</p> + <p>A hash function is a function object that takes a single argument of type + <tt>Key</tt> and returns a value of type <tt>std::size_t</tt>.</p> +<p>Two values <tt>k1</tt> and <tt>k2</tt> of type <tt>Key</tt> are considered +equal if the container's equality function object returns <tt>true</tt> when passed those +values. If <tt>k1</tt> and <tt>k2</tt> are equal, the hash function shall return +the same value for both. <ins>[<i>Note:</i> Thus supplying a non-default <tt>Pred</tt> +parameter usually implies the need to supply a non-default <tt>Hash</tt> +parameter. <i>— end note</i>]</ins></p> + +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1247"></a>1247. <tt>auto_ptr</tt> is overspecified</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> D.12.1 [auto.ptr] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-10-24 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#auto.ptr">issues</a> in [auto.ptr].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +This issue is extracted as the ongoing point-of-interest from earlier +issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#463">463</a>. +</p> + +<p> +<tt>auto_ptr</tt> is overspecified as the <tt>auto_ptr_ref</tt> +implementation detail is formally specified, and the technique is +observable so workarounds for compiler defects can cause a working +implementation of the primary <tt>auto_ptr</tt> template become +non-conforming. +</p> + +<p> +<tt>auto_ptr_ref</tt> is a documentation aid to describe a possible +mechanism to implement the class. It should be marked exposition only, +as per similar classes, e.g., <tt>istreambuf_iterator::proxy</tt> +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10-25 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I wonder, whether the revised wording shouldn't be as straight as +for <tt>istream_buf</tt> by adding one further sentence: +</p> + +<blockquote> +An implementation is permitted to provide equivalent functionality without +providing a class with this name. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-06 Alisdair adds Daniel's suggestion to the proposed wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-06 Howard moves issue to Review. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-14 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add the term "exposition only" in the following two places: +</p> + +<p> +Ammend D.12.1 [auto.ptr]p2: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins>The exposition only class </ins> <del>T</del><ins>t</ins>emplate <tt>auto_ptr_ref</tt> +holds a reference to an <tt>auto_ptr</tt>. It is used by the +<tt>auto_ptr</tt> conversions to allow <tt>auto_ptr</tt> objects to be +passed to and returned from functions. +<ins>An implementation is permitted to provide equivalent functionality +without providing a class with this name.</ins> +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>namespace std { + template <class Y> struct auto_ptr_ref { }; <ins>// exposition only</ins> +</pre></blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1249"></a>1249. basic_ios default ctor</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.5.4.1 [basic.ios.cons] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2009-10-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-24</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#basic.ios.cons">issues</a> in [basic.ios.cons].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The basic_ios default ctor is required to leave the objects members +uninitialized (see below). The paragraph says the object must be +initialized by calling basic_ios::init() before it's destroyed by +I can't find a requirement that it be initialized before calling +any of the class other member functions. Am I not looking in the +right place or that an issue? +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-10-25 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I agree, that your wording makes that clearer, but suggest to write +</p> + +<blockquote> +... calling <tt>basic_ios::init<del>()</del></tt> before ... +</blockquote> + +<p> +Doing so, I recommend to adapt that of <tt>ios_base();</tt> as well, where +we have: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Effects:</i> Each <tt>ios_base</tt> member has an indeterminate value +after construction. These members shall be initialized by calling +<tt>basic_ios::init</tt>. If an <tt>ios_base</tt> object is destroyed +before these initializations have taken place, the behavior is +undefined. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Post-Rapperswil: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 27.5.2.7 [ios.base.cons] p1: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>ios_base(); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<i>Effects:</i> Each <tt>ios_base</tt> member has an indeterminate value +after construction. <del>These</del> <ins>The object's</ins> members shall be initialized by calling +<tt>basic_ios::init</tt> <ins>before the object's first use or before + it is destroyed, whichever comes first; otherwise the behavior + is undefined.</ins>. <del>If an <tt>ios_base</tt> object is destroyed +before these initializations have taken place, the behavior is +undefined.</del> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 27.5.4.1 [basic.ios.cons] p2: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>basic_ios(); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<i>Effects:</i> Constructs an object of class <tt>basic_ios</tt> +(27.5.2.7) leaving its member objects uninitialized. The object shall be +initialized by calling <del>its</del> +<tt><ins>basic_ios::</ins>init</tt> <ins>before its first +use or before it is destroyed, whichever comes first; otherwise the +behavior is undefined.</ins> <del>member function. If it is destroyed +before it has been initialized the behavior is undefined.</del> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1250"></a>1250. <tt><bitset></tt> still overspecified</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.5 [template.bitset] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2009-10-29 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#template.bitset">issues</a> in [template.bitset].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1227">1227</a> — <tt><bitset></tt> synopsis overspecified makes the observation +that <tt>std::bitset</tt>, and in fact the whole library, may be implemented +without needing to <tt>#include <stdexcept></tt> in any library header. The +proposed resolution removes the <tt>#include <stdexcept></tt> directive from +the header. +</p> + +<p> +I'd like to add that the <tt><bitset></tt> header (as well as the rest of +the library) has also been implemented without #including the +<tt><cstddef></tt> header in any library header. In the case of <tt>std::bitset</tt>, +the template is fully usable (i.e., it may be instantiated and all +its member functions may be used) without ever mentioning <tt>size_t</tt>. +In addition, just like no library header except for <tt><bitset></tt> +<tt>#includes <stdexcept></tt> in its synopsis, no header but <tt><bitset></tt> +<tt>#includes <cstddef></tt> either. +</p> + +<p> +Thus I suggest that the <tt>#include <cstddef></tt> directive be similarly +removed from the synopsis of <tt><bitset></tt>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-08 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 6 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 20.5 [template.bitset]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>#include <cstddef> // for size_t</del> +#include <string> +#include <iosfwd> // for istream, ostream +namespace std { +... +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1254"></a>1254. Misleading sentence in <tt>vector<bool>::flip</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.4.2 [vector.bool] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Christopher Jefferson <b>Opened:</b> 2009-11-01 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#vector.bool">issues</a> in [vector.bool].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The effects of <tt>vector<bool>::flip</tt> has the line: +</p> + +<blockquote> +It is unspecified whether the function has any effect on allocated but +unused bits. +</blockquote> + +<p> +While this is technically true, it is misleading, as any member function +in any standard container may change unused but allocated memory. Users +can never observe such changes as it would also be undefined behaviour +to read such memory. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-14 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Strike second sentence from the definition of <tt>vector<bool>::flip()</tt>, +23.4.2 [vector.bool], paragraph 5. +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Effects:</i> Replaces each element in the container with its complement. +<del>It is unspecified whether the function has any effect on allocated +but unused bits.</del> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1255"></a>1255. <tt>declval</tt> should be added to the library</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.3 [utility] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2009-11-03 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#utility">issues</a> in [utility].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +During the Santa Cruz meeting it was decided to split off the provision +of the library utility <tt>value()</tt> proposed in <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2979.html">N2979</a> +from the concrete request of the +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2939.html#uk300">UK 300</a> +comment. +The provision of a new library component that allows the production of +values in unevaluated expressions is considered as important +to realize constrained templates in C++0x where concepts are not +available. +</p> + +<p> +The following proposed resolution is an improvement over that suggested in +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2958.html">N2958</a>, +because the proposed component can now be defined without loss of +general usefulness and any <i>use</i> by user-code will make the program ill-formed. +A possible prototype implementation that satisfies the core language +requirements +can be written as: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class T> + struct declval_protector { + static const bool stop = false; + static typename std::add_rvalue_reference<T>::type delegate(); <font color="#C80000">// undefined</font> + }; + +template<class T> +typename std::add_rvalue_reference<T>::type declval() { + static_assert(declval_protector<T>::stop, "declval() must not be used!"); + return declval_protector<T>::delegate(); +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Further-on the earlier suggested name <tt>value()</tt> has been changed to <tt>declval()</tt> +after discussions with committee members. +</p> + +<p> +Finally the suggestion shown below demonstrates that it can simplify +existing standard wording by directly using it in the library +specification, and that it also improves an overlooked corner case for +<tt>common_type</tt> by adding support for <tt>cv void</tt>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-19 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 6 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p><i>[ +The proposed resolution has been updated to +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n3000.pdf">N3000</a> +numbering and wording +]</i></p> + + +<ol> +<li> +<p> +Change 20.3 [utility], header <tt><utility></tt> synopsis +as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>// 20.3.3, forward/move: +template <class T> struct identity; +template <class T, class U> T&& forward(U&&); +template <class T> typename remove_reference<T>::type&& move(T&&); + +<ins>// 20.3.4, declval:</ins> +<ins>template <class T> typename add_rvalue_reference<T>::type declval(); // as unevaluated operand</ins> +</pre></blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Immediately after the current section 20.3.3 [forward] insert a +new section: +</p> +<p> +<ins>20.3.4 Function template declval [declval]</ins> +</p> +<p> +<ins>The library provides the function template <tt>declval</tt> to simplify +the definition of expressions which occur as +unevaluated operands (5 [expr]). The +template parameter <tt>T</tt> of <tt>declval</tt> may +be an incomplete type.</ins> +</p> + +<pre><ins>template <class T> typename add_rvalue_reference<T>::type declval(); // as unevaluated operand</ins> +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins><i>Remarks:</i> If this function is used according to 3.2 [basic.def.odr], +the program is ill-formed.</ins> +</p> + +<p> +<ins>[<i>Example:</i></ins> +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins> +template<class To, class From> +decltype(static_cast<To>(declval<From>())) convert(From&&); +</ins></pre></blockquote> + +<p> +<ins> +declares a function template <tt>convert</tt>, which only participates in +overloading if the type <tt>From</tt> can be explicitly cast to type <tt>To</tt>. +For another example see class template <tt>common_type</tt> +(20.7.7.6 [meta.trans.other]). +— <i>end example</i>]</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> + +</li> + +<li> +<p> +This bullet just makes clear that after applying <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2984.html">N2984</a>, the changes in 20.7.4.3 [meta.unary.prop], before +table Type property queries should <em>not</em> use <tt>declval</tt>, +because the well-formedness requirement of the specification of +<tt>is_constructible</tt> would become more complicated, because we +would need to make sure that the expression <i>CE</i> is checked in an +unevaluated context. +</p> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Also 20.7.6 [meta.rel]/4 is not modified similar to the previous bullet, +because with +the stricter requirements of not using <tt>declval()</tt> the well-formedness condition +would be harder to specify. The following changes are only editorial ones (e.g. +the removal of the duplicate declaration of <tt>create()</tt>): +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Given the following function prototype: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T> + typename add_rvalue_reference<T>::type create(); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +the predicate condition for a template specialization +<tt>is_convertible<From, To></tt> shall be satisfied if and only +if the return expression in the following code would be well-formed, +including any +implicit conversions to the return type of the function: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>template <class T> +typename add_rvalue_reference<T>::type create();</del> +To test() { + return create<From>(); +} +</pre></blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change the entry in column "Comments" for <tt>common_type</tt> in Table 51 — +Other transformations (20.7.7.6 [meta.trans.other]): +</p> + +<p><i>[ +NB: This wording change extends the type domain of <tt>common_type</tt> for <tt>cv +void => cv void</tt> transformations and thus makes <tt>common_type</tt> usable for +all binary type combinations that are supported by <tt>is_convertible</tt> +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +The member typedef <tt>type</tt> shall be defined as set out below. All +types in the parameter pack <tt>T</tt> shall be complete <ins>or +(possibly cv-qualified) <tt>void</tt></ins>. A program may specialize +this trait if at least one template parameter in the specialization is a +user-defined type. [<i>Note:</i> Such specializations are needed when +only explicit conversions are desired among the template arguments. +— <i>end note</i>] +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.7.7.6 [meta.trans.other]/3 as indicated: +</p> + +<p><i>[ +NB: This wording change is more than an editorial simplification of +the definition of <tt>common_type</tt>: It also extends its usefulness for <tt>cv +void</tt> types as outlined above +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +The nested typedef <tt>common_type::type</tt> shall be defined as follows: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +[..] +</p> +<pre>template <class T, class U> +struct common_type<T, U> { +<del>private: + static T&& __t(); + static U&& __u(); +public:</del> + typedef decltype(true ? <del>__t</del><ins>declval<T></ins>() : <del>__u</del><ins>declval<U></ins>()) type; +}; +</pre> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change X [func.ret]/1 as indicated +[<i>This part solves some main aspects of issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1225">1225</a></i>]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>namespace std { + template <class> class result_of; // undefined + + template <class Fn, class... ArgTypes> + class result_of<Fn(ArgTypes...)> { + public : + <del>// types</del> + typedef <del>see below</del><ins>decltype(declval<Fn>() ( declval<ArgTypes>()... ))</ins> type; + }; +} +</pre> +<p> +<del>1 Given an rvalue <tt>fn</tt> of type <tt>Fn</tt> and values <tt>t1, t2, ..., tN</tt> of +types <tt>T1, T2, ..., TN</tt> in <tt>ArgTypes</tt>, +respectively, the <tt>type</tt> member is the result type of the expression +<tt>fn(t1, t2, ...,tN)</tt>. The values <tt>ti</tt> +are lvalues when the corresponding type <tt>Ti</tt> is an lvalue-reference +type, and rvalues otherwise.</del> +</p> +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1256"></a>1256. <tt>weak_ptr</tt> comparison functions should be removed</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.10.3 [util.smartptr.weak] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2009-11-04 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Additional to the necessary cleanup of the description of the the +<tt>weak_ptr</tt> component from 20.9.10.3 [util.smartptr.weak] +described in <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1231">1231</a> it turns out that the currently deleted +comparison functions of <tt>weak_ptr</tt> are not needed at all: There +is no safe-bool conversion from <tt>weak_ptr</tt>, and it won't silently +chose a conversion to <tt>shared_ptr</tt>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-14 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 20.9.10.3 [util.smartptr.weak]/1 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>namespace std { +template<class T> class weak_ptr { +public: +... + <del>// comparisons</del> + <del>template<class Y> bool operator<(weak_ptr<Y> const&) const = delete;</del> + <del>template<class Y> bool operator<=(weak_ptr<Y> const&) const = delete;</del> + <del>template<class Y> bool operator>(weak_ptr<Y> const&) const = delete;</del> + <del>template<class Y> bool operator>=(weak_ptr<Y> const&) const = delete;</del> +}; +... +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1257"></a>1257. Header <ios> still contains a <code>concept_map</code></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.5 [iostreams.base] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Beman Dawes <b>Opened:</b> 2009-11-04 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#iostreams.base">issues</a> in [iostreams.base].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The current WP still contains a <tt>concept_map</tt>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-11 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change Iostreams base classes 27.5 [iostreams.base], Header <ios> synopsis, +as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>concept_map ErrorCodeEnum<io_errc> { };</del> +<ins>template <> struct is_error_code_enum<io_errc> : true_type { }</ins> +error_code make_error_code(io_errc e); +error_condition make_error_condition(io_errc e); +const error_category& iostream_category(); +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1258"></a>1258. std::function Effects clause impossible to satisfy</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8.14.2.2 [func.wrap.func.mod] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2009-11-05 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-19</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +As of 20.8.14.2.2 [func.wrap.func.mod]/2+ we have the following +prototype description: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class F, Allocator Alloc> + void assign(F, const Alloc&); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<i>Effects:</i> <tt>function(f, a).swap(*this)</tt> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Two things: First the concept debris needs to be removed, second and +much more importantly, the effects clause is now impossible to satisfy, +because there is no constructor that would match the parameter sequence +(<tt>FunctionObject</tt>, <tt>Allocator</tt>) [plus the fact that no +<tt>f</tt> and no <tt>a</tt> is part of the signature]. The most +probable candidate is +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class F, class A> function(allocator_arg_t, const A&, F); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +and the effects clause needs to be adapted to use this signature. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-13 Daniel brought wording up to date. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-15 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-11 Moved to Tentatively NAD Editorial after 5 positive votes on +c++std-lib. It was noted that this issue was in partial conflict with <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1288">1288</a>, and the two issues were merged in <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1288">1288</a>. +]</i></p> + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +Addressed by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1288">1288</a>. +</p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change in 20.8.14.2.2 [func.wrap.func.mod] the complete prototype description as +indicated +</p> +<p><i>[ +Question to +the editor: Shouldn't there a paragraph number in front of the Effects clause? +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote><pre>template<class F, <del>Allocator Alloc</del><ins>class A</ins>> + void assign(F <ins>f</ins>, const A<del>lloc</del>& <ins>a</ins>); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<ins>3</ins> <i>Effects:</i> <tt>function(<del>f, a</del><ins>allocator_arg, a, +f</ins>).swap(*this)</tt> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1260"></a>1260. <tt>is_constructible<int*,void*></tt> reports true</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.7.4.3 [meta.unary.prop] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Peter Dimov <b>Opened:</b> 2009-11-07 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-20</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#meta.unary.prop">issues</a> in [meta.unary.prop].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The specification of <tt>is_constructible<T,Args...></tt> in +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n3000.pdf">N3000</a> +uses +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>static_cast<T>(create<Args>()...) +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +for the one-argument case, but <tt>static_cast</tt> also permits +unwanted conversions such as <tt>void*</tt> to <tt>T*</tt> and +<tt>Base*</tt> to <tt>Derived*</tt>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Post-Rapperswil: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to <del>NAD Editorial</del><ins>Resolved</ins>, this issue is addressed by paper +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3047.html">n3047</a> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 20.7.4.3 [meta.unary.prop], p6: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +the predicate condition for a template specialization +<tt>is_constructible<T, Args></tt> shall be satisfied, if and only +if the following <del>expression <i>CE</i></del> <ins>variable +definition</ins> would be well-formed: +</p> + +<ul> +<li> +<p> +if <tt>sizeof...(Args) == <ins>0</ins> <del>1</del></tt><del>, the expression</del>: +</p> +<blockquote><pre><del>static_cast<T>(create<Args>()...)</del> +<ins>T t;</ins> +</pre></blockquote> +</li> +<li> +<p> +otherwise <del>the expression</del>: +</p> +<blockquote><pre>T<ins> t</ins>(create<Args>()...); +</pre></blockquote> +</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1261"></a>1261. Insufficent overloads for <tt>to_string</tt> / <tt>to_wstring</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.5 [string.conversions] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Christopher Jefferson <b>Opened:</b> 2009-11-10 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#string.conversions">issues</a> in [string.conversions].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Reported on the gcc mailing list. +</p> + +<blockquote> +The code "<tt>int i; to_string(i);</tt>" fails to compile, as +'<tt>int</tt>' is ambiguous between '<tt>long long</tt>' and '<tt>long +long unsigned</tt>'. It seems unreasonable to expect users to cast +numbers up to a larger type just to use <tt>to_string</tt>. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-14 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +21.3 [string.classes], change <tt>to_string</tt> and +<tt>to_wstring</tt> to: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>string to_string(int val);</ins> +<ins>string to_string(unsigned val);</ins> +<ins>string to_string(long val);</ins> +<ins>string to_string(unsigned long val);</ins> +string to_string(long long val); +string to_string(unsigned long long val); +<ins>string to_string(float val);</ins> +<ins>string to_string(double val);</ins> +string to_string(long double val); + +<ins>wstring to_wstring(int val);</ins> +<ins>wstring to_wstring(unsigned val);</ins> +<ins>wstring to_wstring(long val);</ins> +<ins>wstring to_wstring(unsigned long val);</ins> +wstring to_wstring(long long val); +wstring to_wstring(unsigned long long val); +<ins>wstring to_wstring(float val);</ins> +<ins>wstring to_wstring(double val);</ins> +wstring to_wstring(long double val); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +In 21.5 [string.conversions], paragraph 7, change to: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>string to_string(int val);</ins> +<ins>string to_string(unsigned val);</ins> +<ins>string to_string(long val);</ins> +<ins>string to_string(unsigned long val);</ins> +string to_string(long long val); +string to_string(unsigned long long val); +<ins>string to_string(float val);</ins> +<ins>string to_string(double val);</ins> +string to_string(long double val); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +7 <i>Returns:</i> each function returns a <tt>string</tt> object holding +the character representation of the value of its argument that would be +generated by calling <tt>sprintf(buf, fmt, val)</tt> with a format +specifier of <ins> <tt>"%d"</tt>, <tt>"%u"</tt>, <tt>"%ld"</tt>, +<tt>"%lu"</tt>, </ins> <tt>"%lld"</tt>, <tt>"%llu"</tt>, +<ins><tt>"%f"</tt>, <tt>"%f"</tt>,</ins> or <tt>"%Lf"</tt>, respectively, +where <tt>buf</tt> designates an internal character buffer of sufficient +size. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +In 21.5 [string.conversions], paragraph 14, change to: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><ins>wstring to_wstring(int val);</ins> +<ins>wstring to_wstring(unsigned val);</ins> +<ins>wstring to_wstring(long val);</ins> +<ins>wstring to_wstring(unsigned long val);</ins> +wstring to_wstring(long long val); +wstring to_wstring(unsigned long long val); +<ins>wstring to_wstring(float val);</ins> +<ins>wstring to_wstring(double val);</ins> +wstring to_wstring(long double val); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +14 <i>Returns:</i> Each function returns a <tt>wstring</tt> object +holding the character representation of the value of its argument that +would be generated by calling <tt>swprintf(buf, buffsz, fmt, val)</tt> +with a format specifier of <ins> <tt>L"%d"</tt>, <tt>L"%u"</tt>, +<tt>L"%ld"</tt>, <tt>L"%lu"</tt>, </ins><tt>L"%lld"</tt>, +<tt>L"%llu"</tt>, <ins><tt>L"%f"</tt>, <tt>L"%f"</tt>,</ins> or +<tt>L"%Lf"</tt>, respectively, where <tt>buf</tt> designates an internal +character buffer of sufficient size <tt>buffsz</tt>. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1262"></a>1262. <tt>std::less<std::shared_ptr<T>></tt> is underspecified</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.10.2.7 [util.smartptr.shared.cmp] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Jonathan Wakely <b>Opened:</b> 2009-11-10 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +20.9.10.2.7 [util.smartptr.shared.cmp]/5 says: +</p> + +<blockquote> +For templates <tt>greater</tt>, <tt>less</tt>, <tt>greater_equal</tt>, and <tt>less_equal</tt>, the +partial specializations for <tt>shared_ptr</tt> shall yield a total order, even if +the built-in operators <tt><</tt>, <tt>></tt>, +<tt><=</tt>, and <tt>>=</tt> do not. Moreover, +<tt>less<shared_ptr<T> >::operator()(a, b)</tt> shall return +<tt>std::less<T*>::operator()(a.get(), b.get())</tt>. +</blockquote> + +<p> +This is necessary in order to use <tt>shared_ptr</tt> as the key in associate +containers because +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2637.pdf">n2637</a> +changed <tt>operator<</tt> on <tt>shared_ptr</tt>s to be +defined in terms of <tt>operator<</tt> on the stored pointers (a mistake IMHO +but too late now.) By 5.9 [expr.rel]/2 the result of comparing builtin +pointers is unspecified except in special cases which generally do not +apply to <tt>shared_ptr</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +Earlier versions of the WP +(<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2798.pdf">n2798</a>, +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2857.pdf">n2857</a>) +had the following note on +that paragraph: +</p> + +<blockquote> +[Editor's +note: It's not clear to me whether the first sentence is a requirement +or a note. The second +sentence seems to be a requirement, but it doesn't really belong here, +under <tt>operator<</tt>.] +</blockquote> + +<p> +I agree completely - if partial specializations are needed they should +be properly specified. +</p> + +<p> +20.9.10.2.7 [util.smartptr.shared.cmp]/6 has a note saying the comparison operator +allows <tt>shared_ptr</tt> objects to be used as keys in associative +containers, which is misleading because something else like a +<tt>std::less</tt> partial specialization is needed. If it is not correct that +note should be removed. +</p> + +<p> +20.9.10.2.7 [util.smartptr.shared.cmp]/3 refers to '<tt>x</tt>' and +'<tt>y</tt>' but the prototype has parameters '<tt>a</tt>' and +'<tt>b</tt>' - that needs to be fixed even if the rest of the issue is +NAD. +</p> + +<p> +I see two ways to fix this, I prefer the first because it removes the +need for any partial specializations and also fixes <tt>operator></tt> and +other comparisons when defined in terms of <tt>operator<</tt>. +</p> + +<ol> +<li> +<p> +Replace 20.9.10.2.7 [util.smartptr.shared.cmp]/3 with the following and +remove p5: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class T, class U> bool operator<(const shared_ptr<T>& a, const shared_ptr<U>& b); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +3 <i>Returns:</i> <del><tt>x.get() < y.get()</tt>.</del> +<ins><tt>std::less<V>()(a.get(), b.get())</tt>, where <tt>V</tt> is the +composite pointer type (5.9 [expr.rel]).</ins> +</p> + +<p> +4 <i>Throws:</i> nothing. +</p> + +<p><del> +5 For templates <tt>greater</tt>, <tt>less</tt>, <tt>greater_equal</tt>, and <tt>less_equal</tt>, the +partial specializations for <tt>shared_ptr</tt> shall yield a total order, even if +the built-in operators <tt><</tt>, <tt>></tt>, +<tt><=</tt>, and <tt>>=</tt> do not. Moreover, +<tt>less<shared_ptr<T> >::operator()(a, b)</tt> shall return +<tt>std::less<T*>::operator()(a.get(), b.get())</tt>. +</del></p> +<p> +6 [<i>Note:</i> Defining a comparison operator allows +<tt>shared_ptr</tt> objects to be used as keys in associative +containers. — <i>end note</i>] +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + + +<li> +<p> +Add to 20.9.10.2 [util.smartptr.shared]/1 (after the <tt>shared_ptr</tt> comparisons) +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class T> struct greater<shared_ptr<T>>; +template<class T> struct less<shared_ptr<T>>; +template<class T> struct greater_equal<shared_ptr<T>>; +template<class T> struct less_equal<shared_ptr<T>>; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Remove 20.9.10.2.7 [util.smartptr.shared.cmp]/5 and /6 and replace with: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class T, class U> bool operator<(const shared_ptr<T>& a, const shared_ptr<U>& b); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +3 <i>Returns:</i> <tt><del>x</del><ins>a</ins>.get() < <del>y</del><ins>b</ins>.get()</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +4 <i>Throws:</i> nothing. +</p> + +<p><del> +5 For templates <tt>greater</tt>, <tt>less</tt>, <tt>greater_equal</tt>, and <tt>less_equal</tt>, the +partial specializations for <tt>shared_ptr</tt> shall yield a total order, even if +the built-in operators <tt><</tt>, <tt>></tt>, +<tt><=</tt>, and <tt>>=</tt> do not. Moreover, +<tt>less<shared_ptr<T> >::operator()(a, b)</tt> shall return +<tt>std::less<T*>::operator()(a.get(), b.get())</tt>. +</del></p> +<p><del> +6 [<i>Note:</i> Defining a comparison operator allows +<tt>shared_ptr</tt> objects to be used as keys in associative +containers. — <i>end note</i>] +</del></p> +</blockquote> + +<pre><ins> +template<class T> struct greater<shared_ptr<T>> : +binary_function<shared_ptr<T>, shared_ptr<T>, bool> { + bool operator()(const shared_ptr<T>& a, const shared_ptr<T>& b) const; +}; +</ins></pre> + +<blockquote><ins> +<tt>operator()</tt> returns <tt>greater<T*>()(a.get(), b.get())</tt>. +</ins></blockquote> + +<pre><ins> +template<class T> struct less<shared_ptr<T>> : +binary_function<shared_ptr<T>, shared_ptr<T>, bool> { + bool operator()(const shared_ptr<T>& a, const shared_ptr<T>& b) const; +}; +</ins></pre> + +<blockquote><ins> +<tt>operator()</tt> returns <tt>less<T*>()(a.get(), b.get())</tt>. +</ins></blockquote> + +<pre><ins> +template<class T> struct greater_equal<shared_ptr<T>> : +binary_function<shared_ptr<T>, shared_ptr<T>, bool> { + bool operator()(const shared_ptr<T>& a, const shared_ptr<T>& b) const; +}; +</ins></pre> + +<blockquote><ins> +<tt>operator()</tt> returns <tt>greater_equal<T*>()(a.get(), b.get())</tt>. +</ins></blockquote> + +<pre><ins> +template<class T> struct less_equal<shared_ptr<T>> : +binary_function<shared_ptr<T>, shared_ptr<T>, bool> { + bool operator()(const shared_ptr<T>& a, const shared_ptr<T>& b) const; +}; +</ins></pre> + +<blockquote><ins> +<tt>operator()</tt> returns <tt>less_equal<T*>()(a.get(), b.get())</tt>. +</ins></blockquote> + +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + +<p><i>[ +2009-11-18: Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Replace 20.9.10.2.7 [util.smartptr.shared.cmp]/3 with the following and +remove p5: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class T, class U> bool operator<(const shared_ptr<T>& a, const shared_ptr<U>& b); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +3 <i>Returns:</i> <del><tt>x.get() < y.get()</tt>.</del> +<ins><tt>less<V>()(a.get(), b.get())</tt>, where <tt>V</tt> is the +composite pointer type (5.9 [expr.rel]) of <tt>T*</tt> and <tt>U*</tt>.</ins> +</p> + +<p> +4 <i>Throws:</i> nothing. +</p> + +<p><del> +5 For templates <tt>greater</tt>, <tt>less</tt>, <tt>greater_equal</tt>, and <tt>less_equal</tt>, the +partial specializations for <tt>shared_ptr</tt> shall yield a total order, even if +the built-in operators <tt><</tt>, <tt>></tt>, +<tt><=</tt>, and <tt>>=</tt> do not. Moreover, +<tt>less<shared_ptr<T> >::operator()(a, b)</tt> shall return +<tt>std::less<T*>::operator()(a.get(), b.get())</tt>. +</del></p> +<p> +6 [<i>Note:</i> Defining a comparison operator allows +<tt>shared_ptr</tt> objects to be used as keys in associative +containers. — <i>end note</i>] +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1264"></a>1264. <tt>quick_exit</tt> support for freestanding implementations</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17.6.1.3 [compliance] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-11-12 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#compliance">issues</a> in [compliance].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses UK 172</b></p> + +<p> +This issue is a response to NB comment UK-172 +</p> + +<p> +The functions <tt>quick_exit</tt> and <tt>at_quick_exit</tt> should be +added to the required features of <tt><cstdlib></tt> in a +freestanding implementation. +</p> + +<p> +This comment was rejected in Summit saying neither <tt>at_exit</tt> nor +<tt>at_quick_exit</tt> should be required. This suggests the comment was +misread, as <tt>atexit</tt> is already required to be supported. If the LWG +really did wish to not require the registration functions be supported, +then a separate issue should be opened to change the current standard. +</p> + +<p> +Given both <tt>exit</tt> and <tt>atexit</tt> are required, the UK panel feels it is +appropriate to require the new <tt>quick_exit</tt> facility is similarly +supported. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-12-11 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Ammend p3 Freestanding implementations 17.6.1.3 [compliance] +</p> + +<blockquote> +3 The supplied version of the header <tt><cstdlib></tt> shall +declare at least the functions <tt>abort<del>()</del></tt>, <tt>atexit<del>()</del></tt>, +<ins><tt>at_quick_exit</tt>,</ins> <del>and</del> <tt>exit<del>()</del></tt><ins>, and +<tt>quick_exit</tt></ins>(18.5 [support.start.term]). The other +headers listed in this table shall meet the same requirements as for a +hosted implementation. +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1267"></a>1267. Incorrect wording for <tt>condition_variable_any::wait_for</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30.5.2 [thread.condition.condvarany] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Anthony Williams <b>Opened:</b> 2009-11-17 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#thread.condition.condvarany">issues</a> in [thread.condition.condvarany].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +30.5.2 [thread.condition.condvarany]p18 and 30.5.2 [thread.condition.condvarany]p27 specify incorrect preconditions for +<tt>condition_variable_any::wait_for</tt>. The stated preconditions require that +<tt>lock</tt> has a <tt>mutex()</tt> member function, and that this produces the +same result for all concurrent calls to <tt>wait_for()</tt>. This is +inconsistent with <tt>wait()</tt> and <tt>wait_until()</tt> which do not impose +such a requirement. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-12-24 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Remove 30.5.2 [thread.condition.condvarany]p18 and 30.5.2 [thread.condition.condvarany]p27. +</p> +<blockquote> +<pre>template <class Lock, class Rep, class Period> + cv_status wait_for(Lock& lock, const chrono::duration<Rep, Period>& rel_time); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p><del> +18 <i>Precondition:</i> lock is locked by the calling thread, and either +</del></p> +<ul> +<li><del> +no other thread is waiting on this <tt>condition_variable</tt> object or +</del></li> +<li><del> +<tt>lock.mutex()</tt> returns the same value for each of the lock arguments +supplied by all concurrently waiting (via <tt>wait</tt>, <tt>wait_for</tt>, or +<tt>wait_until</tt>) threads. +</del></li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + +<p>...</p> + +<pre>template <class Lock, class Rep, class Period, class Predicate> + bool wait_for(Lock& lock, const chrono::duration<Rep, Period>& rel_time, Predicate pred); +</pre> + +<blockquote> + +<p><del> +27 Precondition: lock is locked by the calling thread, and either +</del></p> +<ul> +<li><del> +no other thread is waiting on this <tt>condition_variable</tt> object or +</del></li> +<li><del> +<tt>lock.mutex()</tt> returns the same value for each of the lock arguments +supplied by all concurrently waiting (via <tt>wait</tt>, <tt>wait_for</tt>, or +<tt>wait_until</tt>) threads. +</del></li> +</ul> + +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1268"></a>1268. The Mutex requirements in 30.4.1 and 30.4.2 are wrong</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30.4 [thread.mutex] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Anthony Williams <b>Opened:</b> 2009-11-17 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-26</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#thread.mutex">issues</a> in [thread.mutex].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The <tt>Mutex</tt> requirements in 30.4.1 [thread.mutex.requirements] and +30.4.1.3 [thread.timedmutex.requirements] confuse the requirements on the +behaviour of <tt>std::mutex</tt> et al with the requirements on +<tt>Lockable</tt> types for use with <tt>std::unique_lock</tt>, +<tt>std::lock_guard</tt> and <tt>std::condition_variable_any</tt>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010 Pittsburgh: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Concepts of threads chapter and issue presentation are: Lockable < Mutex < +TimedMutex and Lockable < TimedLockable < TimedMutex. +</p> +<p> +Typo in failed deletion of Mutex in 30.4.4 p4 edits. +</p> +<p> +Lockable requirements are too weak for condition_variable_any, but the Mutex +requirements are too strong. +</p> +<p> +Need subset of Lockable requirements for condition_variable_any that does not +include try_lock. E.g. CvLockable < Lockable. +</p> +<p> +Text needs updating to recent draft changes. +</p> +<p> +Needs to specify exception behavior in Lockable. +</p> +<p> +The current standard is fine for what it says, but it places requirements that +are too strong on authors of mutexes and locks. +</p> +<p> +Move to open status. Suggest Anthony look at condition_variable_any +requirements. Suggest Anthony refine requirements/concepts categories. +</p> +<p> +Related to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#964">964</a> and <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#966">966</a> +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-03-28 Daniel synced with N3092. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-10-25 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Accepting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3130.html">n3130</a> would solve this issue. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-11 Batavia: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Resolved by adopting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3197.html">n3197</a>. +</blockquote> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add a new section to 30.2 [thread.req] after 30.2.4 [thread.req.timing] as follows: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +30.2.5 Requirements for Lockable types +</p> + +<p> +The standard library templates <tt>unique_lock</tt> (30.4.2.2 [thread.lock.unique]), <tt>lock_guard</tt> (30.4.2.1 [thread.lock.guard]), <tt>lock</tt>, <tt>try_lock</tt> (30.4.3 [thread.lock.algorithm]) and <tt>condition_variable_any</tt> (30.5.2 [thread.condition.condvarany]) all operate on user-supplied +<tt>Lockable</tt> objects. Such an object must support the member functions +specified for either the <tt>Lockable</tt> Requirements or the +<tt>TimedLockable</tt> requirements as appropriate to acquire or release +ownership of a <tt>lock</tt> by a given <tt>thread</tt>. [<i>Note:</i> the +nature of any lock ownership and any synchronization it may entail are not part +of these requirements. — <i>end note</i>] +</p> + +<p> +30.2.5.1 Lockable Requirements +</p> + +<p> +In order to qualify as a <tt>Lockable</tt> type, the following expressions must +be supported, with the specified semantics, where <tt>m</tt> denotes a value of +type <tt>L</tt> that supports the <tt>Lockable</tt>: +</p> + +<p> +The expression <tt>m.lock()</tt> shall be well-formed and have the following +semantics: +</p> + +<dl> + <dt>Effects:</dt><dd>Block until a lock can be acquired for the current thread.</dd> + <dt>Return type:</dt><dd><tt>void</tt></dd> +</dl> + +<p> +The expression <tt>m.try_lock()</tt> shall be well-formed and have the +following semantics: +</p> + +<dl> + <dt>Effects:</dt><dd>Attempt to acquire a lock for the current thread without blocking.</dd> + <dt>Return type:</dt><dd><tt>bool</tt></dd> + <dt>Returns:</dt><dd><tt>true</tt> if the lock was + acquired, <tt>false</tt> otherwise.</dd> +</dl> + +<p> +The expression <tt>m.unlock()</tt> shall be well-formed and have the +following semantics: +</p> + +<dl> + <dt>Effects:</dt><dd>Release a lock on <tt>m</tt> held by the current thread.</dd> + <dt>Return type:</dt><dd><tt> void</tt></dd> + <dt>Throws:</dt><dd> Nothing if the current thread holds a lock on <tt>m</tt>.</dd> +</dl> + +<p> +30.2.5.2 <tt>TimedLockable</tt> Requirements +</p> + +<p> +For a type to qualify as <tt>TimedLockable</tt> it must meet the +<tt>Lockable</tt> requirements, and additionally the following +expressions must be well-formed, with the specified semantics, +where <tt>m</tt> is an instance of a type <tt>TL</tt> that supports +the <tt>TimedLockable</tt> requirements, <tt>rel_time</tt> denotes +instantiation of <tt>duration</tt> (20.11.3 [time.duration]) and <tt>abs_time</tt> +denotes an instantiation of <tt>time_point</tt> (20.11.4 [time.point]) + +</p> + +<p> +The expression <tt>m.try_lock_for(rel_time)</tt> shall be well-formed and have the +following semantics: +</p> + +<dl> + <dt>Effects:</dt><dd>Attempt to acquire a lock for the current + thread within the specified time period.</dd> + <dt>Return type:</dt><dd><tt>bool</tt></dd> + <dt>Returns:</dt><dd><tt>true</tt> if the lock was + acquired, <tt>false</tt> otherwise.</dd> +</dl> + +<p> +The expression <tt>m.try_lock_until(abs_time)</tt> shall be well-formed and have the +following semantics: +</p> + +<dl> + <dt>Effects:</dt><dd>Attempt to acquire a lock for the current + thread before the specified point in time.</dd> + <dt>Return type:</dt><dd><tt>bool</tt></dd> + <dt>Returns:</dt><dd><tt>true</tt> if the lock was + acquired, <tt>false</tt> otherwise.</dd> +</dl> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Replace 30.4.1 [thread.mutex.requirements] paragraph 2 with the +following: +</p> + +<blockquote> +2 This section describes requirements on <del>template argument types +used to instantiate templates defined in</del> <ins>the mutex types +supplied by</ins> the C++ standard library. <del>The template +definitions in the C++ standard library refer</del> These types shall +conform to the named <tt>Mutex</tt> requirements whose details are set +out below. In this description, <tt>m</tt> is an object +of <del>a <tt>Mutex</tt> type</del> +<ins>one of the standard library mutex types <tt>std::mutex</tt>, +<tt>std::recursive_mutex</tt>, <tt>std::timed_mutex</tt> or +<tt>std::recursive_timed_mutex</tt>.</ins>. +</blockquote> + +<p> +Add the following paragraph after 30.4.1 [thread.mutex.requirements] +paragraph 2: +</p> + +<blockquote><ins> +A <tt>Mutex</tt> type shall conform to the <tt>Lockable</tt> +requirements (30.2.5.1). +</ins></blockquote> + +<p> +Replace 30.4.1.3 [thread.timedmutex.requirements] paragraph 1 with the +following: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<ins>The C++ standard library <tt>TimedMutex</tt> types <tt>std::timed_mutex</tt> + and <tt>std::recursive_timed_mutex</tt> </ins> +<del>A <tt>TimedMutex</tt> type</del> shall meet the requirements for +a <tt>Mutex</tt> type. In addition, <del>it</del><ins>they</ins> shall +meet the requirements set out <del>in this Clause 30.4.2</del><ins>below</ins>, +where <tt>rel_time</tt> denotes an instantiation of <tt>duration</tt> +(20.11.3 [time.duration]) and <tt>abs_time</tt> denotes an instantiation +of <tt>time_point</tt> (20.11.4 [time.point]). +</blockquote> + +<p> +Add the following paragraph after 30.4.1.3 [thread.timedmutex.requirements] paragraph 1: +</p> + +<blockquote><ins> +A <tt>TimedMutex</tt> type shall conform to the <tt>TimedLockable</tt> +requirements (30.2.5.1). +</ins></blockquote> + + +<p> +Add the following paragraph following 30.4.2.1 [thread.lock.guard] +paragraph 1: +</p> + +<blockquote><ins> +The supplied <tt>Mutex</tt> type shall meet the <tt>Lockable</tt> +requirements +(30.2.5.1). +</ins></blockquote> + +<p> +Add the following paragraph following 30.4.2.2 [thread.lock.unique] +paragraph 1: +</p> + +<blockquote><ins> +The supplied <tt>Mutex</tt> type shall meet the <tt>Lockable</tt> +requirements +(30.2.5.1). <tt>unique_lock<Mutex></tt> meets the <tt>Lockable</tt> +requirements. If <tt>Mutex</tt> meets the <tt>TimedLockable</tt> +requirements +(30.2.5.2) then <tt>unique_lock<Mutex></tt> also meets the +<tt>TimedLockable</tt> requirements. +</ins></blockquote> + +<p> +Replace the use of "mutex" or "mutex object" with "lockable object" +throughout clause 30.4.2 [thread.lock] paragraph 1: +</p> + +<blockquote> +1 A lock is an object that holds a reference to +a <del>mutex</del><ins>lockable object</ins> and may unlock +the <del>mutex</del><ins>lockable object</ins> during the lock's +destruction (such as when leaving block scope). A thread of execution +may use a lock to aid in managing <del>mutex</del> ownership <ins>of a +lockable object</ins> in an exception safe manner. A lock is said to +own a <del>mutex</del><ins>lockable object</ins> if it is currently +managing the ownership of that <del>mutex</del><ins>lockable +object</ins> for a thread of execution. A lock does not manage the +lifetime of the <del>mutex</del><ins>lockable object</ins> it +references. [ Note: Locks are intended to ease the burden of +unlocking the <del>mutex</del><ins>lockable object</ins> under both +normal and exceptional circumstances. — end note ] +</blockquote> + +<p>30.4.2 [thread.lock] paragaph 2:</p> + +<blockquote> +2 Some lock constructors take tag types which describe what should be +done with the <del>mutex</del><ins>lockable</ins> object during the +lock's constuction. +</blockquote> + +<p>30.4.2.1 [thread.lock.guard] paragaph 1:</p> + +<blockquote> +1 An object of type <tt>lock_guard</tt> controls the ownership of a + <del>mutex</del><ins>lockable</ins> object within a scope. A +<tt>lock_guard</tt> object maintains ownership of +a <del>mutex</del><ins>lockable</ins> object throughout +the <tt>lock_guard</tt> object's lifetime. The behavior of a program +is undefined if the <del>mutex</del><ins>lockable object</ins> +referenced by <tt>pm</tt> does not exist for the entire lifetime (3.8) +of the <tt>lock_guard</tt> object. <ins><tt>Mutex</tt> shall meet + the <tt>Lockable</tt> requirements (30.2.5.1).</ins> +</blockquote> + +<p>30.4.2.2 [thread.lock.unique] paragaph 1:</p> + +<blockquote> +1 An object of type <tt>unique_lock</tt> controls the ownership of +a <del>mutex</del><ins>lockable object</ins> within a +scope. <del>Mutex</del> <del>o</del><ins>O</ins>wnership <ins>of the +lockable object</ins> may be acquired at construction or after +construction, and may be transferred, after acquisition, to +another <tt>unique_lock</tt> object. Objects of +type <tt>unique_lock</tt> are not copyable but are movable. The +behavior of a program is undefined if the contained +pointer <tt>pm</tt> is not null and the mutex pointed to +by <tt>pm</tt> does not exist for the entire remaining lifetime (3.8) +of the <tt>unique_lock</tt> object. <ins><tt>Mutex</tt> shall meet +the <tt>Lockable</tt> requirements (30.2.5.1).</ins> +</blockquote> + + +<p> +Add the following to the precondition of <tt>unique_lock(mutex_type& + m, +const chrono::time_point<Clock, Duration>& abs_time)</tt> in +30.4.2.2.1 [thread.lock.unique.cons] paragraph 18: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class Clock, class Duration> + unique_lock(mutex_type& m, const chrono::time_point<Clock, Duration>& abs_time); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +18 <i>Requires:</i> If <tt>mutex_type</tt> is not a recursive mutex +the +calling thread does not own the mutex. <ins>The supplied <tt>mutex_type</tt> +type shall meet the <tt>TimedLockable</tt> requirements (30.2.5.2).</ins> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Add the following to the precondition of <tt>unique_lock(mutex_type& + m, +const chrono::duration<Rep, Period>& rel_time)</tt> in +30.4.2.2.1 [thread.lock.unique.cons] +paragraph 22 +</p> + +<blockquote> +22 <i>Requires:</i> If <tt>mutex_type</tt> is not a recursive mutex + the +calling thread does not own the mutex. <ins>The supplied <tt>mutex_type</tt> +type shall meet the <tt>TimedLockable</tt> requirements (30.2.5.2).</ins> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Add the following as a precondition of <tt>bool try_lock_until(const +chrono::time_point<Clock, Duration>& abs_time)</tt> before +30.4.2.2.2 [thread.lock.unique.locking] paragraph 8 +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class Clock, class Duration> + bool try_lock_until(const chrono::time_point<Clock, Duration>& abs_time); +</pre> +<blockquote><ins> +<i>Requires:</i> The supplied <tt>mutex_type</tt> type shall meet the +<tt>TimedLockable</tt> requirements (30.2.5.2). +</ins></blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Add the following as a precondition of <tt>bool try_lock_for(const +chrono::duration<Rep, Period>& rel_time)</tt> before +30.4.2.2.2 [thread.lock.unique.locking] paragraph 12 +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class Rep, class Period> + bool try_lock_for(const chrono::duration<Rep, Period>& rel_time); +</pre> +<blockquote><ins> +<i>Requires:</i> The supplied <tt>mutex_type</tt> type shall meet the +<tt>TimedLockable</tt> requirements (30.2.5.2). +</ins></blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Replace 30.4.3 [thread.lock.algorithm] p1 with the following: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class L1, class L2, class... L3> int try_lock(L1&, L2&, L3&...); +</pre> +<blockquote> +1 <i>Requires:</i> Each template parameter type shall meet the +<tt><del>Mutex</del> <ins>Lockable</ins></tt> requirements +<ins>(30.2.5.1).</ins><del>, except that a call to <tt>try_lock()</tt> +may throw +an exception.</del> [<i>Note:</i> The <tt>unique_lock</tt> class +template meets +these requirements when suitably instantiated. — <i>end note</i>] +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Replace 30.4.3 [thread.lock.algorithm] p4 with the following: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class L1, class L2, class... L3> void lock(L1&, L2&, L3&...); +</pre> +<blockquote> +4 <i>Requires:</i> Each template parameter type shall meet the +<tt>Mutex<del>Mutex</del> <ins>Lockable</ins></tt> +requirements <ins>(30.2.5.1).</ins><del>, except that a call to +<tt>try_lock()</tt> may throw an exception.</del> [<i>Note:</i> The +<tt>unique_lock</tt> class template meets these requirements when +suitably +instantiated. — <i>end note</i>] +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Replace 30.5.2 [thread.condition.condvarany] paragraph 1 with: +</p> + +<blockquote> +1 A <tt>Lock</tt> type shall meet the <del>requirements for a <tt>Mutex</tt> +type</del> <ins><tt>Lockable</tt> requirements (30.2.5.1)</ins>, except +that +<tt>try_lock</tt> is not required. [<i>Note:</i> All of the standard +mutex types +meet this requirement. — <i>end note</i>] +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1270"></a>1270. <tt>result_of</tt> should be moved to <tt><type_traits></tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> X [func.ret] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-11-19 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#func.ret">issues</a> in [func.ret].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses UK 198</b></p> + +<p> +NB Comment: UK-198 makes this request among others. It refers to a more +detailed issue that BSI did not manage to submit by the CD1 ballot deadline +though. +</p> + +<p> +<tt>result_of</tt> is essentially a metafunction to return the type of an +expression, and belongs with the other library metafunctions in +<tt><type_traits></tt> rather than lurking in <tt><functional></tt>. + The current definition in <tt><functional></tt> made sense when +<tt>result_of</tt> was nothing more than a protocol to enable several components +in <tt><functional></tt> to provide their own result types, but it has +become a more general tool. For instance, <tt>result_of</tt> is now used in the +threading and futures components. +</p> + +<p> +Now that <tt><type_traits></tt> is a required header for free-standing +implementations it will be much more noticeable (in such environments) that a +particularly useful trait is missing, unless that implementation also chooses to +offer <tt><functional></tt> as an extension. +</p> + +<p> +The simplest proposal is to simply move the wording (editorial direction below) +although a more consistent form for type_traits would reformat this as a table. +</p> + +<p> +Following the acceptance of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1255">1255</a>, <tt>result_of</tt> now +depends on the <tt>declval</tt> function template, tentatively provided +in <tt><utility></tt> which is <em>not</em> (yet) required of a +free-standing implementation. +</p> + +<p> +This dependency is less of an issue when <tt>result_of</tt> continues to +live in <tt><functional></tt>. +</p> + +<p> +Personally, I would prefer to clean up the dependencies so both +<tt>result_of</tt> and <tt>declval</tt> are available in a free-standing +implementation, but that would require slightly more work than suggested +here. A minimal tweak would be to require <tt><utility></tt> in a +free-standing implementation, although there are a couple of subtle +issues with <tt>make_pair</tt>, which uses <tt>reference_wrapper</tt> in +its protocol and that is much harder to separate cleanly from +<tt><functional></tt>. +</p> + +<p> +An alternative would be to enact the other half of +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2979.html">N2979</a> +and create a new minimal header for the new C++0x library facilities to +be added to the freestanding requirements (plus <tt>swap</tt>.) +</p> + +<p> +I have a mild preference for the latter, although there are clearly +reasons to consider better library support for free-standing in general, +and adding the whole of <tt><utility></tt> could be considered a step in that +direction. See NB comment +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n3009.html#JP23">JP-23</a> +for other suggestions (<tt>array</tt>, <tt>ratio</tt>) +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-01-27 Beman updated wording. +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +The original wording is preserved here: +</p> +<blockquote> + +<p> +Move X [func.ret] to a heading below 20.7 [meta]. Note +that in principle we should not change the tag, although this is a new tag for +0x. If it has been stable since TR1 it is clearly immutable though. +</p> + +<p> +This wording should obviously adopt any other changes currently in (Tentatively) +Ready status that touch this wording, such as <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1255">1255</a>. +</p> + +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-09 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p><i>From Function objects 20.8 [function.objects], Header <functional> +synopsis, remove:</i></p> +<blockquote> + <pre>// 20.7.4 result_of: +template <class> class result_of; <i>// undefined</i> +template <class F, class... Args> class result_of<F(ArgTypes...)>;</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>Remove Function object return types X [func.ret] in its entirety. +This sub-section reads:</i></p> +<blockquote> + <pre>namespace std { + template <class> class result_of; <i>// undefined</i> + + template <class Fn, class... ArgTypes> + class result_of<Fn(ArgTypes...)> { + public : + // types + typedef see below type; + }; +}</pre> + <p>Given an rvalue <code>fn</code> of type <code>Fn</code> and values <code> + t1, t2, ..., tN</code> of types T1, T2, ..., TN in <code>ArgTypes</code>, + respectively, the type member is the result type of the expression <code> + fn(t1, t2, ...,tN)</code>. The values <code>ti</code> are lvalues when the + corresponding type <code>Ti</code> is an lvalue-reference type, and rvalues + otherwise.</p> +</blockquote> +<p><i>To Header <type_traits> synopsis 20.7.2 [meta.type.synop], add at +the indicated location:</i></p> +<blockquote> + <pre>template <class T> struct underlying_type; +<ins>template <class T> struct result_of; <i>// not defined +</i>template <class Fn, class... ArgTypes> struct result_of<Fn(ArgTypes...)>;</ins></pre> +</blockquote> +<p><i>To Other transformations 20.7.7.6 [meta.trans.other], Table 51 — +Other transformations, add:</i></p> +<blockquote> + <table style="border-collapse: collapse;" border="1" bordercolor="#111111" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0"> + <tbody><tr> + <td><b>Template</b></td> + <td><b>Condition</b></td> + <td><b>Comments</b></td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td valign="top"><code>template <class T><br> + struct underlying_type;</code></td> + <td valign="top"><code>T</code> shall be an enumeration type + (7.2)</td> + <td valign="top">The member typedef <code>type</code> shall + name the underlying type of <code>T</code>.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td valign="top"><ins><code>template <class Fn, class... ArgTypes> + struct result_of<Fn(ArgTypes...)>;</code></ins></td> + <td valign="top"><ins><code>Fn</code> shall be a function object type + 20.8 [function.objects], reference to function, or reference to + function object type. + <tt>decltype(declval<Fn>()(declval<ArgTypes>()...))</tt> shall + be well formed.</ins></td> + <td valign="top"><ins>The member typedef <code>type</code> + shall name the type <code>decltype(declval<Fn>()(declval<ArgTypes>()...))</code>.</ins></td> + </tr> + </tbody></table> +</blockquote> +<p>At the end of Other transformations 20.7.7.6 [meta.trans.other] add:</p> + +<blockquote> +<p>[<i>Example:</i> Given these definitions:</p> + + <pre>typedef bool(&PF1)(); +typedef short(*PF2)(long); + +struct S { + operator PF2() const; + double operator()(char, int&); + };</pre> +<p>the following assertions will hold:</p> + <pre>static_assert(std::is_same<<wbr>std::result_of<S(int)>::type, short>::value, "Error!"); +static_assert(std::is_same<<wbr>std::result_of<S&(unsigned char, int&)>::type, double>::value, "Error!"); +static_assert(std::is_same<<wbr>std::result_of<PF1()>::type, bool>::value, "Error!");</pre> + <p><i> — end example</i>]</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1271"></a>1271. CR undefined in duration operators</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.11.3.5 [time.duration.nonmember] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2009-11-21 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#time.duration.nonmember">issues</a> in [time.duration.nonmember].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +IMO <tt>CR</tt> alone is not really defined (it should be <tt>CR(Rep1, +Rep2)</tt>). +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-12-24 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 20.11.3.5 [time.duration.nonmember] paragraphs 9 and 12: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class Rep1, class Period, class Rep2> + duration<typename common_type<Rep1, Rep2>::type, Period> + operator/(const duration<Rep1, Period>& d, const Rep2& s); +</pre> +<blockquote> +9 <i>Returns:</i> <tt>duration<CR<ins>(Rep1, Rep2)</ins>, Period>(d) /= s</tt>. +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class Rep1, class Period, class Rep2> + duration<typename common_type<Rep1, Rep2>::type, Period> + operator%(const duration<Rep1, Period>& d, const Rep2& s); +</pre> +<blockquote> +12 <i>Returns:</i> <tt>duration<CR<ins>(Rep1, Rep2)</ins>, Period>(d) %= s</tt>. +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1276"></a>1276. <tt>forwardlist</tt> missing allocator constructors</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.3.3 [forwardlist] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2009-12-12 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#forwardlist">issues</a> in [forwardlist].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +I found that forward_list has only +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>forward_list(const forward_list<T,Allocator>& x); +forward_list(forward_list<T,Allocator>&& x); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +but misses +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>forward_list(const forward_list& x, const Allocator&); +forward_list(forward_list&& x, const Allocator&); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Note to other reviewers: I also checked the container adaptors for similar +inconsistencies, but as far as I can see these are already handled by the +current active issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1194">1194</a> and <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1199">1199</a>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-01-14 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 23.3.3 [forwardlist]/3, class template forward_list synopsis change as +indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>forward_list(const forward_list<del><T,Allocator></del>& x); +forward_list(forward_list<del><T,Allocator></del>&& x); +<ins>forward_list(const forward_list&, const Allocator&);</ins> +<ins>forward_list(forward_list&&, const Allocator&);</ins> +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1277"></a>1277. <tt>std::thread::id</tt> should be trivially copyable</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30.3.1.1 [thread.thread.id] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Anthony Williams <b>Opened:</b> 2009-11-24 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#thread.thread.id">issues</a> in [thread.thread.id].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The class definition of <tt>std::thread::id</tt> in +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n3000.pdf">N3000</a> +is: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>class thread::id { +public: + id(); +}; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Typically, I expect that the internal data members will either be +pointers or integers, so that in practice the class will be trivially +copyable. However, I don't think the current wording guarantees it, and +I think it would be useful. In particular, I can see a use for +<tt>std::atomic<std::thread::id></tt> to allow a <tt>thread</tt> +to claim ownership of a data structure atomicly, and +<tt>std::atomic<T></tt> requires that <tt>T</tt> is trivially +copyable. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-12 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 7 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add a new sentence to 30.3.1.1 [thread.thread.id] p1: +</p> + +<blockquote> +1 An object of type <tt>thread::id</tt> provides a unique identifier for +each thread of execution and a single distinct value for all +<tt>thread</tt> objects that do not represent a thread of execution +(30.3.1 [thread.thread.class]). Each thread of execution has an +associated <tt>thread::id</tt> object that is not equal to the +<tt>thread::id</tt> object of any other thread of execution and that is +not equal to the <tt>thread::id</tt> object of any <tt>std::thread</tt> +object that does not represent threads of execution. The library may +reuse the value of a <tt>thread::id</tt> of a terminated thread that can +no longer be joined. <ins><tt>thread::id</tt> shall be a trivially +copyable class (9 [class]).</ins> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1278"></a>1278. inconsistent return values for <tt>forward_list::insert_after</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.3.3.4 [forwardlist.modifiers] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Bo Persson <b>Opened:</b> 2009-11-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#forwardlist.modifiers">issues</a> in [forwardlist.modifiers].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +After applying LDR<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#149">149</a>, <tt>forward_list</tt> now has 5 +overloads of <tt>insert_after</tt>, all returning an iterator. +</p> + +<p> +However, two of those - inserting a single object - return "An iterator +pointing to a copy of <tt>x</tt> [the inserted object]" while the other +three - inserting zero or more objects - return an iterator equivalent +to the position parameter, pointing before any possibly inserted +objects. +</p> + +<p> +Is this the intended change? +</p> + +<p> +I don't really know what <tt>insert_after(position, empty_range)</tt> +should really return, but always returning <tt>position</tt> seems less +than useful. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-04 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I agree this inconsistency will be error prone and needs to be fixed. +Additionally <tt>emplace_after</tt>'s return value is unspecified. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-04 Nico provides wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010 Pittsburgh: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +We prefer to return an iterator to the last inserted element. Modify the +proposed wording and then set to Ready. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-03-15 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Wording updated and set to Ready. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In <tt>forward_list</tt> modifiers 23.3.3.4 [forwardlist.modifiers] +make the following modifications: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>iterator insert_after(const_iterator position, size_type n, const T& x); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p>...</p> +<p> +10 <i>Returns:</i> <del>position.</del> <ins>An iterator pointing to the last +inserted copy of <tt>x</tt> or <tt>position</tt> if <tt>n == 0</tt>.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class InputIterator> + iterator insert_after(const_iterator position, InputIterator first, InputIterator last); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p>...</p> + +<p> +13 <i>Returns:</i> <del>position.</del> <ins>An iterator pointing to the last +inserted element or <tt>position</tt> if <tt>first == last</tt>.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> + +<pre>iterator insert_after(const_iterator position, initializer_list<T> il); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p>...</p> + +<p> +15 <i>Returns:</i> <del>position.</del> <ins>An iterator pointing to the last +inserted element or <tt>position</tt> if <tt>il</tt> is empty.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class... Args> + iterator emplace_after(const_iterator position, Args&&... args); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p>...</p> +<p>17 ...</p> + +<p><ins> +<i>Returns:</i> An iterator pointing to the new constructed element from +args. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1280"></a>1280. initialization of stream iterators</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 24.6.1.1 [istream.iterator.cons], 24.6.2.1 [ostream.iterator.cons.des] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Jonathan Wakely <b>Opened:</b> 2009-12-04 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#istream.iterator.cons">issues</a> in [istream.iterator.cons].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +24.6.1.1 [istream.iterator.cons] describes the effects in terms of: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>basic_istream<charT,traits>* in_stream; // exposition only +</pre> + +<p> +3 <i>Effects:</i> Initializes <i>in_stream</i> with <tt>s</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +That should be <tt>&s</tt> and similarly for 24.6.2.1 [ostream.iterator.cons.des]. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-12-23 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 6 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 24.6.1.1 [istream.iterator.cons] like so: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>istream_iterator(istream_type& s); +</pre> +<blockquote> +3 <i>Effects:</i> Initializes <i>in_stream</i> with <tt><ins>&</ins>s</tt>. +<i>value</i> ... +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +And 24.6.2.1 [ostream.iterator.cons.des] like so: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>ostream_iterator(ostream_type& s); +</pre> +<blockquote> +1 <i>Effects:</i> Initializes <i>out_stream</i> with <tt><ins>&</ins>s</tt> +and <i>delim</i> with null. +</blockquote> + +<pre>ostream_iterator(ostream_type& s, const charT* delimiter); +</pre> +<blockquote> +2 <i>Effects:</i> Initializes <i>out_stream</i> with <tt><ins>&</ins>s</tt> +and <i>delim</i> with <tt>delimiter</tt>. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1283"></a>1283. <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> and <tt>MoveAssignable</tt> need clarification +of moved-from state</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.2.1 [utility.arg.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2009-12-12 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-19</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#utility.arg.requirements">issues</a> in [utility.arg.requirements].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses UK 150</b></p> + +<p> +There is on going confusion over what one can and can not do with a moved-from +object (e.g. +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n3009.html#UK150">UK 150</a>, +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#910">910</a>). +This issue attempts to clarify that moved-from objects are valid objects with an +unknown state. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-01-22 Wording tweaked by Beman. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-01-22 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-01-23 Alisdair opens: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +I'm afraid I must register an objection. +</p> + +<p> +My primary objection is that I have always been opposed to this kind of a +resolution as over-constraining. My preferred example is a call implementing +the pImpl idiom via <tt>unique_ptr</tt>. Once the pImpl has been moved from, it +is no longer safe to call the vast majority of the object's methods, yet I see +no reason to make such a type unusable in the standard library. I would prefer +a resolution along the lines suggested in the UK comment, which only requires +that the object can be safely destroyed, and serve as the target of an +assignment operator (if supported.) +</p> + +<p> +However, I will not hold the issue up if I am a lone dissenting voice on this +(yes, that is a call to hear more support, or I will drop that objection in +Pittsburgh) +</p> + +<p> +With the proposed wording, I'm not clear what the term 'valid object' means. In +my example above, is a pImpl holding a null pointer 'valid'? What about a float +holding a signalling NaN? What determines if an object is valid? Without a +definition of a valid/invalid object, I don't think this wording adds anything, +and this is an objection that I do want resolved. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-01-24 Alisdair removes his objection. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-01-24 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-10 Reopened. The wording here has been merged into <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1309">1309</a>. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-10 Moved to Tentatively <del>NAD Editorial</del><ins>Resolved</ins> after 5 postive votes on +c++std-lib. Rationale added below. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +This issue is now addressed by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1309">1309</a>. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change the follwing tables in 20.2.1 [utility.arg.requirements] as shown: +</p> + +<blockquote> + +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 33 — <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> requirements <b>[moveconstructible]</b></caption> +<tbody><tr> +<th>Expression</th> +<th>Post-condition</th> +</tr> +<tr> +<td> +<tt>T t(rv)</tt> +</td> +<td> +<tt>t</tt> is equivalent to the value of <tt>rv</tt> before the construction. +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td colspan="2"> +[<i>Note:</i> +<del>There is no requirement on the value of <tt>rv</tt> after the +construction.</del> +<ins><tt>rv</tt> remains a valid object. Its state is unspecified.</ins> +— <i>end note</i>] +</td> +</tr> +</tbody></table> + +</blockquote> +<blockquote> + +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 35 — <tt>MoveAssignable</tt> requirements <b>[moveassignable]</b></caption> +<tbody><tr> +<th>Expression</th> +<th>Return type</th> +<th>Return value</th> +<th>Post-condition</th> +</tr> +<tr> +<td> +<tt>t = rv</tt> +</td> +<td> +<tt>T&</tt> +</td> +<td> +<tt>t</tt> +</td> +<td> +<tt>t</tt> is equivalent to the value of <tt>rv</tt> before the assigment. +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td colspan="4"> +[<i>Note:</i> +<del>There is no requirement on the value of <tt>rv</tt> after the +assignment.</del> +<ins><tt>rv</tt> remains a valid object. Its state is unspecified.</ins> +— <i>end note</i>] +</td> +</tr> +</tbody></table> + +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1284"></a>1284. <tt>vector<bool> initializer_list</tt> constructor missing an allocator argument</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.4.2 [vector.bool] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Bo Persson <b>Opened:</b> 2009-12-09 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#vector.bool">issues</a> in [vector.bool].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The specialization for <tt>vector<bool></tt> (23.4.2 [vector.bool]) +has a constructor +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>vector(initializer_list<bool>); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +which differs from the base template's constructor (and other containers) in +that it has no <tt>allocator</tt> parameter. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-12-16 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change the signature in the synopsis of 23.4.2 [vector.bool] to +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>vector(initializer_list<bool><ins>, const Allocator& = Allocator()</ins>); +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1285"></a>1285. <tt>allocator_traits</tt> call to <tt>new</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.4.2 [allocator.traits.members] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2009-12-10 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#allocator.traits.members">issues</a> in [allocator.traits.members].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +LWG issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#402">402</a> added "<tt>::</tt>" to the call to <tt>new</tt> +within <tt>allocator::construct</tt>. I suspect we want to retain that fix. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-12-13 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 7 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 20.2.5 [allocator.requirements], table 40 "Allocator requirements": +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 40 — Allocator requirements</caption> +<tbody><tr> +<th>Expression</th> +<th>Return type</th> +<th>Assertion/note<br>pre-/post-condition</th> +<th>Default</th> +</tr> +<tr> +<td> +<tt>a.construct(c,args)</tt> +</td> +<td> +(not used) +</td> +<td> +Effect: Constructs an object of type <tt>C</tt> at <tt>c</tt> +</td> +<td> +<tt><ins>::</ins>new ((void*)c) C(forward<Args>(args)...)</tt> +</td> +</tr> +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Change 20.9.4.2 [allocator.traits.members], p4: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T, class... Args> + static void construct(Alloc& a, T* p, Args&&... args); +</pre> +<blockquote> +4 <i>Effects:</i> calls <tt>a.construct(p, +std::forward<Args>(args)...)</tt> if that call is well-formed; otherwise, +invokes <tt><ins>::</ins>new (static_cast<void*>(p)) +T(std::forward<Args>(args)...)</tt>. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1286"></a>1286. <tt>allocator_traits::select_on_container_copy_construction</tt> type-o</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.4.2 [allocator.traits.members] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2009-12-10 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#allocator.traits.members">issues</a> in [allocator.traits.members].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +<tt>allocator_traits::select_on_container_copy_construction</tt> refers to an +unknown "<tt>a</tt>": +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>static Alloc select_on_container_copy_construction(const Alloc& rhs); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +7 <i>Returns:</i> <tt>rhs.select_on_container_copy_construction(a)</tt> if that +expression is well-formed; otherwise, <tt>rhs</tt>. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2009-12-13 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 20.9.4.2 [allocator.traits.members], p7: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>static Alloc select_on_container_copy_construction(const Alloc& rhs); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +7 <i>Returns:</i> +<tt>rhs.select_on_container_copy_construction(<del>a</del>)</tt> if that +expression is well-formed; otherwise, <tt>rhs</tt>. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1287"></a>1287. <tt>std::function</tt> requires <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> target object</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8.14.2.1 [func.wrap.func.con] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Jonathan Wakely <b>Opened:</b> 2009-12-13 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#func.wrap.func.con">issues</a> in [func.wrap.func.con].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +I think <tt>std::function</tt> should require <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> for the +target object. +</p> + +<p> +I initially thought that <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> was enough, but it's not. If +<tt>F</tt> is move-only then function's copy constructor cannot be called, but +because function uses type erasure, <tt>F</tt> is not known and so the copy +constructor cannot be disabled via <tt>enable_if</tt>. One option would be to +throw an exception if you try to copy a function with a non-copyable target +type, but I think that would be a terrible idea. +</p> + +<p> +So although the constructors require that the target be initialised by +<tt>std::move(f)</tt>, that's only an optimisation, and a copy constructor is +required. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-12-24 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add to 20.8.14.2.1 [func.wrap.func.con] paragraph 9: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class F> function(F f); +template <class F, class A> function(allocator_arg_t, const A& a, F f); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +9 <i>Requires:</i> <ins><tt>F</tt> shall be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>.</ins> +<tt>f</tt> shall be callable for argument types <tt>ArgTypes</tt> and return +type <tt>R</tt>. The copy constructor and destructor of <tt>A</tt> shall not +throw exceptions. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1288"></a>1288. <tt>std::function</tt> assignment from rvalues</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8.14.2.1 [func.wrap.func.con] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Jonathan Wakely <b>Opened:</b> 2009-12-13 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#func.wrap.func.con">issues</a> in [func.wrap.func.con].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In 20.8.14.2.1 [func.wrap.func.con] +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class F> function& operator=(F f); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +20 <i>Effects:</i> <tt>function(f).swap(*this);</tt> +</p> +<p> +21 <i>Returns:</i> <tt>*this</tt> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +This assignment operator can be called such that <tt>F</tt> is an rvalue-reference e.g. +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>func.operator=<F&&>(f); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +There are two issues with this. +</p> + +<ol> +<li> +the effects mean that <tt>f</tt> is passed as an lvalue and so there will be an +unnecessary copy. The argument should be forwarded, so that the copy can be +avoided. +</li> +<li> +It should not be necessary to use that syntax to pass an rvalue. As <tt>F</tt> +is a deduced context it can be made to work with either lvalues or rvalues. +</li> +</ol> + +<p> +The same issues apply to <tt>function::assign</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +N.B. this issue is not related to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1287">1287</a> and applies whether that +issue is resolved or not. The wording below assumes the resolution of LWG <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1258">1258</a> has been applied. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-12-16 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +201002-11 Opened by Alisdair for the purpose of merging <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1258">1258</a> into +this issue as there is a minor conflict. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-11 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 20.8.14.2.1 [func.wrap.func.con] +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class F> function& operator=(F<ins>&&</ins> f); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +20 <i>Effects:</i> +<tt>function(<ins>std::forward<F>(</ins>f<ins>)</ins>).swap(*this);</tt> +</p> +<p> +21 <i>Returns:</i> <tt>*this</tt> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +In 20.8.14.2.2 [func.wrap.func.mod] +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class F, <del>Allocator Alloc</del><ins>class A</ins>> + void assign(F<ins>&& f</ins>, const A<del>lloc</del>& a); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins>3</ins> <i>Effects:</i> <tt>function(<del>f, a</del><ins>allocator_arg, a, +std::forward<F>(f)</ins>).swap(*this);</tt> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Update member function signature for class template in 20.8.14.2 [func.wrap.func] +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class F> function& operator=(F<ins>&&</ins>); + +template<class F, class A> void assign(F<ins>&&</ins>, const A&); +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1290"></a>1290. Don't require <tt>[u|bi]nary_function</tt> inheritance</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8 [function.objects] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2009-12-14 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-26</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#function.objects">issues</a> in [function.objects].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +This issue is a follow-up of the discussion on issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#870">870</a> during +the 2009 Santa Cruz meeting. +</p> + +<p> +The class templates <tt>unary_function</tt> and <tt>binary_function</tt> are +actually very simple typedef providers, +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>namespace std { + +template <class Arg, class Result> +struct unary_function { + typedef Arg argument_type; + typedef Result result_type; +}; + +template <class Arg1, class Arg2, class Result> +struct binary_function { + typedef Arg1 first_argument_type; + typedef Arg2 second_argument_type; + typedef Result result_type; +}; + +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +which <i>may</i> be used as base classes (similarly to the iterator template), +but were originally <i>not</i> intended as a customization point. The SGI +documentation introduced the concept <a href="http://www.sgi.com/tech/stl/AdaptableUnaryFunction.html">Adaptable Unary +Function</a> as function objects "with nested typedefs that define its argument +type and result type" and a similar definition for <a href="http://www.sgi.com/tech/stl/AdaptableBinaryFunction.html">Adaptable Binary +Function</a> related to <tt>binary_function</tt>. But as of TR1 a protocol was +introduced that relies on inheritance relations based on these types. 20.8.4 [refwrap]/3 b. 3 requires that a specialization of +<tt>reference_wrapper<T></tt> shall derive from <tt>unary_function</tt>, +if type <tt>T</tt> is "a class type that is derived from +<tt>std::unary_function<T1, R></tt>" and a similar inheritance-based rule +for <tt>binary_function</tt> exists as well. +</p> + +<p> +As another disadvantage it has been pointed out in the TR1 issue list, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2005/n1837.pdf">N1837</a> +(see section 10.39), that the requirements of <tt>mem_fn</tt> 20.8.13 [func.memfn]/2+3 to <em>derive</em> from +<tt>std::unary_function/std::binary_function</tt> under circumstances, where the +provision of corresponding typedefs would be sufficient, unnecessarily prevent +implementations that take advantage of empty-base-class- optimizations. +</p> + +<p> +Both requirements should be relaxed in the sense that the +<tt>reference_wrapper</tt> should provide typedef's <tt>argument_type</tt>, +<tt>first_argument_type</tt>, and <tt>second_argument_type</tt> based on similar +rules as the <i>weak result type</i> rule (20.8.2 [func.require]/3) does +specify the presence of <tt>result_type</tt> member types. +</p> + +<p> +For a related issue see also <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1279">1279</a>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-10-24 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Accepting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3145.html">n3145</a> would resolve this issue as NAD editorial. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><i>[ +2010-11 Batavia: Solved by N3198 +]</i></p> + +<p> +Resolved by adopting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3198.html">n3198</a>. +</p> + +<p> +Previous proposed resolution: + +</p><p><i>[ +The here proposed resolution is an attempt to realize the common denominator of +the reflector threads c++std-lib-26011, c++std-lib-26095, and c++std-lib-26124. +]</i></p> + + +<ol> +<li> +<p> +Change X [base]/1 as indicated: <i>[The intend is to provide an +alternative fix for issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1279">1279</a> and some editorial harmonization +with existing wording in the library, like 24.4.2 [iterator.basic]/1]</i> +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +1 The following class<ins> templat</ins>es are provided to simplify the +<ins>definition of</ins> typedefs of the argument and result types <ins>for +function objects. The behavior of a program that adds specializations for any of +these templates is undefined.</ins><del>:</del> +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>namespace std { + template <class Arg, class Result> + struct unary_function { + typedef Arg argument_type; + typedef Result result_type; + }; +} + +namespace std { + template <class Arg1, class Arg2, class Result> + struct binary_function { + typedef Arg1 first_argument_type; + typedef Arg2 second_argument_type; + typedef Result result_type; + }; +} +</pre></blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.8.4 [refwrap], class template <tt>reference_wrapper</tt> +synopsis as indicated: <i>[The intent is to remove the requirement that +<tt>reference_wrapper</tt> derives from <tt>unary_function</tt> or +<tt>binary_function</tt> if the situation requires the definition of the +typedefs <tt>argument_type</tt>, <tt>first_argument_type</tt>, or +<tt>second_argument_type</tt>. This change is suggested, because the new way of +definition uses the same strategy as the <em>weak result type</em> specification +applied to argument types, which provides the following advantages: It creates +less potential conflicts between <tt>[u|bi]nary_function</tt> bases and typedefs +in a function object and it ensures that user-defined function objects which +provide typedefs but no such bases are handled as first class citizens.]</i> +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>namespace std { + template <class T> class reference_wrapper + <del>: public unary_function<T1, R> // <i>see below</i></del> + <del>: public binary_function<T1, T2, R> // <i>see below</i></del> + { + public : + // types + typedef T type; + typedef <i>see below</i> result_type; // not always defined + <ins>typedef <i>see below</i> argument_type; // not always defined</ins> + <ins>typedef <i>see below</i> first_argument_type; // not always defined</ins> + <ins>typedef <i>see below</i> second_argument_type; // not always defined</ins> + + // construct/copy/destroy + ... + }; +</pre></blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.8.4 [refwrap]/3 as indicated: <i>[The intent is to remove the +requirement that <tt>reference_wrapper</tt> derives from <tt>unary_function</tt> +if the situation requires the definition of the typedef <tt>argument_type</tt> +and <tt>result_type</tt>. Note that this clause does concentrate on +<tt>argument_type</tt> alone, because the <tt>result_type</tt> is already ruled +by p. 2 via the <em>weak result type</em> specification. The new way of +specifying <tt>argument_type</tt> is equivalent to the <em>weak result type</em> +specification]</i> +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +3 The template instantiation <tt>reference_wrapper<T></tt> shall <del>be +derived from <tt>std::unary_function<T1, R></tt></del><ins>define a nested +type named <tt>argument_type</tt> as a synonym for <tt>T1</tt></ins> only if the +type <tt>T</tt> is any of the following: +</p> +<ul> +<li>a function type or a pointer to function type taking one argument +of type <tt>T1</tt><del> and returning <tt>R</tt></del> +</li> +<li>a pointer to member function <tt>R T0::f</tt> <em>cv</em> (where +<em>cv</em> represents the member function's cv-qualifiers); +the type <tt>T1</tt> is <em>cv</em> <tt>T0*</tt> +</li> +<li>a class type <del>that is derived from +<tt>std::unary_function<T1, R></tt></del><ins>with a member type +<tt>argument_type</tt>; + the type <tt>T1</tt> is <tt>T::argument_type</tt></ins> +</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.8.4 [refwrap]/4 as indicated: <i>[The intent is to remove the +requirement that <tt>reference_wrapper</tt> derives from +<tt>binary_function</tt> if the situation requires the definition of the typedef +<tt>first_argument_type</tt>, <tt>second_argument_type</tt>, and +<tt>result_type</tt>. Note that this clause does concentrate on +<tt>first_argument_type</tt> and <tt>second_argument_type</tt> alone, because +the <tt>result_type</tt> is already ruled by p. 2 via the <em>weak result +type</em> specification. The new way of specifying <tt>first_argument_type</tt> +and <tt>second_argument_type</tt> is equivalent to the <em>weak result type</em> +specification]</i> +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +The template instantiation <tt>reference_wrapper<T></tt> shall <del>be +derived from <tt>std::binary_function<T1, T2, R></tt></del><ins>define two +nested types named <tt>first_argument_type</tt> and +<tt>second_argument_type</tt> as a synonym for <tt>T1</tt> and <tt>T2</tt>, +respectively,</ins> only if the type <tt>T</tt> is any of the following: +</p> +<ul> +<li>a function type or a pointer to function type taking two arguments +of types <tt>T1</tt> and <tt>T2</tt><del> and returning +<tt>R</tt></del> +</li> +<li>a pointer to member function <tt>R T0::f(T2)</tt> <em>cv</em> +(where <em>cv</em> represents the member function's cv-qualifiers); + the type <tt>T1</tt> is <em>cv</em> <tt>T0*</tt> +</li> +<li>a class type <del>that is derived from +<tt>std::binary_function<T1, T2, R></tt></del><ins>with member +types <tt>first_argument_type</tt> + and <tt>second_argument_type</tt>; the type <tt>T1</tt> is +<tt>T::first_argument_type</tt> and the type <tt>T2</tt> is + <tt>T::second_argument_type</tt></ins> +</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.8.13 [func.memfn]/2+3 as indicated: <i>[The intent is to remove +the requirement that mem_fn's return type has to derive +from <tt>[u|bi]nary_function</tt>. The reason for suggesting the +change here is to better support empty-base-class optimization +choices as has been pointed out in <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2005/n1837.pdf">N1837</a>]</i> +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +2 The simple call wrapper shall <del>be derived from +<tt>std::unary_function<<em>cv</em> T*, <i>Ret</i>></tt></del><ins>define +two nested types named <tt>argument_type</tt> and <tt>result_type</tt> as a +synonym for <tt><em>cv</em> T*</tt> and <tt><i>Ret</i></tt>, respectively,</ins> +when <tt>pm</tt> is a pointer to member function with cv-qualifier <em>cv</em> +and taking no arguments, where <tt><i>Ret</i></tt> is <tt>pm</tt>'s return type. +</p> +<p> +3 The simple call wrapper shall <del>be derived from +<tt>std::binary_function<<em>cv</em> T*, T1, +<i>Ret</i>></tt></del><ins>define three nested types named +<tt>first_argument_type</tt>, <tt>second_argument_type</tt>, and +<tt>result_type</tt> as a synonym for <tt><em>cv</em> T*</tt>, <tt>T1</tt>, and +<tt><i>Ret</i></tt>, respectively,</ins> when <tt>pm</tt> is a pointer to member +function with cv-qualifier <em>cv</em> and taking one argument of type +<tt>T1</tt>, where <tt><i>Ret</i></tt> is <tt>pm</tt>'s return type. +</p> +</blockquote> +</li> + +</ol> +<p></p> + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Addressed by paper <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3198.html">n3198</a>. + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1292"></a>1292. <tt>std::function</tt> should support all callable types</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8.14.2.1 [func.wrap.func.con] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2009-12-19 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#func.wrap.func.con">issues</a> in [func.wrap.func.con].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Some parts of the specification of <tt>std::function</tt> is unnecessarily +restricted to a subset of all callable types (as defined in 20.8.1 [func.def]/3), even though the intent clearly is to be usable for +<em>all</em> of them as described in 20.8.14.2 [func.wrap.func]/1. This +argument becomes strengthened by the fact that current C++0x-compatible +compilers work fine with them: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>#include <functional> +#include <iostream> + +struct A +{ + int foo(int i) const {return i+1;} +}; + +struct B +{ + int mem; +}; + +int main() +{ + std::function<int(const A&, int)> f(&A::foo); + A a; + std::cout << f(a, 1) << '\n'; + std::cout << f.target_type().name() << '\n'; + typedef int (A::* target_t)(int) const; + target_t* p = f.target<target_t>(); + std::cout << (p != 0) << '\n'; + std::function<int(B&)> f2(&B::mem); + B b = { 42 }; + std::cout << f2(b) << '\n'; + std::cout << f2.target_type().name() << '\n'; + typedef int (B::* target2_t); + target2_t* p2 = f2.target<target2_t>(); + std::cout << (p2 != 0) << '\n'; +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +The problematics passages are 20.8.14.2.1 [func.wrap.func.con]/10: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class F> function(F f); +template <class F, class A> function(allocator_arg_t, const A& a, F f); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p>...</p> +<p> +10 <i>Postconditions:</i> <tt>!*this</tt> if any of the following hold: +</p> +<ul> +<li> +<tt>f</tt> is a NULL function pointer. +</li> +<li> +<tt>f</tt> is a NULL member function pointer. +</li> +<li> +<tt>F</tt> is an instance of the function class template, and <tt>!f</tt> +</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +because it does not consider pointer to data member and all constraints based on +<em>function objects</em> which like 20.8.14.2 [func.wrap.func]/2 or 20.8.14.2.5 [func.wrap.func.targ]/3. The latter two will be resolved by the proposed +resolution of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#870">870</a> and are therefore not handled here. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Post-Rapperswil: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 20.8.14.2.1 [func.wrap.func.con]/10+11 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class F> function(F f); +template <class F, class A> function(allocator_arg_t, const A& a, F f); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p>...</p> +<p> +10 <i>Postconditions:</i> <tt>!*this</tt> if any of the following hold: +</p> +<ul> +<li> +<tt>f</tt> is a NULL function pointer. +</li> +<li> +<tt>f</tt> is a NULL <ins>pointer to</ins> member <del>function pointer</del>. +</li> +<li> +<tt>F</tt> is an instance of the function class template, and <tt>!f</tt> +</li> +</ul> + +<p> +11 Otherwise, <tt>*this</tt> targets a copy of <tt>f</tt> <del>or</del><ins>, +initialized with</ins> <tt>std::move(f)</tt> <del>if <tt>f</tt> is not a pointer +to member function, and targets a copy of <tt>mem_fn(f)</tt> if <tt>f</tt> is a +pointer to member function</del>. [<i>Note:</i> implementations are encouraged +to avoid the use of dynamically allocated memory for small function objects, for +example, where <tt>f</tt>'s target is an object holding only a pointer or +reference to an object and a member function pointer. — <i>end note</i>] +</p> + +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1293"></a>1293. <tt>unique_ptr<T[], D></tt> needs to get rid of <i>unspecified-pointer-type</i></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.9.3 [unique.ptr.runtime] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2009-12-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-19</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses UK 211</b></p> + +<p> +As a response to UK 211 LWG issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1021">1021</a> has replaced the +<i>unspecified-pointer-type</i> by <tt>nullptr_t</tt> to allow assignment of +type-safe null-pointer literals in the non-array form of +<tt>unique_ptr::operator=</tt>, but did not the same for the specialization for +arrays of runtime length. But without this parallel change of the signature we +have a status quo, where <tt>unique_ptr<T[], D></tt> declares a member +function which is completely unspecified. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2009-12-21 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-03-14 Howard adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +We moved +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3073.html">N3073</a> +to the formal motions page in Pittsburgh which should obsolete this issue. I've +moved this issue to NAD Editorial, solved by N3073. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +Solved by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3073.html">N3073</a>. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 20.9.9.3 [unique.ptr.runtime], class template <tt>unique_ptr<T[], +D></tt> synopsis, change as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>// assignment +unique_ptr& operator=(unique_ptr&& u); +unique_ptr& operator=(<del><i>unspecified-pointer-type</i></del><ins>nullptr_t</ins>); +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1294"></a>1294. Difference between callable wrapper and forwarding call wrapper unclear</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8.2 [func.require] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Jens Maurer <b>Opened:</b> 2009-12-21 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#func.require">issues</a> in [func.require].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The current wording in the standard makes it hard to discriminate the difference +between a "call wrapper" as defined in 20.8.1 [func.def]/5+6: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +5 A <i>call wrapper type</i> is a type that holds a callable object and supports +a call operation that forwards to that object. +</p> +<p> +6 A <i>call wrapper</i> is an object of a call wrapper type. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +and a "forwarding call wrapper" as defined in 20.8.2 [func.require]/4: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +4 [..] A <i>forwarding call wrapper</i> is a call wrapper that can be called +with an argument list. [<i>Note:</i> in a typical implementation forwarding call +wrappers have an overloaded function call operator of the form +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class... ArgTypes> +R operator()(ArgTypes&&... args) <i>cv-qual</i>; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +— <i>end note</i>] +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Reason for this lack of clear difference seems to be that the wording adaption +to variadics and rvalues that were applied after it's original proposal in <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2004/n1673.html#call%20wrapper">N1673</a>: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +[..] A <b>forwarding call wrapper</b> is a call wrapper that can be called +with an argument list <tt>t1, t2, ..., tN</tt> where each <tt>ti</tt> is an lvalue. +The effect of calling a forwarding call wrapper with one or more +arguments that are rvalues is implementation defined. [<i>Note:</i> in +a typical implementation forwarding call wrappers have overloaded +function call operators of the form +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class T1, class T2, ..., class TN> +R operator()(T1& t1, T2& t2, ..., TN& tN) <i>cv-qual</i>; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +— <i>end note</i>] +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p> +combined with the fact that the word "forward" has two different meanings in +this context. This issue attempts to clarify the difference better. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-09-14 Daniel provides improved wording and verified that it is correct against N3126. Previous resolution is shown here: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +4 [..] A <i>forwarding call wrapper</i> is a call wrapper that can be called +with an <ins>arbitrary</ins> argument list<ins> and uses perfect forwarding to +deliver the arguments to the wrapped callable object</ins>. [<i>Note:</i> in a +typical implementation forwarding call wrappers have an overloaded function call +operator of the form +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class... ArgTypes> +R operator()(ArgTypes&&... args) <i>cv-qual</i>; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +— <i>end note</i>] +</p> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 20.8.2 [func.require]/4 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><p> +[..] A <em>forwarding call wrapper</em> is a call wrapper that can be called with an <ins>arbitrary</ins> argument +list <ins>and delivers the arguments as references to the wrapped callable object. This forwarding step shall ensure +that rvalue arguments are delivered as rvalue-references and lvalue arguments are delivered as lvalue-references</ins>. +[<em>Note</em>: in a typical implementation forwarding call wrappers have an overloaded function call operator of the +form +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class... UnBoundArgs> +R operator()(UnBoundArgs&&... unbound_args) <em>cv-qual</em>; +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +— <em>end note</em> ] +</p> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1295"></a>1295. Contradictory call wrapper requirements</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8.2 [func.require] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2009-12-22 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#func.require">issues</a> in [func.require].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +20.8.2 [func.require]/3 b 1 says +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +3 If a call wrapper (20.8.1 [func.def]) has a <i>weak result type</i> the +type of its member type <tt>result_type</tt> is based on the type <tt>T</tt> of +the wrapper's target object (20.8.1 [func.def]): +</p> + +<ul> +<li> +if <tt>T</tt> is a function, reference to function, or pointer to function type, +<tt>result_type</tt> shall be a synonym for the return type of <tt>T</tt>; +</li> +<li> +[..] +</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + +<p> +The first two enumerated types (function and reference to function) +can never be valid types for <tt>T</tt>, because +</p> + +<p> +20.8.1 [func.def]/7 +</p> + +<blockquote> +7 A <i>target object</i> is the callable object held by a call wrapper. +</blockquote> + +<p> +and 20.8.1 [func.def]/3 +</p> + +<blockquote> +3 A <i>callable type</i> is a pointer to function, a pointer to member function, +a pointer to member data, or a class type whose objects can appear immediately +to the left of a function call operator. +</blockquote> + +<p> +exclude functions and references to function as "target objects". +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Post-Rapperswil: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 20.8.2 [func.require]/3 b 1 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +3 If a call wrapper (20.8.1 [func.def]) has a <i>weak result type</i> the +type of its member type <tt>result_type</tt> is based on the type <tt>T</tt> of +the wrapper's target object (20.8.1 [func.def]): +</p> + +<ul> +<li> +if <tt>T</tt> is a <del>function, reference to function, or</del> pointer to +function type, <tt>result_type</tt> shall be a synonym for the return type of +<tt>T</tt>; +</li> +<li> +[..] +</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1298"></a>1298. Missing specialization of <tt>ctype_byname<char></tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 22.2 [locale.syn] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-12-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The <tt><locale></tt> synopsis in 22.2 [locale.syn] calls out an +explicit specialization for <tt>ctype_byname<char></tt>, however no such +specialization is defined in the standard. The only reference I can find to +<tt>ctype_byname<char></tt> is 22.3.1.1.2 [locale.facet]:Table 77 +— Required specializations (for facets) which also refers to +<tt>ctype_byname<wchar_t></tt> which has no special consideration. +</p> + +<p> +Is the intent an explicit <em>instantiation</em> which would use a slightly +different syntax? Should the explicit specialization simply be struck? +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-01-31 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +22.2 [locale.syn] +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +Strike the explicit specialization for <tt>ctype_byname<char></tt> from +the <tt><locale></tt> synopsis +</p> +<blockquote><pre>... +template <class charT> class ctype_byname; +<del>template <> class ctype_byname<char>; // <i>specialization</i></del> +... +</pre></blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1299"></a>1299. Confusing typo in specification for <tt>get_time</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.4 [ext.manip] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-12-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#ext.manip">issues</a> in [ext.manip].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Extended Manipulators 27.7.4 [ext.manip] p8 defines the semantics of +<tt>get_time</tt> in terms of a function <tt>f</tt>. +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class charT, class traits> +void f(basic_ios<charT, traits>& str, struct tm* tmb, const charT* fmt) { + typedef istreambuf_iterator<charT, traits> Iter; + typedef time_get<charT, Iter> TimeGet; + + ios_base::iostate err = ios_base::goodbit; + const TimeGet& tg = use_facet<TimeGet>(str.getloc()); + + tm.get(Iter(str.rdbuf()), Iter(), str, err, tmb, fmt, fmt + traits::length(fmt)); + + if (err != ios_base::goodbit) + str.setstate(err): +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Note the call to <tt>tm.get</tt>. This is clearly an error, as <tt>tm</tt> is a +type and not an object. I believe this should be <tt>tg.get</tt>, rather than +<tt>tm</tt>, but this is not my area of expertise. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-01-14 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 27.7.4 [ext.manip] p8: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class charT, class traits> +void f(basic_ios<charT, traits>& str, struct tm* tmb, const charT* fmt) { + typedef istreambuf_iterator<charT, traits> Iter; + typedef time_get<charT, Iter> TimeGet; + + ios_base::iostate err = ios_base::goodbit; + const TimeGet& tg = use_facet<TimeGet>(str.getloc()); + + t<ins>g</ins><del>m</del>.get(Iter(str.rdbuf()), Iter(), str, err, tmb, fmt, fmt + traits::length(fmt)); + + if (err != ios_base::goodbit) + str.setstate(err): +} +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1303"></a>1303. <tt>shared_ptr</tt>, <tt>unique_ptr</tt>, and rvalue references v2</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.9.2 [unique.ptr.single], 20.9.10.2 [util.smartptr.shared] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Stephan T. Lavavej <b>Opened:</b> 2010-01-23 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#unique.ptr.single">issues</a> in [unique.ptr.single].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n3000.pdf">N3000</a> +20.9.10.2 [util.smartptr.shared]/1 still says: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class Y, class D> explicit shared_ptr(const unique_ptr<Y, D>& r) = delete; +template <class Y, class D> shared_ptr& operator=(const unique_ptr<Y, D>& r) = delete; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +I believe that this is unnecessary now that "rvalue references v2" +prevents rvalue references from binding to lvalues, and I didn't +see a Library Issue tracking this. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-12 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +Strike from 20.9.9.2 [unique.ptr.single]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class T, class D = default_delete<T>> class unique_ptr { + ... + unique_ptr(const unique_ptr&) = delete; + <del>template <class U, class E> unique_ptr(const unique_ptr<U, E>&) = delete;</del> + unique_ptr& operator=(const unique_ptr&) = delete; + <del>template <class U, class E> unique_ptr& operator=(const unique_ptr<U, E>&) = delete;</del> +}; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Strike from 20.9.10.2 [util.smartptr.shared]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class T> class shared_ptr { + ... + <del>template <class Y, class D> explicit shared_ptr(const unique_ptr<Y, D>& r) = delete;</del> + ... + <del>template <class Y, class D> shared_ptr& operator=(const unique_ptr<Y, D>& r) = delete;</del> + ... +}; +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1306"></a>1306. <tt>pointer</tt> and <tt>const_pointer</tt> for <tt><array></tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.3.1 [array] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nicolai Josuttis <b>Opened:</b> 2010-01-24 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#array">issues</a> in [array].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Class <tt><array></tt> is the only sequence container class that has no +types <tt>pointer</tt> and <tt>const_pointer</tt> defined. You might argue that +this makes no sense because there is no allocator support, but on the other +hand, types <tt>reference</tt> and <tt>const_reference</tt> are defined for +<tt>array</tt>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-11 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 6 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add to Class template array 23.3.1 [array]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>namespace std { + template <class T, size_t N > + struct array { + ... + typedef T value_type; + <ins>typedef T * pointer;</ins> + <ins>typedef const T * const_pointer;</ins> + ... + }; +} +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1307"></a>1307. <tt>exception_ptr</tt> and <tt>allocator</tt> pointers don't understand !=</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.8.5 [propagation] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2010-01-26 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-19</p> +<p><b>View other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index-open.html#propagation">active issues</a> in [propagation].</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#propagation">issues</a> in [propagation].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The current requirements for a conforming implementation of +<tt>std::exception_ptr</tt> (18.8.5 [propagation]/1-6) does not clarify +whether the expression +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>e1 != e2 +e1 != nullptr +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +with <tt>e1</tt> and <tt>e2</tt> being two values of type +<tt>std::exception_ptr</tt> are supported or not. Reason for this oddity is that +the concept <tt>EqualityComparable</tt> does not provide operator <tt>!=</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +For the same reason programmers working against the types <tt>X::pointer</tt>, +<tt>X::const_pointer</tt>, <tt>X::void_pointer</tt>, and +<tt>X::const_void_pointer</tt> of any allocator concept <tt>X</tt> (20.2.5 [allocator.requirements]/4 + Table 40) in a generic context can not rely +on the availability of the != operation, which is rather unnatural and +error-prone. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010 Pittsburgh: Moved to NAD Editorial. Rationale added below. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +Solved by +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3073.html">N3073</a>. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1309"></a>1309. Missing expressions for <tt>Move/CopyConstructible</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.2.1 [utility.arg.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2010-02-03 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#utility.arg.requirements">issues</a> in [utility.arg.requirements].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +Table 33 — MoveConstructible requirements [moveconstructible] and +Table 34 — CopyConstructible requirements [copyconstructible] support +solely the following expression: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>T t(rv) +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +where <tt>rv</tt> is defined to be as "non-const rvalue of type <tt>T</tt>" and +<tt>t</tt> as a "modifiable lvalue of type <tt>T</tt>" in 20.2.1 [utility.arg.requirements]/1. +</p> + +<p> +This causes two different defects: +</p> + +<ol type="a"> +<li> +<p> +We cannot move/copy-initialize a <em>const</em> lvalue of type <tt>T</tt> as in: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>int get_i(); + +const int i1(get_i()); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +both in Table 33 and in Table 34. +</p> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +The single support for +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>T t(rv) +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +in case of <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> means that we cannot provide an +lvalue as a source of a copy as in +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>const int& get_lri(); + +int i2(get_lri()); +</pre></blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + +<p> +I believe this second defect is due to the fact that this single +expression supported <em>both</em> initialization situations according +to the old (implicit) lvalue reference -> rvalue reference +conversion rules. +</p> + +<p> +Finally [copyconstructible] refers to some name <tt>u</tt> which is not part of +the expression, and both [copyconstructible] and [moveconstructible] should +support construction expressions from temporaries - this would be a stylistic +consequence in the light of the new <tt>DefaultConstructible</tt> requirements +and compared with existing requirements (see e.g. Container requirements or the +output/forward iterator requirements).. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-09 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-10 Reopened. The proposed wording of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1283">1283</a> has been +merged here. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-10 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<ol> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.2.1 [utility.arg.requirements]/1 as indicated: <i>[This change +suggestion is motivated to make type descriptions clearer: First, <tt>a</tt>, +<tt>b</tt>, and <tt>c</tt> <em>may</em> also be non-<tt>const T</tt>. Second, <tt>u</tt> +is described in a manner consistent with the container requirements tables.]</i> +</p> + +<blockquote> +1 The template definitions in the C++ standard library refer to various named +requirements whose details are set out in tables 31-38. In these tables, +<tt>T</tt> is a<ins>n object or reference</ins> type to be supplied by a C++ +program instantiating a template; <tt>a</tt>, <tt>b</tt>, and <tt>c</tt> are +values of type <ins>(possibly</ins> <tt>const<ins>)</ins> T</tt>; <tt>s</tt> and +<tt>t</tt> are modifiable lvalues of type <tt>T</tt>; <tt>u</tt> <ins>denotes an +identifier;</ins> <del>is a value of type (possibly <tt>const</tt>) <tt>T</tt>; +and</del> <tt>rv</tt> is a<ins>n</ins> <del>non-const</del> rvalue of type +<tt>T</tt><ins>; and <tt>v</tt> is an lvalue of type (possibly <tt>const</tt>) +<tt>T</tt> or an rvalue of type <tt>const T</tt></ins>. +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +In 20.2.1 [utility.arg.requirements] Table 33 ([moveconstructible]) +change as indicated <i>[Note: The symbol <tt>u</tt> is defined to be either a +const or a non-const value and is the right one we need here]</i>: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 33 — <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> requirements [moveconstructible]</caption> + +<tbody><tr> +<th>Expression</th> +<th>Post-condition</th> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> +<tt>T <del>t</del><ins>u</ins>(rv)<ins>;</ins></tt> +</td> +<td> +<tt><del>t</del><ins>u</ins></tt> is equivalent +to the value of <tt>rv</tt> before the construction +</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><ins><tt>T(rv)</tt></ins></td> +<td><ins><tt>T(rv)</tt> is equivalent to the value of <tt>rv</tt> before the +construction</ins></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td colspan="2">[<i>Note:</i> +<del>There is no requirement on the value of <tt>rv</tt> after the +construction.</del> +<ins><tt>rv</tt> remains a valid object. Its state is unspecified.</ins> +— <i>end note</i>]</td> +</tr> +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +In 20.2.1 [utility.arg.requirements] Table 34 ([copyconstructible]) +change as indicated <i>[Note: The symbol <tt>u</tt> is defined to be either a +const or a non-const value and is the right one we need here. The expressions +using <tt>a</tt> are recommended to ensure that lvalues are supported as sources +of the copy expression]</i>: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 34 — <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> requirements [copyconstructible]<br> +<ins>(in addition to <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>)</ins></caption> + +<tbody><tr> +<th>Expression</th> +<th>Post-condition</th> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> +<tt>T <del>t</del><ins>u</ins>(<del>r</del>v)<ins>;</ins></tt> +</td> +<td> +the value of <tt><del>u</del><ins>v</ins></tt> +is unchanged and is equivalent to <tt><del>t</del><ins>u</ins></tt> +</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> +<ins><tt>T(v)</tt></ins> +</td> +<td><ins>the value of <tt>v</tt> is unchanged and is equivalent to <tt>T(v)</tt></ins> +</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td colspan="2"><del>[<i>Note:</i> A type that satisfies the +<tt>CopyConstructible</tt> requirements also satisfies the <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> +requirements. — <i>end note</i>]</del></td> +</tr> + +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + +</li> + +<li> +<p> +In Table 35 — MoveAssignable requirements [moveassignable] change as +indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> + +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 35 — <tt>MoveAssignable</tt> requirements <b>[moveassignable]</b></caption> +<tbody><tr> +<th>Expression</th> +<th>Return type</th> +<th>Return value</th> +<th>Post-condition</th> +</tr> +<tr> +<td> +<tt>t = rv</tt> +</td> +<td> +<tt>T&</tt> +</td> +<td> +<tt>t</tt> +</td> +<td> +<tt>t</tt> is equivalent to the value of <tt>rv</tt> before the assigment. +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td colspan="4"> +[<i>Note:</i> +<del>There is no requirement on the value of <tt>rv</tt> after the +assignment.</del> +<ins><tt>rv</tt> remains a valid object. Its state is unspecified.</ins> +— <i>end note</i>] +</td> +</tr> +</tbody></table> + +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +In 20.2.1 [utility.arg.requirements] change Table 36 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 36 — <tt>CopyAssignable</tt> requirements +[copyassignable]<br><ins>(in addition to <tt>MoveAssignable</tt>)</ins></caption> + +<tbody><tr> +<th>Expression</th> +<th>Return type</th> +<th>Return value</th> +<th>Post-condition</th> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>t = <del>u</del><ins>v</ins></tt></td> +<td><tt>T&</tt></td> +<td><tt>t</tt></td> +<td><tt>t</tt> is equivalent to <tt><del>u</del><ins>v</ins></tt>, the value of +<tt><del>u</del><ins>v</ins></tt> is unchanged</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td colspan="4"><del>[<i>Note:</i> A type that satisfies the <tt>CopyAssignable</tt> +requirements also satisfies the <tt>MoveAssignable</tt> requirements. — +<i>end note</i>]</del></td> +</tr> + +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1312"></a>1312. <tt>vector::data</tt> no longer returns a raw pointer</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.4.1.3 [vector.data] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2010-02-07 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The original intent of <tt>vector::data</tt> was to match <tt>array::data</tt> +in providing a simple API with direct access to the contiguous buffer of +elements that could be passed to a "classic" C API. At some point, the return +type became the '<tt>pointer</tt>' typedef, which is not derived from the +<tt>allocator</tt> via allocator traits - it is no longer specified to precisely +<tt>T *</tt>. The return type of this function should be corrected to no longer +use the typedef. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-02-10 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +23.4.1 [vector] +</p> + +<p> +Update the class definition in p2: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>// 23.3.6.3 data access +<del>pointer</del><ins>T *</ins> data(); +<del>const_pointer</del><ins>const T *</ins> data() const; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +23.4.1.3 [vector.data] +</p> + +<p> +Adjust signatures: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre><del>pointer</del><ins>T *</ins> data(); +<del>const_pointer</del><ins>const T *</ins> data() const; +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1316"></a>1316. <tt>scoped_allocator_adaptor operator==</tt> has no definition</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.10 [allocator.adaptor] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Pablo Halpern <b>Opened:</b> 2009-02-11 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-24</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#allocator.adaptor">issues</a> in [allocator.adaptor].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The WP +(<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n3000.pdf">N3000</a>) +contains these declarations: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>template <class OuterA1, class OuterA2, class... InnerAllocs> + bool operator==(const scoped_allocator_adaptor<OuterA1, InnerAllocs...>& a, + const scoped_allocator_adaptor<OuterA2, InnerAllocs...>& b); +template <class OuterA1, class OuterA2, class... InnerAllocs> + bool operator!=(const scoped_allocator_adaptor<OuterA1, InnerAllocs...>& a, + const scoped_allocator_adaptor<OuterA2, InnerAllocs...>& b);</pre> +</blockquote> + +<p> +But does not define what the behavior of these operators are. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Post-Rapperswil: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add a new section after 20.10.3 [allocator.adaptor.members]: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p><b>Scoped allocator operators [scoped.adaptor.operators]</b></p> + +<pre>template <class OuterA1, class OuterA2, class... InnerAllocs> + bool operator==(const scoped_allocator_adaptor<OuterA1, InnerAllocs...>& a, + const scoped_allocator_adaptor<OuterA2, InnerAllocs...>& b);</pre> + +<blockquote> +<i>Returns:</i> <code>a.outer_allocator() == b.outer_allocator()</code> +if <code>sizeof...(InnerAllocs)</code> is zero; otherwise, +<code>a.outer_allocator() == b.outer_allocator() && +a.inner_allocator() == b.inner_allocator()</code>. +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class OuterA1, class OuterA2, class... InnerAllocs> + bool operator!=(const scoped_allocator_adaptor<OuterA1, InnerAllocs...>& a, + const scoped_allocator_adaptor<OuterA2, InnerAllocs...>& b);</pre> + +<blockquote> +<i>Returns:</i> <code>!(a == b)</code>. +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1319"></a>1319. Containers should require an iterator that is at least a Forward Iterator</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2.1 [container.requirements.general] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2010-02-16 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-24</p> +<p><b>View other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index-open.html#container.requirements.general">active issues</a> in [container.requirements.general].</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#container.requirements.general">issues</a> in [container.requirements.general].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The requirements on container iterators are spelled out in +23.2.1 [container.requirements.general], table 91. +</p> + +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 91 — Container requirements</caption> + +<tbody><tr> +<th>Expression</th> +<th>Return type</th> +<th>Operational semantics</th> +<th>Assertion/note<br>pre-/post-condition</th> +<th>Complexity</th> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td colspan="5"><center>...</center></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>X::iterator</tt></td> +<td>iterator type whose value type is <tt>T</tt></td> +<td></td> +<td>any iterator category except output iterator. Convertible to +<tt>X::const_iterator</tt>.</td> +<td>compile time</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>X::const_iterator</tt></td> +<td>constant iterator type whose value type is <tt>T</tt></td> +<td></td> +<td>any iterator category except output iterator</td> +<td>compile time</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td colspan="5"><center>...</center></td> +</tr> + +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + +<p> +As input iterators do not have the multi-pass guarantee, they are not suitable +for iterating over a container. For example, taking two calls to +<tt>begin()</tt>, incrementing either iterator might invalidate the other. +While data structures might be imagined where this behaviour produces +interesting and useful results, it is very unlikely to meet the full set of +requirements for a standard container. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Post-Rapperswil: +]</i></p> + + +<p> +Daniel notes: I changed the currently suggested P/R slightly, because it is not robust in regard to new fundamental iterator +catagories. I recommend to say instead that each container::iterator shall satisfy (and thus may refine) the forward +iterator requirements. +</p> + +<blockquote> +Moved to Tentatively Ready with revised wording after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<ol> +<li>Change Table 93 — Container requirements in [container.requirements.general] as indicated: +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> +<caption>Table 93 — Container requirements</caption> + +<tbody> +<tr> +<th>Expression</th> +<th>Return type</th> +<th>Operational<br>semantics</th> +<th>Assertion/note<br>pre-/post-condition</th> +<th>Complexity</th> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td colspan="5" align="center"><tt>...</tt></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>X::iterator</tt></td> +<td>iterator type<br>whose value<br>type is <tt>T</tt></td> +<td></td> +<td>any iterator category<br><del>except output iterator</del><ins><br>that meets the forward iterator requirements</ins>. convertible<br>to<br><tt>X::const_iterator</tt></td> +<td>compile time</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>X::const_iterator</tt></td> +<td>constant iterator type<br>whose value<br>type is <tt>T</tt></td> +<td></td> +<td>any iterator category<br><del>except output iterator</del><ins><br>that meets the forward iterator requirements</ins>.</td> +<td>compile time</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td colspan="5" align="center"><tt>...</tt></td> +</tr> + +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + +</li> +</ol> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1321"></a>1321. <tt>scoped_allocator_adaptor construct</tt> and <tt>destroy</tt> don't +use <tt>allocator_traits</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.10.3 [allocator.adaptor.members] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2010-02-16 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-20</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +20.10.3 [allocator.adaptor.members] p8-9 says: +</p> + +<blockquote> + +<pre>template <class T, class... Args> + void construct(T* p, Args&&... args); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +8 <i>Effects:</i> let <tt><i>OUTERMOST</i>(x)</tt> be <tt>x</tt> if <tt>x</tt> +does not have an <tt>outer_allocator()</tt> function and +<tt><i>OUTERMOST</i>(x.outer_allocator())</tt> otherwise. +</p> + +<ul> +<li> +If <tt>uses_allocator<T, inner_allocator_type>::value</tt> is +<tt>false</tt> and <tt>is_constructible<T, Args...>::value</tt> is +<tt>true</tt>, calls <tt><i>OUTERMOST</i>(*this).construct(p, +std::forward<Args>(args)...)</tt>. +</li> + +<li> +Otherwise, if <tt>uses_allocator<T, inner_allocator_type>::value</tt> is +<tt>true</tt> and <tt>is_constructible<T, allocator_arg_t, +inner_allocator_type, Args...>::value</tt> is <tt>true</tt>, calls +<tt><i>OUTERMOST</i>(*this).construct(p, allocator_arg, +inner_allocator(),std::forward<Args>(args)...)</tt>. +</li> + +<li> +Otherwise, if <tt>uses_allocator<T, inner_allocator_type>::value</tt> is +<tt>true</tt> and <tt>is_constructible<T, Args..., +inner_allocator_type>::value</tt> is <tt>true</tt>, calls +<tt><i>OUTERMOST</i>(*this).construct(p, std::forward<Args>(args)..., +inner_allocator())</tt>. +</li> + +<li> +Otherwise, the program is ill-formed. [<i>Note:</i> an error will result if +<tt>uses_allocator</tt> evaluates to <tt>true</tt> but the specific constructor +does not take an allocator. This definition prevents a silent failure to pass an +inner allocator to a contained element. — <i>end note</i>] +</li> +</ul> + +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class T> + void destroy(T* p); +</pre> +<blockquote> +9 <i>Effects:</i> calls <tt>outer_allocator().destroy(p)</tt>. +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + +<p> +In all other calls where applicable <tt>scoped_allocator_adaptor</tt> does not +call members of an allocator directly, but rather does so indirectly via +<tt>allocator_traits</tt>. For example: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<pre>size_type max_size() const; +</pre> +<blockquote> +7 <i>Returns:</i> +<tt><b>allocator_traits<OuterAlloc>::</b>max_size(outer_allocator())</tt>. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Indeed, without the indirection through <tt>allocator_traits</tt> the +definitions for <tt>construct</tt> and <tt>destroy</tt> are likely to fail at +compile time since the <tt>outer_allocator()</tt> may not have the members +<tt>construct</tt> and <tt>destroy</tt>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +The proposed wording is a product of Pablo, Daniel and Howard. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010 Pittsburgh: Moved to NAD Editorial. Rationale added below. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Rationale:</b></p> +<p> +Solved by +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3059.pdf">N3059</a>. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In 20.10.3 [allocator.adaptor.members] move and change p8 +as indicated, and change p9 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> + +<p> +<ins>Let <tt><i>OUTERMOST(x)</i></tt> be <tt><i>x</i></tt> if <tt><i>x</i></tt> +does not have an <tt>outer_allocator()</tt> <ins>member</ins> function and +<tt><i>OUTERMOST(x.outer_allocator())</i></tt> otherwise. Let +<tt><i>OUTERMOST_ALLOC_TRAITS(x)</i></tt> be +<tt>allocator_traits<decltype(<i>OUTERMOST(x)</i>)></tt>. +[<i>Note:</i> <tt><i>OUTERMOST(x)</i></tt> and +<tt><i>OUTERMOST_ALLOC_TRAITS(x)</i></tt> are recursive operations. It is +incumbent upon the definition of <tt>outer_allocator()</tt> to ensure that the +recursion terminates. It <em>will</em> terminate for all instantiations +of <tt>scoped_allocator_adaptor</tt>. — <i>end note</i>] +</ins> +</p> + +<pre>template <class T, class... Args> + void construct(T* p, Args&&... args); +</pre> +<blockquote> + +<p> +8 <i>Effects:</i> <del>let <tt><i>OUTERMOST(x)</i></tt> be <tt><i>x</i></tt> if +<tt><i>x</i></tt> does not have an <tt>outer_allocator()</tt> function and +<tt><i>OUTERMOST(x.outer_allocator())</i></tt> otherwise.</del> +</p> + +<ul> +<li> +If <tt>uses_allocator<T, inner_allocator_type>::value</tt> is +<tt>false</tt> and <tt>is_constructible<T, Args...>::value</tt> is +<tt>true</tt>, calls <tt><del><i>OUTERMOST(*this)</i>.</del> +<ins><i>OUTERMOST_ALLOC_TRAITS(outer_allocator())</i>::</ins>construct( +<ins><i>OUTERMOST(outer_allocator())</i>,</ins> p, +std::forward<Args>(args)... )</tt>. +</li> + +<li> +Otherwise, if <tt>uses_allocator<T, inner_allocator_type>::value</tt> is +<tt>true</tt> and <tt>is_constructible<T, allocator_arg_t, +inner_allocator_type, Args...>::value</tt> is <tt>true</tt>, calls +<tt><del><i>OUTERMOST(*this)</i>.</del> +<ins><i>OUTERMOST_ALLOC_TRAITS(outer_allocator())</i>::</ins>construct( +<ins><i>OUTERMOST(outer_allocator())</i>,</ins> p, allocator_arg, +inner_allocator(), std::forward<Args>(args)... )</tt>. +</li> + +<li> +Otherwise, if <tt>uses_allocator<T, inner_allocator_type>::value</tt> is +<tt>true</tt> and <tt>is_constructible<T, Args..., +inner_allocator_type>::value</tt> is <tt>true</tt>, calls +<tt><del><i>OUTERMOST(*this)</i>.</del> +<ins><i>OUTERMOST_ALLOC_TRAITS(outer_allocator())</i>::</ins>construct( +<ins><i>OUTERMOST(outer_allocator())</i>,</ins> p, +std::forward<Args>(args)..., inner_allocator() )</tt>. +</li> + +<li> +Otherwise, the program is ill-formed. [<i>Note:</i> an error will result if +<tt>uses_allocator</tt> evaluates to <tt>true</tt> but the specific constructor +does not take an allocator. This definition prevents a silent failure to pass an +inner allocator to a contained element. — <i>end note</i>] +</li> +</ul> + +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class T> + void destroy(T* p); +</pre> +<blockquote> +9 <i>Effects:</i> calls <tt><del>outer_allocator().</del> +<ins><i>OUTERMOST_ALLOC_TRAITS(outer_allocator())</i>::</ins>destroy( +<ins><i>OUTERMOST(outer_allocator())</i>,</ins> p)</tt>. +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1322"></a>1322. Explicit <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> requirements are insufficient</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.2.1 [utility.arg.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2010-02-16 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#utility.arg.requirements">issues</a> in [utility.arg.requirements].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +With the acceptance of library defect <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#822">822</a> only +direct-initialization is supported, and not copy-initialization in the +requirement sets <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> and <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>. This +is usually a good thing, if only the library implementation needs to obey these +restrictions, but the Empire strikes back quickly: +</p> + +<ol> +<li> +<p> +<em>Affects user-code</em>: <tt>std::exception_ptr</tt> is defined purely via +requirements, among them <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>. A strict reading of the +standard would make implementations conforming where <tt>std::exception_ptr</tt> +has an explicit copy-c'tor and user-code must code defensively. This is a very +unwanted effect for such an important component like +<tt>std::exception_ptr</tt>. +</p> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +<em>Wrong re-use</em>: Recently proposed requirement sets +(<tt>NullablePointer</tt> as of +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3025.html">N3025</a>, +Hash) or cleanup of existing requirement sets (e.g. iterator requirements as of +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3046.html">N3046</a>) +tend to reuse existing requirement sets, so reusing <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> +is attempting, even in cases, where the intend is to support copy-initialization +as well. +</p> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +<em>Inconsistency</em>: The current iterator requirements set Table 102 (output +iterator requirements) and Table 103 (forward iterator requirements) demonstrate +quite clearly a strong divergence of copy-semantics: The specified semantics of +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>X u(a); +X u = a; +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +are underspecified compared to the most recent clarifications of the +<tt>CopyConstructible</tt> requirements, c.f. issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1309">1309</a> which is +very unsatisfactory. This will become worse for each further issue that involves +the <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> specification (for possible directions see <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1173">1173</a>). +</p> +</li> +</ol> + +<p> +The suggested resolution is to define two further requirements +<tt>implicit-MoveConstructible</tt> and <tt>implicit-CopyConstructible</tt> (or +any other reasonable name like <tt>MoveConvertible</tt> and +<tt>CopyConvertible</tt>) each with a very succinct but precise meaning solving +all three problems mentioned above. +</p> + +<p><i>[Batavia: Resolved by accepting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3215.html">n3215</a>.]</i></p> + + + + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<ol> +<li> +<p> +Add the following new table ?? after Table 34 — <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> +requirements [moveconstructible]: +</p> + +<blockquote> + +<table border="1"> +<caption><ins>Table ?? — <tt>Implicit MoveConstructible</tt> requirements +[implicit.moveconstructible] (in addition to +<tt>MoveConstructible</tt>)</ins></caption> + +<tbody><tr> +<th><ins>Expression</ins></th> +<th><ins>Operational Semantics</ins></th> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><ins><tt>T u = rv;</tt></ins></td> +<td><ins>Equivalent to: <tt>T u(rv);</tt></ins></td> +</tr> + +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Add the following new table ?? after Table 35 — <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> +requirements [copyconstructible]: +</p> + +<blockquote> + +<table border="1"> +<caption><ins>Table ?? — <tt>Implicit CopyConstructible</tt> requirements +[implicit.copyconstructible] (in addition to +<tt>CopyConstructible</tt>)</ins></caption> + +<tbody><tr> +<th><ins>Expression</ins></th> +<th><ins>Operational Semantics</ins></th> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><ins><tt>T u = v;</tt></ins></td> +<td><ins>Equivalent to: <tt>T u(v);</tt></ins></td> +</tr> + +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> + +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.2.3 [nullablepointer.requirements]/1 as follows: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +A <tt>NullablePointer</tt> type is a pointer-like type that supports null +values. A type <tt>P</tt> meets the requirements of <tt>NullablePointer</tt> if: +</p> + +<ul> +<li> +<tt>P</tt> satisfies the requirements of <tt>EqualityComparable</tt>, +<tt>DefaultConstructible</tt>, <tt><ins>implicit</ins> CopyConstructible</tt>, +<tt>CopyAssignable</tt>, and <tt>Destructible</tt>, +</li> + +<li>[..]</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.2.4 [hash.requirements]/1 as indicated: <i>[explicit +copy-constructible functors could not be provided as arguments +to any algorithm that takes these by value. Also a typo is fixed.]</i> +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +1 A type <tt>H</tt> meets the <i>Hash</i> requirements if: +</p> +<ul> +<li> +it is a function object type (20.8), +</li> +<li> +it satis<ins>fies</ins><del>ifes</del> the requirements of +<tt><ins>implicit</ins> CopyConstructible</tt> and <tt>Destructible</tt> +(20.2.1), +</li> +<li> +[..] +</li> +</ul> + +</blockquote> + +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.7.1 [meta.rqmts]/1+2 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +1 A <i>UnaryTypeTrait</i> describes a property of a type. It shall be a class +template that takes one template type argument and, optionally, additional +arguments that help define the property being described. It shall be +<tt>DefaultConstructible</tt>, <tt><ins>implicit</ins> CopyConstructible</tt>, +[..] +</p> + +<p> +2 A <tt>BinaryTypeTrait</tt> describes a relationship between two types. It +shall be a class template that takes two template type arguments and, +optionally, additional arguments that help define the relationship being +described. It shall be <tt>DefaultConstructible</tt>, +<tt><ins>implicit </ins>CopyConstructible</tt>, and [..] +</p> + +</blockquote> + +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.8.2 [func.require]/4 as indicated: <i>[explicit +copy-constructible functors could not be provided as arguments to any algorithm +that takes these by value]</i> +</p> + +<blockquote> +4 Every call wrapper (20.8.1) shall be <tt><ins>implicit</ins> +MoveConstructible</tt>. A simple call wrapper is a call wrapper that is +<tt><ins>implicit</ins> CopyConstructible</tt> and <tt>CopyAssignable</tt> and +whose copy constructor, move constructor, and assignment operator do not throw +exceptions. [..] +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.8.4 [refwrap]/1 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +1 <tt>reference_wrapper<T></tt> is a<ins>n <tt>implicit</tt></ins> +<tt>CopyConstructible</tt> and <tt>CopyAssignable</tt> wrapper around a +reference to an object or function of type <tt>T</tt>. +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.8.10.1.2 [func.bind.bind]/5+9 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +5 <i>Remarks:</i> The return type shall satisfy the requirements of +<tt><ins>implicit</ins> MoveConstructible</tt>. If all of <tt>FD</tt> and +<tt>TiD</tt> satisfy the requirements of <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>, then the +return type shall satisfy the requirements of <tt><ins>implicit</ins> +CopyConstructible</tt>. [<i>Note:</i> this implies that all of <tt>FD</tt> and +<tt>TiD</tt> are <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>. — <i>end note</i>] +</p> + +<p> +[..] +</p> + +<p> +9 <i>Remarks:</i> The return type shall satisfy the requirements of +<tt><ins>implicit</ins> MoveConstructible</tt>. If all of <tt>FD</tt> and +<tt>TiD</tt> satisfy the requirements of <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>, then the +return type shall satisfy the requirements of <tt><ins>implicit</ins> +CopyConstructible</tt>. [<i>Note:</i> this implies that all of <tt>FD</tt> and +<tt>TiD</tt> are <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>. — <i>end note</i>] +</p> +</blockquote> + +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.8.10.1.3 [func.bind.place] as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +1 All placeholder types shall be <tt>DefaultConstructible</tt> and +<tt><ins>implicit</ins> CopyConstructible</tt>, and [..] +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.9.9 [unique.ptr]/5 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +5 Each object of a type <tt>U</tt> instantiated form the <tt>unique_ptr</tt> +template specified in this subclause has the strict ownership semantics, +specified above, of a unique pointer. In partial satisfaction of these +semantics, each such <tt>U</tt> is <tt><ins>implicit</ins> +MoveConstructible</tt> and <tt>MoveAssignable</tt>, but is not +<tt>CopyConstructible</tt> nor <tt>CopyAssignable</tt>. The template parameter +<tt>T</tt> of <tt>unique_ptr</tt> may be an incomplete type. +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.9.10.2 [util.smartptr.shared]/2 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +2 Specializations of <tt>shared_ptr</tt> shall be +<tt><ins>implicit</ins> CopyConstructible</tt>, <tt>CopyAssignable</tt>, and +<tt>LessThanComparable</tt>, [..] +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.9.10.3 [util.smartptr.weak]/2 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +2 Specializations of <tt>weak_ptr</tt> shall be <tt><ins>implicit</ins> +CopyConstructible</tt> and <tt>CopyAssignable</tt>, allowing their use in +standard containers. The template parameter <tt>T</tt> of <tt>weak_ptr</tt> may +be an incomplete type. +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 24.2.2 [iterator.iterators]/2 as indicated: <i>[This fixes a +defect in the Iterator requirements. None of the usual algorithms accepting +iterators would be usable with iterators with explicit copy-constructors]</i> +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +2 A type <tt>X</tt> satisfies the Iterator requirements if: +</p> + +<ul> +<li> +<tt>X</tt> satisfies the <tt><ins>implicit</ins> CopyConstructible</tt>, +<tt>CopyAssignable</tt>, and <tt>Destructible</tt> requirements (20.2.1) +and lvalues of type <tt>X</tt> are swappable (20.2.2), and [..] +</li> +<li>...</li> +</ul> + +</blockquote> + +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change D.12.1 [auto.ptr]/3 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote> +3 [..] Instances of <tt>auto_ptr</tt> meet the requirements of +<tt><ins>implicit</ins> MoveConstructible</tt> and <tt>MoveAssignable</tt>, but +do not meet the requirements of <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> and +<tt>CopyAssignable</tt>. — <i>end note</i>] +</blockquote> +</li> + +</ol> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1323"></a>1323. <tt>basic_string::replace</tt> should use <tt>const_iterator</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.4.6.6 [string::replace] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2010-02-19 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-24</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#string::replace">issues</a> in [string::replace].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p> +In contrast to all library usages of purely positional iterator values several +overloads of <tt>std::basic_string::replace</tt> still use iterator instead of +<tt>const_iterator</tt> arguments. The paper +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3021.pdf">N3021</a> +quite nicely visualizes the purely positional responsibilities of the function +arguments. +</p> + +<p> +This should be fixed to make the library consistent, the proposed changes are +quite mechanic. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Post-Rapperswil: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<ol> + +<li> +<p> +In 21.4 [basic.string], class template <tt>basic_string</tt> synopsis +change as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>// 21.4.6 modifiers: +... +basic_string& replace(<ins>const_</ins>iterator i1, <ins>const_</ins>iterator i2, + const basic_string& str); +basic_string& replace(<ins>const_</ins>iterator i1, <ins>const_</ins>iterator i2, + const charT* s, size_type n); +basic_string& replace(<ins>const_</ins>iterator i1, <ins>const_</ins>iterator i2, + const charT* s); +basic_string& replace(<ins>const_</ins>iterator i1, <ins>const_</ins>iterator i2, + size_type n, charT c); +template<class InputIterator> + basic_string& replace(<ins>const_</ins>iterator i1, <ins>const_</ins>iterator i2, + InputIterator j1, InputIterator j2); +basic_string& replace(<ins>const_</ins>iterator, <ins>const_</ins>iterator, + initializer_list<charT>); +</pre></blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +In 21.4.6.6 [string::replace] before p.18, change the following signatures +as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>basic_string& replace(<ins>const_</ins>iterator i1, <ins>const_</ins>iterator i2, const basic_string& str); +</pre></blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +In 21.4.6.6 [string::replace] before p.21, change the following signatures +as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>basic_string& + replace(<ins>const_</ins>iterator i1, <ins>const_</ins>iterator i2, const charT* s, size_type n); +</pre></blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +In 21.4.6.6 [string::replace] before p.24, change the following signatures +as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>basic_string& replace(<ins>const_</ins>iterator i1, <ins>const_</ins>iterator i2, const charT* s); +</pre></blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +In 21.4.6.6 [string::replace] before p.27, change the following signatures +as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>basic_string& replace(<ins>const_</ins>iterator i1, <ins>const_</ins>iterator i2, size_type n, + charT c); +</pre></blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +In 21.4.6.6 [string::replace] before p.30, change the following signatures +as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class InputIterator> + basic_string& replace(<ins>const_</ins>iterator i1, <ins>const_</ins>iterator i2, + InputIterator j1, InputIterator j2); +</pre></blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +In 21.4.6.6 [string::replace] before p.33, change the following signatures +as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>basic_string& replace(<ins>const_</ins>iterator i1, <ins>const_</ins>iterator i2, + initializer_list<charT> il); +</pre></blockquote> +</li> + +</ol> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1324"></a>1324. Still too many implicit conversions for <tt>pair</tt> and <tt>tuple</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.3.5.2 [pairs.pair], 20.4.2.1 [tuple.cnstr] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2010-03-20 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-26</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#pairs.pair">issues</a> in [pairs.pair].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In analogy to library defect <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#811">811</a>, <tt>tuple</tt>'s variadic +constructor +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class... UTypes> +explicit tuple(UTypes&&... u); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +creates the same problem as pair: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>#include <tuple> + +int main() +{ + std::tuple<char*> p(0); +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +produces a similar compile error for a recent gcc implementation. +</p> + +<p> +I suggest to follow the same resolution path as has been applied to +<tt>pair</tt>'s corresponding c'tor, that is require that these c'tors should +not participate in overload resolution, if the arguments are not implicitly +convertible to the element types. +</p> + +<p> +Further-on both <tt>pair</tt> and <tt>tuple</tt> provide converting constructors +from different <tt>pairs</tt>/<tt>tuples</tt> that should be not available, if +the corresponding element types are not implicitly convertible. It seems +astonishing that in the following example +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>struct A { + explicit A(int); +}; + +A a = 1; <font color="#C80000">// Error</font> + +std::tuple<A> ta = std::make_tuple(1); <font color="#C80000">// # OK?</font> +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +the initialization marked with # could be well-formed. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Only constraints on constructors are suggested. Adding similar constraints on +assignment operators is considered as QoI, because the assigments wouldn't be +well-formed anyway. +]</i></p> + + +<ol> + +<li> +<p> +Following 20.3.5.2 [pairs.pair]/5 add a new Remarks element: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class U, class V> pair(const pair<U, V>& p); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +5 <i>Effects:</i> Initializes members from the corresponding members of the +argument<del>, performing implicit conversions as needed</del>. +</p> + +<p> +<ins><i>Remarks:</i> This constructor shall not participate in overload +resolution unless <tt>U</tt> is implicitly convertible to <tt>first_type</tt> +and <tt>V</tt> is implicitly convertible to <tt>second_type</tt>.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Following 20.3.5.2 [pairs.pair]/6 add a new Remarks element: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class U, class V> pair(pair<U, V>&& p); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +6 <i>Effects:</i> The constructor initializes <tt>first</tt> with +<tt>std::move(p.first)</tt> and second with <tt>std::move(p.second)</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +<ins><i>Remarks:</i> This constructor shall not participate in overload +resolution unless <tt>U</tt> is implicitly convertible to <tt>first_type</tt> +and <tt>V</tt> is implicitly convertible to <tt>second_type</tt>.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Following 20.4.2.1 [tuple.cnstr]/7 add a new Remarks element: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class... UTypes> +explicit tuple(UTypes&&... u); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +6 <i>Requires:</i> Each type in <tt>Types</tt> shall satisfy the requirements of +<tt>MoveConstructible</tt> (Table 33) from the corresponding type in +<tt>UTypes</tt>. <tt>sizeof...(Types) == sizeof...(UTypes)</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +7 <i>Effects:</i> Initializes the elements in the <tt>tuple</tt> with the +corresponding value in <tt>std::forward<UTypes>(u)</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +<ins><i>Remarks:</i> This constructor shall not participate in overload +resolution unless each type in <tt>UTypes</tt> is implicitly convertible to its +corresponding type in <tt>Types</tt>.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Following 20.4.2.1 [tuple.cnstr]/13 add a new Remarks element: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class... UTypes> tuple(const tuple<UTypes...>& u); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +12 <i>Requires:</i> Each type in <tt>Types</tt> shall be constructible from the +corresponding type in <tt>UTypes</tt>. <tt>sizeof...(Types) == +sizeof...(UTypes)</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +13 <i>Effects:</i> Constructs each element of <tt>*this</tt> with the +corresponding element of <tt>u</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +<ins><i>Remarks:</i> This constructor shall not participate in overload +resolution unless each type in <tt>UTypes</tt> is implicitly convertible to its +corresponding type in <tt>Types</tt>.</ins> +</p> + +<p> +14 [<i>Note:</i> <tt>enable_if</tt> can be used to make the converting +constructor and assignment operator exist only in the cases where the source and +target have the same number of elements. — <i>end note</i>] +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Following 20.4.2.1 [tuple.cnstr]/16 add a new Remarks element: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class... UTypes> tuple(tuple<UTypes...>&& u); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +15 <i>Requires:</i> Each type in <tt>Types</tt> shall shall satisfy the +requirements of <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> (Table 33) from the corresponding +type in <tt>UTypes</tt>. <tt>sizeof...(Types) == sizeof...(UTypes)</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +16 <i>Effects:</i> Move-constructs each element of <tt>*this</tt> with the +corresponding element of <tt>u</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +<ins><i>Remarks:</i> This constructor shall not participate in overload +resolution unless each type in <tt>UTypes</tt> is implicitly convertible to its +corresponding type in <tt>Types</tt>.</ins> +</p> + +<p> +[<i>Note:</i> <tt>enable_if</tt> can be used to make the converting constructor +and assignment operator exist only in the cases where the source and target have +the same number of elements. — <i>end note</i>] +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Following 20.4.2.1 [tuple.cnstr]/18 add a new Remarks element: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class U1, class U2> tuple(const pair<U1, U2>& u); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +17 <i>Requires:</i> The first type in <tt>Types</tt> shall be constructible from +<tt>U1</tt> and the second type in <tt>Types</tt> shall be constructible from +<tt>U2</tt>. <tt>sizeof...(Types) == 2</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +18 <i>Effects:</i> Constructs the first element with <tt>u.first</tt> and the +second element with <tt>u.second</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +<ins><i>Remarks:</i> This constructor shall not participate in overload +resolution unless <tt>U1</tt> is implicitly convertible to the first type in +<tt>Types</tt> and <tt>U2</tt> is implicitly convertible to the second type in +<tt>Types</tt>.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Following 20.4.2.1 [tuple.cnstr]/20 add a new Remarks element: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class U1, class U2> tuple(pair<U1, U2>&& u); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +19 <i>Requires:</i> The first type in <tt>Types</tt> shall shall satisfy the +requirements of <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>(Table 33) from <tt>U1</tt> and the +second type in <tt>Types</tt> shall be move-constructible from <tt>U2</tt>. +<tt>sizeof...(Types) == 2</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +20 <i>Effects:</i> Constructs the first element with <tt>std::move(u.first)</tt> +and the second element with <tt>std::move(u.second)</tt> +</p> + +<p> +<ins><i>Remarks:</i> This constructor shall not participate in overload +resolution unless <tt>U1</tt> is implicitly convertible to the first type in +<tt>Types</tt> and <tt>U2</tt> is implicitly convertible to the second type in +<tt>Types</tt>.</ins> +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +</ol> +<p><i>[ +2010-10-24 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Accepting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3140.html">n3140</a> would solve this issue. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +See <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3140.html">n3140</a>. + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1325"></a>1325. bitset</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.5.1 [bitset.cons] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Christopher Jefferson <b>Opened:</b> 2010-03-07 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#bitset.cons">issues</a> in [bitset.cons].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +As mentioned on the boost mailing list: +</p> + +<p> +The following code, valid in C++03, is broken in C++0x due to ambiguity +between the "<tt>unsigned long long</tt>" and "<tt>char*</tt>" +constructors. +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>#include <bitset> +std::bitset<10> b(0); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +The proposed resolution has been reviewed by Stephan T. Lavavej. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Post-Rapperswil +]</i></p> + + +<p> +The proposed resolution has two problems: +</p> +<ul> +<li> +<p>it fails to provide support for non-terminated strings, which +could be easily added and constitutes an important use-case. For +example, the following code would invoke UB with the current +P/R:</p> +<blockquote> +<pre>char s[4] = { '0', '1', '0', '1' }; // notice: not null-terminated! +bitset<4> b(s, 0, 4); +</pre></blockquote> +because it requires the evaluation (under the as-if rule, to be fair, +but it doesn't matter) of <tt>basic_string<char>(s)</tt> +</li> +<li> +<p>it promotes a consistency between the two <tt>bitset</tt> +constructors that take a <tt>const std::string&</tt> and a +<tt>const char*</tt>, respectively, while practice established by +<tt>std::basic_string</tt> would recommend a different set of +parameters. In particular, the constructor of +<tt>std::basic_string</tt> that takes a <tt>const char*</tt> does +not have a <tt>pos</tt> parameter</p> +</li> +</ul> + +<blockquote> +Moved to Tentatively Ready with revised wording provided by Alberto Ganesh Babati after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + + +<ol> +<li>In the synopsis of header <tt><bitset></tt> in +20.5 [template.bitset]/1, replace the fourth bitset constructor: +<blockquote> +<pre><del>explicit bitset(const char *str);</del> +<ins>template <class charT> + explicit bitset( + const charT *str, + typename basic_string<charT>::size_type n = basic_string<charT>::npos, + charT zero = charT('0'), charT one = charT('1'));</ins> +</pre></blockquote> +</li> +<li>In 20.5.1 [bitset.cons]/8: +<blockquote> +<pre><del>explicit bitset(const char *str);</del> +<ins>template <class charT> +explicit +bitset(const charT *str, + typename basic_string<charT>::size_type n = basic_string<charT>::npos, + charT zero = charT('0'), charT one = charT('1'));</ins> +</pre></blockquote> +Effects: Constructs an object of class +<tt>bitset<N></tt> as if by +<del>bitset(string(str)).</del> +<blockquote><pre><ins> +bitset( + n == basic_string<charT>::npos + ? basic_string<charT>(str) + : basic_string<charT>(str, n), + 0, n, zero, one) +</ins></pre></blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1326"></a>1326. Missing/wrong preconditions for <tt>pair</tt> and <tt>tuple</tt> functions</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.3.5.2 [pairs.pair], 20.4.2.1 [tuple.cnstr] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2010-03-07 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-26</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#pairs.pair">issues</a> in [pairs.pair].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +There are several constructors and creation functions of std::tuple +that impose requirements on it's arguments, that are unnecessary +restrictive and don't match the intention for the supported argument +types. This is related to the fact that tuple is supposed to accept both +object types and lvalue-references and the usual MoveConstructible and +CopyConstructible requirements are bad descriptions for non-const +references. Some examples: +</p> + +<ol type="a"> +<li> +<p> +20.4.2.1 [tuple.cnstr] before p.4 and p.8, resp.: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>explicit tuple(const Types&...); +</pre> +<blockquote> +4 <i>Requires:</i> Each type in <tt>Types</tt> shall be copy constructible. +</blockquote> + +<pre>tuple(const tuple& u) = default; +</pre> +<blockquote> +8 <i>Requires:</i> Each type in <tt>Types</tt> shall satisfy the requirements of +<tt>CopyConstructible</tt> (Table 34). + +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +A tuple that contains lvalue-references to non-const can never +satisfy the <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> requirements. <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> +requirements <i>refine</i> the <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> requirements and +this would require that these lvalue-references could bind +rvalues. But the core language does not allow that. Even, if we +would interpret that requirement as referring to the underlying +non-reference type, this requirement would be wrong as well, +because there is no reason to disallow a type such as +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>struct NoMoveNoCopy { + NoMoveNoCopy(NoMoveNoCopy&&) = delete; + NoMoveNoCopy(const NoMoveNoCopy&) = delete; + ... +}: +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +for the instantiation of <tt>std::tuple<NoMoveNoCopy&></tt> and +that of it's copy constructor. +</p> + +<p> +A more reasonable requirement for this example would be to require that +"<tt>is_constructible<Ti, const Ti&>::value</tt> shall +evaluate to true for all <tt>Ti</tt> in <tt>Types</tt>". In this case +the special reference-folding and const-merging rules of references +would make this well-formed in all cases. We could also add the further +constraint "if <tt>Ti</tt> is an object type, it shall satisfy the +<tt>CopyConstructible</tt> requirements", but this additional +requirement seems not really to help here. Ignoring it would only mean +that if a user would provide a curious object type <tt>C</tt> that +satisfies the <tt>std::is_constructible<C, const C&></tt> +test, but not the "<tt>C</tt> is <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>" test would +produce a <tt>tuple<C></tt> that does not satisfy the +<tt>CopyConstructible</tt> requirements as well. +</p> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +20.4.2.1 [tuple.cnstr] before p.6 and p.10, resp.: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class... UTypes> +explicit tuple(UTypes&&... u); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +6 <i>Requires:</i> Each type in <tt>Types</tt> shall satisfy the +requirements of <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> (Table 33) from the +corresponding type in <tt>UTypes</tt>. <tt>sizeof...(Types) == +sizeof...(UTypes)</tt>. +</blockquote> + +<pre>tuple(tuple&& u); +</pre> +<blockquote> +10 <i>Requires:</i> Each <tt>type</tt> in <tt>Types</tt> shall shall +satisfy the requirements of <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> (Table 33). +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +We have a similar problem as in (a): Non-const lvalue-references +are intended template arguments for <tt>std::tuple</tt>, but cannot satisfy +the <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> requirements. In this case the correct +requirements would be +</p> + +<blockquote> +<tt>is_constructible<Ti, Ui>::value</tt> shall evaluate to true +for all <tt>Ti</tt> in <tt>Types</tt> and for all <tt>Ui</tt> in +<tt>UTypes</tt> +</blockquote> + +<p> +and +</p> + +<blockquote> +<tt>is_constructible<Ti, Ti>::value</tt> shall evaluate to true +for all <tt>Ti</tt> in <tt>Types</tt> +</blockquote> + +<p> +respectively. +</p> +</li> +</ol> + +<p> +Many <tt>std::pair</tt> member functions do not add proper requirements, e.g. +the default c'tor does not require anything. This is corrected within the +suggested resolution. Further-on the P/R has been adapted to the FCD numbering. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-03-25 Daniel updated wording: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +The issue became updated to fix some minor inconsistencies and to ensure a +similarly required fix for <tt>std::pair</tt>, which has the same specification +problem as <tt>std::tuple</tt>, since <tt>pair</tt> became extended to support +reference members as well. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[Original proposed resolution:]</i></p> + +<ol> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.3.5.2 [pairs.pair]/1 as indicated <i>[The changes for the effects +elements are not normative changes, they just ensure +harmonization with existing wording style]</i>: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>constexpr pair(); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>first_type</tt> and <tt>second_type</tt> shall satisfy +the <tt>DefaultConstructible</tt> requirements.</ins> +</p> + +<p> +1 <i>Effects:</i> <ins>Value-initializes <tt>first</tt> and +<tt>second</tt>.</ins><del>Initializes its members as if implemented: <tt>pair() +: first(), second() { }</tt>.</del> +</p> + +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.3.5.2 [pairs.pair]/2 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>pair(const T1& x, const T2& y); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>is_constructible<T1, const T1&>::value</tt> +is <tt>true</tt> and <tt>is_constructible<T2, const T2&>::value</tt> +is <tt>true</tt>.</ins> +</p> + +<p> +2 <i>Effects:</i> The constructor initializes <tt>first</tt> with <tt>x</tt> and +<tt>second</tt> with <tt>y</tt>. +</p> + +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.3.5.2 [pairs.pair]/3 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class U, class V> pair(U&& x, V&& y); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>is_constructible<first_type, U>::value</tt> is +<tt>true</tt> and <tt>is_constructible<second_type, V>::value</tt> is +<tt>true</tt>.</ins> +</p> + +<p> +3 <i>Effects:</i> The constructor initializes <tt>first</tt> with +<tt>std::forward<U>(x)</tt> and <tt>second</tt> with +<tt>std::forward<V>(y)</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +4 <i>Remarks:</i> If <tt>U</tt> is not implicitly convertible to +<tt>first_type</tt> or <tt>V</tt> is not implicitly convertible to +<tt>second_type</tt> this constructor shall not participate in overload +resolution. +</p> + +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.3.5.2 [pairs.pair]/5 as indicated <i>[The change in the effects +element should be non-normatively and is in compatible to the change suggestion +of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1324">1324</a>]</i>: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class U, class V> pair(const pair<U, V>& p); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>is_constructible<first_type, const +U&>::value</tt> is <tt>true</tt> and <tt>is_constructible<second_type, +const V&>::value</tt> is <tt>true</tt>.</ins> +</p> + +<p> +5 <i>Effects:</i> Initializes members from the corresponding members of the +argument<del>, performing implicit conversions as needed</del>. +</p> + +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.3.5.2 [pairs.pair]/6 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class U, class V> pair(pair<U, V>&& p); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>is_constructible<first_type, U>::value</tt> is +<tt>true</tt> and <tt>is_constructible<second_type, V>::value</tt> is +<tt>true</tt>.</ins> +</p> + +<p> +6 <i>Effects:</i> The constructor initializes <tt>first</tt> with +<tt>std::<del>move</del><ins>forward<U></ins>(p.first)</tt> and +<tt>second</tt> with +<tt>std::<del>move</del><ins>forward<V></ins>(p.second)</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.3.5.2 [pairs.pair]/7+8 as indicated [The deletion in the effects +element should be non-normatively]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class... Args1, class... Args2> + pair(piecewise_construct_t, + tuple<Args1...> first_args, tuple<Args2...> second_args); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +7 <i>Requires:</i> <ins><tt>is_constructible<first_type, +Args1...>::value</tt> is <tt>true</tt> and +<tt>is_constructible<second_type, Args2...>::value</tt> is +<tt>true</tt>.</ins> <del>All the types in <tt>Args1</tt> and <tt>Args2</tt> +shall be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> (Table 35). <tt>T1</tt> shall be +constructible from <tt>Args1</tt>. <tt>T2</tt> shall be constructible from +<tt>Args2</tt>.</del> +</p> + +<p> +8 <i>Effects:</i> The constructor initializes <tt>first</tt> with arguments of +types <tt>Args1...</tt> obtained by forwarding the elements of +<tt>first_args</tt> and initializes <tt>second</tt> with arguments of types +<tt>Args2...</tt> obtained by forwarding the elements of <tt>second_args</tt>. +<del>(Here, forwarding an element <tt>x</tt> of type <tt>U</tt> within a +<tt>tuple</tt> object means calling <tt>std::forward<U>(x)</tt>.)</del> +This form of construction, whereby constructor arguments for <tt>first</tt> and +<tt>second</tt> are each provided in a separate <tt>tuple</tt> object, is called +piecewise construction. +</p> + +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.3.5.2 [pairs.pair] before 12 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>pair& operator=(pair&& p); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +<ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>first_type</tt> and <tt>second_type</tt> shall satisfy +the <tt>MoveAssignable</tt> requirements.</ins> +</p> + +<p> +12 <i>Effects:</i> Assigns to <tt>first</tt> with <tt>std::move(p.first)</tt> +and to <tt>second</tt> with <tt>std::move(p.second)</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +13 <i>Returns:</i> <tt>*this</tt>. +</p> + +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change [pairs.pair] before 14 as indicated: [The heterogeneous usage +of MoveAssignable is actually not defined, +but the library uses it at several places, so we follow this tradition +until a better term has been agreed on. One +alternative could be to write "first_type shall be assignable from an +rvalue of U [..]"] +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class U, class V> pair& operator=(pair<U, V>&& p); +</pre> + +<blockquote> + +<p> +<ins><i>Requires:</i> <tt>first_type</tt> shall be <tt>MoveAssignable</tt> from +<tt>U</tt> and <tt>second_type</tt> shall be <tt>MoveAssignable</tt> from +<tt>V</tt>.</ins> +</p> + +<p> +14 <i>Effects:</i> Assigns to <tt>first</tt> with <tt>std::move(p.first)</tt> +and to <tt>second</tt> with <tt>std::move(p.second)</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +15 <i>Returns:</i> <tt>*this</tt>. +</p> + +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.4.2.1 [tuple.cnstr]/4+5 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>explicit tuple(const Types&...); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +4 <i>Requires:</i> <ins><tt>is_constructible<Ti, const +Ti&>::value == true</tt> for e</ins><del>E</del>ach type +<ins><tt>Ti</tt></ins> in <tt>Types</tt><del> shall be copy +constructible</del>. +</p> + +<p> +5 <i>Effects:</i> <del>Copy i</del><ins>I</ins>nitializes each element with the +value of the corresponding parameter. +</p> + +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.4.2.1 [tuple.cnstr]/6 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class... UTypes> +explicit tuple(UTypes&&... u); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +6 <i>Requires:</i> <ins><tt>is_constructible<Ti, Ui>::value == +true</tt> for e</ins><del>E</del>ach type <ins><tt>Ti</tt></ins> in +<tt>Types</tt> <del>shall satisfy the requirements of +<tt>MoveConstructible</tt> (Table 33) from</del><ins>and for</ins> the +corresponding type <ins><tt>Ui</tt></ins> in <tt>UTypes</tt>. +<tt>sizeof...(Types) == sizeof...(UTypes)</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +7 <i>Effects:</i> Initializes the elements in the <tt>tuple</tt> with the +corresponding value in <tt>std::forward<UTypes>(u)</tt>. +</p> + +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.4.2.1 [tuple.cnstr]/8+9 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>tuple(const tuple& u) = default; +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +8 <i>Requires:</i> <ins><tt>is_constructible<Ti, const +Ti&>::value == true</tt> for e</ins><del>E</del>ach type +<ins><tt>Ti</tt></ins> in <tt>Types</tt><del> shall satisfy the +requirements of <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>(Table 34)</del>. +</p> + +<p> +9 <i>Effects:</i> <ins>Initializes</ins><del>Copy constructs</del> each element +of <tt>*this</tt> with the corresponding element of <tt>u</tt>. +</p> + +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.4.2.1 [tuple.cnstr]/10+11 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>tuple(tuple&& u); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +10 <i>Requires:</i> <ins>Let <tt>i</tt> be in <tt>[0, sizeof...(Types))</tt> and +let <tt>Ti</tt> be the <tt>i</tt><sup><i>th</i></sup> type in <tt>Types</tt>. +Then <tt>is_constructible<Ti, Ti>::value</tt> shall be <tt>true</tt> for +all <tt>i</tt>.</ins> <del>Each type in <tt>Types</tt> shall shall satisfy the +requirements of <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> (Table 34)</del>. +</p> + +<p> +11 <i>Effects:</i> <ins>For each <tt>Ti</tt> in <tt>Types</tt>, initializes the +<tt>i</tt><sup><i>th</i></sup></ins> <del>Move-constructs each</del> element of +<tt>*this</tt> with <del>the corresponding element of</del> +<ins><tt>std::forward<Ti>(get<i>(</tt></ins><tt>u</tt><ins><tt>))</tt></ins>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.4.2.1 [tuple.cnstr]/15+16 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class... UTypes> tuple(tuple<UTypes...>&& u); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +15 <i>Requires:</i> <ins>Let <tt>i</tt> be in <tt>[0, sizeof...(Types))</tt>, +<tt>Ti</tt> be the <tt>i</tt><sup><i>th</i></sup> type in <tt>Types</tt>, and +<tt>Ui</tt> be the <tt>i</tt><sup><i>th</i></sup> type in <tt>UTypes</tt>. Then +<tt>is_constructible<Ti, Ui>::value</tt> shall be <tt>true</tt> for all +<tt>i</tt>.</ins> <del>Each type in <tt>Types</tt> shall shall satisfy the +requirements of <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> (Table 34) from the corresponding +type in <tt>UTypes</tt></del>. <tt>sizeof...(Types) == sizeof...(UTypes)</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +16 <i>Effects:</i> <ins>For each type <tt>Ti</tt>, initializes the +<tt>i</tt><sup><i>th</i></sup></ins> <del>Move-constructs each</del> element of +<tt>*this</tt> with <del>the corresponding element of</del> +<ins><tt>std::forward<Ui>(get<i>(</tt></ins><tt>u</tt><ins><tt>))</tt></ins>. +</p> + +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.4.2.1 [tuple.cnstr]/19+20 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class U1, class U2> tuple(pair<U1, U2>&& u); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +19 <i>Requires:</i> <ins><tt>is_constructible<T1, U1>::value == +true</tt> for <tt>t</tt></ins><del><tt>T</tt></del>he first type +<ins><tt>T1</tt></ins> in <tt>Types</tt> <del>shall shall satisfy the +requirements of <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>(Table 33) from +<tt>U1</tt></del> and <ins><tt>is_constructible<T2, U2>::value == +true</tt> for</ins> the second type <ins><tt>T2</tt></ins> in +<tt>Types</tt> <del>shall be move-constructible from <tt>U2</tt></del>. +<tt>sizeof...(Types) == 2</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +20 <i>Effects:</i> <ins>Initializes</ins><del>Constructs</del> the first +element with +<tt>std::<ins>forward<U1></ins><del>move</del>(u.first)</tt> and +the second element with +<tt>std::<ins>forward<U2></ins><del>move</del>(u.second)</tt>. +</p> + +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li> +<p> +Change 20.4.2.4 [tuple.creation]/9-16 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class... TTypes, class... UTypes> +tuple<TTypes..., UTypes...> tuple_cat(const tuple<TTypes...>& t, const tuple<UTypes...>& u); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +9 <i>Requires:</i> <ins><tt>is_constructible<Ti, const +Ti&>::value == true</tt> for each type <tt>Ti</tt></ins><del>All +the types</del> in <tt>TTypes</tt> <del>shall be +<tt>CopyConstructible</tt> (Table 34)</del>. +<ins><tt>is_constructible<Ui, const Ui&>::value == true</tt> +for each type <tt>Ui</tt></ins><del>All the types</del> in +<tt>UTypes</tt> <del>shall be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> (Table +34)</del>. +</p> + +<p> +10 <i>Returns:</i> A <tt>tuple</tt> object constructed by +<ins>initializing</ins><del>copy constructing</del> its first +<tt>sizeof...(TTypes)</tt> elements from the corresponding elements of +<tt>t</tt> and <ins>initializing</ins><del>copy constructing</del> its +last <tt>sizeof...(UTypes)</tt> elements from the corresponding elements +of <tt>u</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class... TTypes, class... UTypes> +tuple<TTypes..., UTypes...> tuple_cat(tuple<TTypes...>&& t, const tuple<UTypes...>& u); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +11 <i>Requires:</i> <ins>Let <tt>i</tt> be in <tt>[0, sizeof...(TTypes))</tt>, +<tt>Ti</tt> be the <tt>i</tt><sup><i>th</i></sup> type in <tt>Types</tt>, +<tt>j</tt> be in <tt>[0, sizeof...(UTypes))</tt>, and <tt>Uj</tt> be the +<tt>j</tt><sup><i>th</i></sup> type in <tt>UTypes</tt>. +<tt>is_constructible<Ti, Ti>::value</tt> shall be <tt>true</tt> for each +type <tt>Ti</tt> and <tt>is_constructible<Uj, const Uj&>::value</tt> +shall be <tt>true</tt> for each type <tt>Uj</tt></ins> <del>All the types in +<tt>TTypes</tt> shall be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> (Table 34). All the types in +<tt>UTypes</tt> shall be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> (Table 35)</del>. +</p> + +<p> +12 <i>Returns:</i> A <tt>tuple</tt> object constructed by <ins>initializing the +<tt>i</tt><sup><i>th</i></sup> element with +<tt>std::forward<Ti>(get<i>(t))</tt> for all <tt>Ti</tt> in +<tt>TTypes</tt> and initializing the +<tt>(j+sizeof...(TTypes))</tt><sup><i>th</i></sup> element with +<tt>get<j>(u)</tt> for all <tt>Uj</tt> in <tt>UTypes</tt>.</ins> <del>move +constructing its first <tt>sizeof...(TTypes)</tt> elements from the +corresponding elements of <tt>t</tt> and copy constructing its last +<tt>sizeof...(UTypes)</tt> elements from the corresponding elements of +<tt>u</tt></del>. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class... TTypes, class... UTypes> +tuple<TTypes..., UTypes...> tuple_cat(const tuple<TTypes...>& t, tuple<UTypes...>&& u); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +13 <i>Requires:</i> <ins>Let <tt>i</tt> be in <tt>[0, sizeof...(TTypes))</tt>, +<tt>Ti</tt> be the <tt>i</tt><sup><i>th</i></sup> type in <tt>Types</tt>, +<tt>j</tt> be in <tt>[0, sizeof...(UTypes))</tt>, and <tt>Uj</tt> be the +<tt>j</tt><sup><i>th</i></sup> type in <tt>UTypes</tt>. +<tt>is_constructible<Ti, const Ti&>::value</tt> shall be <tt>true</tt> +for each type <tt>Ti</tt> and <tt>is_constructible<Uj, Uj>::value</tt> +shall be <tt>true</tt> for each type <tt>Uj</tt></ins> <del>All the types in +<tt>TTypes</tt> shall be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> (Table 35). All the types in +<tt>UTypes</tt> shall be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> (Table 34)</del>. +</p> + +<p> +14 <i>Returns:</i> A <tt>tuple</tt> object constructed by <ins>initializing the +<tt>i</tt><sup><i>th</i></sup> element with <tt>get<i>(t)</tt> for each +type <tt>Ti</tt> and initializing the +<tt>(j+sizeof...(TTypes))</tt><sup><i>th</i></sup> element with +<tt>std::forward<Uj>(get<j>(u))</tt> for each type <tt>Uj</tt></ins> +<del>copy constructing its first <tt>sizeof...(TTypes)</tt> elements from the +corresponding elements of <tt>t</tt> and move constructing its last +<tt>sizeof...(UTypes)</tt> elements from the corresponding elements of +<tt>u</tt></del>. +</p> +</blockquote> + +<pre>template <class... TTypes, class... UTypes> +tuple<TTypes..., UTypes...> tuple_cat(tuple<TTypes...>&& t, tuple<UTypes...>&& u); +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +15 <i>Requires:</i> <ins>Let <tt>i</tt> be in <tt>[0, sizeof...(TTypes))</tt>, +<tt>Ti</tt> be the <tt>i</tt><sup><i>th</i></sup> type in <tt>Types</tt>, +<tt>j</tt> be in <tt>[0, sizeof...(UTypes))</tt>, and <tt>Uj</tt> be the +<tt>j</tt><sup><i>th</i></sup> type in <tt>UTypes</tt>. +<tt>is_constructible<Ti, Ti>::value</tt> shall be <tt>true</tt> for each +type <tt>Ti</tt> and <tt>is_constructible<Uj, Uj>::value</tt> shall be +<tt>true</tt> for each type <tt>Uj</tt></ins> <del>All the types in +<tt>TTypes</tt> shall be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> (Table 34). All the types in +<tt>UTypes</tt> shall be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> (Table 34)</del>. +</p> + +<p> +16 <i>Returns:</i> A <tt>tuple</tt> object constructed by <ins>initializing the +<tt>i</tt><sup><i>th</i></sup> element with +<tt>std::forward<Ti>(get<i>(t))</tt> for each type <tt>Ti</tt> and +initializing the <tt>(j+sizeof...(TTypes))</tt><sup><i>th</i></sup> element with +<tt>std::forward<Uj>(get<j>(u))</tt> for each type <tt>Uj</tt></ins> +<del>move constructing its first <tt>sizeof...(TTypes)</tt> elements from the +corresponding elements of <tt>t</tt> and move constructing its last +<tt>sizeof...(UTypes)</tt> elements from the corresponding elements of +<tt>u</tt></del>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-10-24 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Accepting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3140.html">n3140</a> would solve this issue. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +See <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3140.html">n3140</a>. + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1327"></a>1327. templates defined in <tt><cmath></tt> replacing C macros with the same name</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.8 [c.math] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Michael Wong <b>Opened:</b> 2010-03-07 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#c.math">issues</a> in [c.math].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In 26.8 [c.math]p12 +The templates defined in <tt><cmath></tt> replace the C99 macros +with the same names. The templates have the following declarations: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>namespace std { +template <class T> bool signbit(T x); +template <class T> int fpclassify(T x); +template <class T> bool isfinite(T x); +template <class T> bool isinf(T x); +template <class T> bool isnan(T x); +template <class T> bool isnormal(T x); +template <class T> bool isgreater(T x, T y); +template <class T> bool isgreaterequal(T x, T y); +template <class T> bool isless(T x, T y); +template <class T> bool islessequal(T x, T y); +template <class T> bool islessgreater(T x, T y); +template <class T> bool isunordered(T x, T y); +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +and p13: +</p> + +<blockquote> +13 The templates behave the same as the C99 macros with corresponding +names defined in C99 7.12.3, Classification macros, and C99 7.12.14, +Comparison macros in the C standard. +</blockquote> + +<p> +The C Std versions look like this: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +7.12.14.1/p1: +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +Synopsis +</p> +<p> +1 <tt>#include <math.h></tt> +</p> +<pre>int isgreaterequal(real-floating x, real-floating y); +</pre> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +which is not necessarily the same types as is required by C++ since the +two parameters may be different. Would it not be better if it were truly +aligned with C? +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010 Pittsburgh: Bill to ask WG-14 if heterogeneous support for the +two-parameter macros is intended. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-09-13 Daniel comments: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +I recommend to resolve this issue as NAD Editorial because +the accepted resolution for NB comment <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3162.html#US136">US-136</a> +by motion 27 does address this. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-09-14 Bill comments: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Motion 27 directly addresses LWG 1327 and solves the problem +presented there. Moreover, the solution has been aired before +WG14 with no dissent. These functions now behave the same for +mixed-mode calls in both C and C++ +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Apply proposed resolution for <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3162.html#US136">US-136</a> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1328"></a>1328. istream extractors not setting failbit if eofbit is already set</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.1.1.3 [istream::sentry] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Paolo Carlini <b>Opened:</b> 2010-02-17 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-26</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#istream::sentry">issues</a> in [istream::sentry].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +basing on the recent discussion on the library reflector, see c++std-lib-27728 +and follow ups, I hereby formally ask for LWG 419 to be re-opened, the rationale +being that according to the current specifications, per +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n3000.pdf">n3000</a>, +it seems actually impossible to seek away from end of file, contrary to the +rationale which led <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#342">342</a> to its closure as NAD. My request is also +supported by Martin Sebor, and I'd like also to add, as tentative proposed +resolution for the re-opened issue, the wording suggested by Sebor, thus, change +the beginning of 27.7.1.1.3 [istream::sentry]/2, to: +</p> + +<blockquote> +2 <i>Effects:</i> If <tt><ins>(!noskipws && !</ins>is.good())</tt> is +<tt><del>false</del> <ins>true</ins></tt>, calls <tt>is.setstate(failbit)</tt>. +Otherwise prepares for formatted or unformatted input. ... +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-10 Batavia" +]</i></p> + +<p> +Resolved by adopting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3168.htm">n3168</a>. +</p> + +<p> +Previous proposed resolution: +</p><p> +Change 27.7.1.1.3 [istream::sentry]/2: +</p> + +<blockquote> +2 <i>Effects:</i> If <tt><ins>(!noskipws && !</ins>is.good())</tt> is +<tt><del>false</del> <ins>true</ins></tt>, calls <tt>is.setstate(failbit)</tt>. +Otherwise prepares for formatted or unformatted input. ... +</blockquote> + + + +<p></p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Addressed by paper <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3168.htm">n3168</a>. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1333"></a>1333. Missing forwarding during std::function invocation</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8.14.2.4 [func.wrap.func.inv] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2010-03-26 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#func.wrap.func.inv">issues</a> in [func.wrap.func.inv].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The current wording of 20.8.14.2.4 [func.wrap.func.inv]/1: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>R operator()(ArgTypes... args) const +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<i>Effects:</i> <tt><i>INVOKE</i>(f, t1, t2, ..., tN, R)</tt> (20.8.2), where +<tt>f</tt> is the target object (20.8.1) of <tt>*this</tt> and <tt>t1, t2, ..., +tN</tt> are the values in <tt>args...</tt>. +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +uses an unclear relation between the actual args and the used variables +<tt>ti</tt>. It should be made clear, that <tt>std::forward</tt> has to be used +to conserve the expression lvalueness. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Post-Rapperswil: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 20.8.14.2.4 [func.wrap.func.inv]/1+2 as indicated: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>R operator()(ArgTypes... args) const +</pre> + +<blockquote> +<p> +1 <i>Effects:</i>: <tt><i>INVOKE</i>(f, +<ins>std::forward<ArgTypes>(args)...</ins><del>t1, t2, ..., tN</del>, +R)</tt> (20.8.2), where <tt>f</tt> is the target object (20.8.1) of +<tt>*this</tt> <del>and <tt>t1, t2, ..., tN</tt> are the values in +<tt>args...</tt></del>. +</p> + +<p> +2 <i>Returns:</i> Nothing if <tt>R</tt> is <tt>void</tt>, otherwise the return +value of <tt><i>INVOKE</i>(f, +<ins>std::forward<ArgTypes>(args)...</ins><del>t1, t2, ..., tN</del>, +R)</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +3 <i>Throws:</i> <tt>bad_function_call</tt> if <tt>!*this</tt>; otherwise, any +exception thrown by the wrapped callable object. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1334"></a>1334. Insert iterators are broken for some proxy containers compared to C++03</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 24.5.2.2.2 [back.insert.iter.op=], 24.5.2.4.2 [front.insert.iter.op=], X [insert.insert.iter.op=] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2010-03-28 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-24</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In C++03 this was valid code: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>#include <vector> +#include <iterator> + +int main() { + typedef std::vector<bool> Cont; + Cont c; + std::back_insert_iterator<Cont> it = std::back_inserter(c); + *it = true; +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +In C++0x this code does no longer compile because of an ambiguity error for this +<tt>operator=</tt> overload pair: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>back_insert_iterator<Container>& +operator=(typename Container::const_reference value); + +back_insert_iterator<Container>& +operator=(typename Container::value_type&& value); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +This is so, because for proxy-containers like <tt>std::vector<bool></tt> +the <tt>const_reference</tt> usually is a non-reference type and in this case +it's identical to <tt>Container::value_type</tt>, thus forming the ambiguous +overload pair +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>back_insert_iterator<Container>& +operator=(bool value); + +back_insert_iterator<Container>& +operator=(bool&& value); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +The same problem exists for <tt>std::back_insert_iterator</tt>, +<tt>std::front_insert_iterator</tt>, and <tt>std::insert_iterator</tt>. +</p> + +<p> +One possible fix would be to require that <tt>const_reference</tt> of a proxy +container must not be the same as the <tt>value_type</tt>, but this would break +earlier valid code. The alternative would be to change the first signature to +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>back_insert_iterator<Container>& +operator=(const typename Container::const_reference& value); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +This would have the effect that this signature <em>always</em> expects an lvalue +or rvalue, but it would not create an ambiguity relative to the second form with +rvalue-references. [For all non-proxy containers the signature will be the same +as before due to reference-collapsing and const folding rules] +</p> + + +<p><i>[ +Post-Rapperswil +]</i></p> + + +<p> +This problem is not restricted to the unspeakable <tt>vector<bool></tt>, but is already existing for other proxy +containers like gcc's <tt>rope</tt> class. The following code does no longer work ([Bug libstdc++/44963]): +</p> +<blockquote><pre>#include <iostream> +#include <ext/rope> + +using namespace std; + +int main() +{ + __gnu_cxx::crope line("test"); + auto ii(back_inserter(line)); + + *ii++ = 'm'; // #1 + *ii++ = 'e'; // #2 + + cout << line << endl; +} +</pre></blockquote> +<p> +Both lines marked with #1 and #2 issue now an error because the library has properly implemented the current +wording state (Thanks to Paolo Calini for making me aware of this real-life example). +</p> +<p> +The following P/R is a revision of the orignal P/R and was initially suggested by Howard +Hinnant. Paolo verified that the approach works in gcc. +</p> + +<blockquote> +Moved to Tentatively Ready with revised wording after 6 positive votes on c++std-lib. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p><i>The wording refers to N3126.</i></p> + +<ol> +<li>Change [back.insert.iterator], class <tt>back_insert_iterator</tt> synopsis as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class Container> +class back_insert_iterator : + public iterator<output_iterator_tag,void,void,void,void> { +protected: + Container* container; +public: + [..] + back_insert_iterator<Container>& + operator=(<ins>const</ins> typename Container::<del>const_reference</del><ins>value_type&</ins> value); + back_insert_iterator<Container>& + operator=(typename Container::value_type&& value); + [..] +}; +</pre></blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change [back.insert.iter.op=] before p. 1 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>back_insert_iterator<Container>& + operator=(<ins>const</ins> typename Container::<del>const_reference</del><ins>value_type&</ins> value); +</pre> +<blockquote> +1 <em>Effects</em>: <tt>container->push_back(value)</tt>;<br> +2 <em>Returns</em>: <tt>*this</tt>. +</blockquote></blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change [front.insert.iterator], class <tt>front_insert_iterator</tt> synposis as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class Container> +class front_insert_iterator : + public iterator<output_iterator_tag,void,void,void,void> { +protected: + Container* container; +public: + [..] + front_insert_iterator<Container>& + operator=(<ins>const</ins> typename Container::<del>const_reference</del><ins>value_type&</ins> value); + front_insert_iterator<Container>& + operator=(typename Container::value_type&& value); + [..] +}; +</pre></blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change [front.insert.iter.op=] before p.1 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>front_insert_iterator<Container>& + operator=(<ins>const</ins> typename Container::<del>const_reference</del><ins>value_type&</ins> value); +</pre> +<blockquote> +1 <em>Effects</em>: <tt>container->push_front(value)</tt>;<br> +2 <em>Returns</em>: <tt>*this</tt>. +</blockquote></blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change [insert.iterator], class insert_iterator synopsis as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class Container> + class insert_iterator : + public iterator<output_iterator_tag,void,void,void,void> { + protected: + Container* container; + typename Container::iterator iter; + public: + [..] + insert_iterator<Container>& + operator=(<ins>const</ins> typename Container::<del>const_reference</del><ins>value_type&</ins> value); + insert_iterator<Container>& + operator=(typename Container::value_type&& value); + [..] + }; +</pre></blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change [insert.iter.op=] before p. 1 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>insert_iterator<Container>& + operator=(<ins>const</ins> typename Container::<del>const_reference</del><ins>value_type&</ins> value); +</pre> +<blockquote> +1 <em>Effects</em>: +<blockquote><pre> iter = container->insert(iter, value); + ++iter; +</pre></blockquote> +2 <em>Returns</em>: <tt>*this</tt>. +</blockquote></blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1335"></a>1335. Insufficient requirements for <tt>tuple::operator<()</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.4.2.7 [tuple.rel] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Joe Gottman <b>Opened:</b> 2010-05-15 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#tuple.rel">issues</a> in [tuple.rel].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The requirements section for <tt>std::tuple</tt> says the following: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<i>Requires:</i> For all <tt>i</tt>, where <tt>0 <= i and i < +sizeof...(Types)</tt>, <tt>get<i>(t) < get<i>(u)</tt> is a valid +expression returning a type that is convertible to <tt>bool</tt>. +<tt>sizeof...(TTypes) == sizeof...(UTypes)</tt>. +</blockquote> + +<p> +This is necessary but not sufficient, as the algorithm for comparing +<tt>tuple</tt>s also computes <tt>get<i>(u) < get<i>(t)</tt> +(note the order) +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Post-Rapperswil +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Tentatively Ready with updated wording correcting change-bars after 6 positive votes on c++std-lib. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<ol> +<li>Change [tuple.rel] before p. 4 as indicated [<strong>Remark to the editor: This paragraph doesn't have a number yet, +but it seems to me as if it should have one</strong>]: +<blockquote><pre>template<class... TTypes, class... UTypes> +bool operator<(const tuple<TTypes...>& t, const tuple<UTypes...>& u); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<em>Requires</em>: For all <tt>i</tt>, where <tt>0 <= i</tt> and <tt>i < sizeof...(Types)</tt>, +<tt>get<i>(t) < get<i>(u)</tt> <ins>and <tt>get<i>(u) < get<i>(t)</tt></ins><del>is +a valid expression returning a type that is</del><ins> are valid expressions returning types that +are</ins> convertible to <tt>bool</tt>. <tt>sizeof...(TTypes) == sizeof...(UTypes)</tt>. +</blockquote></blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1337"></a>1337. Swapped arguments in <tt>regex_traits::isctype</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 28.7 [re.traits] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2010-06-21 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-24</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#re.traits">issues</a> in [re.traits].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +28.7 [re.traits]/12 describes <tt>regex_traits::isctype</tt> in terms +of <tt>ctype::is(c, m)</tt>, where <tt>c</tt> is a <tt>charT</tt> and <tt>m</tt> +is a <tt>ctype_base::mask</tt>. Unfortunately 22.4.1.1.1 [locale.ctype.members] +specifies this function as <tt>ctype::is(m, c)</tt> +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Post-Rapperswil: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Change 28.7 [re.traits]/12: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>bool isctype(charT c, char_class_type f) const; +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +11 ... +</p> +<p> +12 <i>Returns:</i> Converts <tt>f</tt> into a value <tt>m</tt> of type +<tt>std::ctype_base::mask</tt> in an unspecified manner, and returns +<tt>true</tt> if <tt>use_facet<ctype<charT> +>(getloc()).is(<del>c</del><ins>m</ins>, <del>m</del><ins>c</ins>)</tt> is +<tt>true</tt>. Otherwise returns <tt>true</tt> if <tt>f</tt> bitwise or'ed with +the result of calling <tt>lookup_classname</tt> with an iterator pair that +designates the character sequence <tt>"w"</tt> is not equal to 0 and <tt>c == +'_'</tt>, or if <tt>f</tt> bitwise or'ed with the result of calling +<tt>lookup_classname</tt> with an iterator pair that designates the character +sequence <tt>"blank"</tt> is not equal to 0 and <tt>c</tt> is one of an +implementation-defined subset of the characters for which <tt>isspace(c, +getloc())</tt> returns <tt>true</tt>, otherwise returns <tt>false</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1338"></a>1338. LWG 1205 incorrectly applied</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.2.13 [alg.search] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2010-06-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-24</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#alg.search">issues</a> in [alg.search].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +LWG <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1205">1205</a> (currently in WP) clarified the return value of several +algorithms when dealing with empty ranges. In particular it recommended for +25.2.13 [alg.search]: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class ForwardIterator1, class ForwardIterator2> + ForwardIterator1 + search(ForwardIterator1 first1, ForwardIterator1 last1, + ForwardIterator2 first2, ForwardIterator2 last2); + +template<class ForwardIterator1, class ForwardIterator2, + class BinaryPredicate> + ForwardIterator1 + search(ForwardIterator1 first1, ForwardIterator1 last1, + ForwardIterator2 first2, ForwardIterator2 last2, + BinaryPredicate pred); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +1 <i>Effects:</i> ... +</p> +<p> +2 <i>Returns:</i> ... Returns <tt>last1</tt> if no such iterator is found. +</p> +<p><ins> +3 <i>Remarks:</i> Returns <tt>first1</tt> if <tt>[first2,last2)</tt> is empty. +</ins></p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +Unfortunately this got translated to an incorrect specification for what gets +returned when no such iterator is found (N3092): +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template<class ForwardIterator1, class ForwardIterator2> + ForwardIterator1 + search(ForwardIterator1 first1, ForwardIterator1 last1, + ForwardIterator2 first2, ForwardIterator2 last2); + +template<class ForwardIterator1, class ForwardIterator2, + class BinaryPredicate> + ForwardIterator1 + search(ForwardIterator1 first1, ForwardIterator1 last1, + ForwardIterator2 first2, ForwardIterator2 last2, + BinaryPredicate pred); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +1 <i>Effects:</i> ... +</p> +<p> +2 <i>Returns:</i> ... Returns <tt>first1</tt> if <tt>[first2,last2)</tt> is +empty or if no such iterator is found. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p> +LWG <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1205">1205</a> is correct and N3092 is not equivalent nor correct. +</p> + +<p> +I have not reviewed the other 10 recommendations of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1205">1205</a>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Post-Rapperswil +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +It was verified that none of the remaining possibly affected algorithms does have any similar problems and a concrete P/R was added +that used a similar style as has been applied to the other cases. +</blockquote> + +<blockquote> +Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<ol> +<li>Change [alg.search]/2 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template<class ForwardIterator1, class ForwardIterator2> + ForwardIterator1 + search(ForwardIterator1 first1, ForwardIterator1 last1, + ForwardIterator2 first2, ForwardIterator2 last2); + +template<class ForwardIterator1, class ForwardIterator2, + class BinaryPredicate> + ForwardIterator1 + search(ForwardIterator1 first1, ForwardIterator1 last1, + ForwardIterator2 first2, ForwardIterator2 last2, + BinaryPredicate pred); +</pre> +<blockquote><p> +1 - [...] +</p> +2 - <em>Returns</em>: The first iterator <tt>i</tt> in the range <tt>[first1,last1 - (last2-first2))</tt> such that for any nonnegative +integer <tt>n</tt> less than <tt>last2 - first2</tt> the following corresponding conditions hold: <tt>*(i + n) == *(first2 + n)</tt>, +<tt>pred(*(i + n), *(first2 + n)) != false</tt>. Returns <tt>first1</tt> if <tt>[first2,last2)</tt> is empty <del>or</del><ins>, otherwise + returns <tt>last1</tt></ins> if no such iterator is found. +</blockquote></blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1339"></a>1339. <tt>uninitialized_fill_n</tt> should return the end of its range</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.8.4 [uninitialized.fill.n] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Jared Hoberock <b>Opened:</b> 2010-07-14 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-23</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3092.pdf">N3092's</a> +specification of <tt>uninitialized_fill_n</tt> discards useful information and +is inconsistent with other algorithms such as <tt>fill_n</tt> which accept an +iterator and a size. As currently specified, <tt>unintialized_fill_n</tt> +requires an additional linear traversal to find the end of the range. +</p> + +<p> +Instead of returning <tt>void</tt>, <tt>unintialized_fill_n</tt> should return +one past the last iterator it dereferenced. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Post-Rapperswil: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In section 20.9 [memory] change:, +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class ForwardIterator, class Size, class T> + <del>void</del> <ins>ForwardIterator</ins> uninitialized_fill_n(ForwardIterator first, Size n, const T& x); +</pre></blockquote> + + +<p> +In section 20.9.8.4 [uninitialized.fill.n] change, +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>template <class ForwardIterator, class Size, class T> + <del>void</del> <ins>ForwardIterator</ins> uninitialized_fill_n(ForwardIterator first, Size n, const T& x); +</pre> +<blockquote> +<p> +1 <i>Effects:</i> +</p> +<blockquote><pre>for (; n--; ++first) + ::new (static_cast<void*>(&*first)) + typename iterator_traits<ForwardIterator>::value_type(x); +<ins>return first;</ins> +</pre></blockquote> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1340"></a>1340. Why does <tt>forward_list::resize</tt> take the object to be copied by value?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.3.3.4 [forwardlist.modifiers] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> +James McNellis <b>Opened:</b> 2010-07-16 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-24</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#forwardlist.modifiers">issues</a> in [forwardlist.modifiers].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3092.pdf">N3092</a> +23.3.3.4 [forwardlist.modifiers], the <tt>resize()</tt> member function is +declared as: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void resize(size_type sz, value_type c); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +The other sequence containers (<tt>list</tt>, <tt>deque</tt>, and +<tt>vector</tt>) take <tt>'c'</tt> by const reference. +</p> + +<p> +Is there a reason for this difference? If not, then <tt>resize()</tt> should +be declared as: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>void resize(size_type sz, const value_type& c); +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +The declaration would need to be changed both at its declaration in the class +definition at 23.3.3 [forwardlist]/3 and where its behavior is specified +at 23.3.3.4 [forwardlist.modifiers]/22. +</p> + +<p> +This would make <tt>forward_list</tt> consistent with the CD1 issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#679">679</a>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Post-Rapperswil +]</i></p> + + +<p> +Daniel changed the P/R slightly, because one paragraph number has been changed since the issue +had been submitted. He also added a similar Requires element that exists in all other containers with +a <tt>resize</tt> member function. He deliberately did not touch the wrong usage of "default-constructed" because that +will be taken care of by LWG issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#868">868</a>. +</p> + +<blockquote> +Moved to Tentatively Ready with revised wording after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + + +<ol> +<li>Change [forwardlist]/3, class template <tt>forward_list</tt> synopsis, as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>... +void resize(size_type sz); +void resize(size_type sz, <ins>const</ins> value_type<ins>&</ins> c); +void clear(); +... +</pre></blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change [forwardlist.modifiers]/27 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre> +void resize(size_type sz); +void resize(size_type sz, <ins>const</ins> value_type<ins>&</ins> c); +</pre> +<blockquote> +27 <em>Effects</em>: If <tt>sz < distance(begin(), end())</tt>, erases the last <tt>distance(begin(), end()) - sz</tt> elements +from the list. Otherwise, inserts <tt>sz - distance(begin(), end())</tt> elements at the end of the list. For the first +signature the inserted elements are default constructed, and for the second signature they are copies of <tt>c</tt>. +<p> +<ins>28 - <em>Requires</em>: <tt>T</tt> shall be <tt>DefaultConstructible</tt> for the first form and it shall be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> + for the second form.</ins></p> +</blockquote></blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1344"></a>1344. [FCD] Replace <tt>throw()</tt> with <tt>noexcept</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17 [library] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-29</p> +<p><b>View other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index-open.html#library">active issues</a> in [library].</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#library">issues</a> in [library].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1351">1351</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses GB-60, CH-16</b></p> +<p> +Dynamic exception specifications are deprecated; the +library should recognise this by replacing all non-throwing +exception specifications of the form <tt>throw()</tt> with the +<tt>noexcept</tt> form. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Resolution proposed by ballot comment: +]</i></p> + +<p> +Replace all non-throwing exception specifications +of the form 'throw()' with the 'noexcept' form. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-10-31 Daniel comments: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +The proposed resolution of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3148.html">n3148</a> +would satisfy this request. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-Batavia: +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +Resolved by adopting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3148.html">n3148</a>. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +See <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3148.html">n3148</a> +See <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3150.html">n3150</a> +See <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3195.html">n3195</a> +See <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3155.html">n3155</a> +See <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3156.html">n3156</a> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1346"></a>1346. [FCD] Apply <tt>noexcept</tt> where library specification does not permit exceptions</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17 [library] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-29</p> +<p><b>View other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index-open.html#library">active issues</a> in [library].</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#library">issues</a> in [library].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1352">1352</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses GB-62, CH-17</b></p> +<p> +Issues with efficiency and unsatisfactory semantics mean +many library functions document they do not throw +exceptions with a Throws: Nothing clause, but do not +advertise it with an exception specification. The semantic +issues are largely resolved with the new 'noexcept' +specifications, and the noexcept operator means we will +want to detect these guarantees programatically in order +to construct programs taking advantage of the guarantee. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Resolution proposed by ballot comment: +]</i></p> + +<p> +Add a <tt>noexcept</tt> exception specification on each +libary API that offers an unconditional <i>Throws</i>: +Nothing guarantee. Where the guarantee is +conditional, add the appropriate +<tt>noexcept(<i>constant-expression</i>)</tt> if an appropriate +constant expression exists. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-10-31 Daniel comments: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +The proposed resolution of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3149.html">n3149</a> +would satisfy this request. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-Batavia: +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +Resolved by adopting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3149.html">n3149</a>. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +This issue is resolved by the adoption of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3195.html">n3195</a> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1347"></a>1347. [FCD] Apply <tt>noexcept</tt> judiciously throughout the library</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17 [library] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-29</p> +<p><b>View other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index-open.html#library">active issues</a> in [library].</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#library">issues</a> in [library].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses GB-63, US-80</b></p> +<p> +Since the newly introduced operator <tt>noexcept</tt> makes it +easy (easier than previously) to detect whether or not a +function has been declared with the empty exception +specification (including <tt>noexcept</tt>) library functions that +cannot throw should be decorated with the empty +exception specification. Failing to do so and leaving it as a +matter of QoI would be detrimental to portability and +efficiency. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Resolution proposed by ballot comment +]</i></p> + +<p> +Review the whole library, and apply the <tt>noexcept</tt> +specification where it is appropriate. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-10-31 Daniel comments: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +The proposed resolution of the combination of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3155.html">n3155</a>, +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3156.html">n3156</a>, +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3157.html">n3157</a>, +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3167.html">n3167</a> +would satisfy this request. The paper <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3150.html">n3150</a> is related +to this as well. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010 Batavia: +]</i></p> + +<p> +While the LWG expects to see further papers in this area, sufficient action was taken in Batavia to close the issue as Resolved by the listed papers. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +See <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3155.html">n3155</a>, +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3156.html">n3156</a>, +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3157.html">n3157</a>, +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3167.html">n3167</a> and remotely +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3150.html">n3150</a> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1354"></a>1354. [FCD] The definition of deadlock excludes cases involving a single thread</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17.3.8 [defns.deadlock] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-24</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses GB-52</b></p> +<p> +The definition of deadlock in 17.3.7 excludes cases +involving a single thread making it incorrect. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Resolution proposed by ballot comment +]</i></p> + +<p> +The definition should be corrected. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010 Batavia Concurrency group provides a Proposed Resolution +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Change 17.3.8 [defns.deadlock] as indicated: +<blockquote> +<b>deadlock</b> +<p> +<del>two</del><ins>one</ins> or more threads are unable to continue execution because each is blocked waiting for one or more of the +others to satisfy some condition. +</p></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1355"></a>1355. [FCD] The definition of move-assignment operator is redundant</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17.3.16 [defns.move.assign.op] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-23</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses GB-50</b></p> +<p> +This definition of move-assignment operator is redundant +and confusing now that the term move-assignment +operator is defined by the core language in subclause +12.8p21. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-10-24 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Accepting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3142.html">n3142</a> provides a superior resolution. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Resolution proposed by ballot comment +]</i></p> + +<p> +Strike subclause 17.3.16 [defns.move.assign.op]. +Add a cross-reference to (12.8) to 17.3.12. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Resolved by paper <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3142.html">n3142</a>. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1356"></a>1356. [FCD] The definition of move-constructor is redundant</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17.3.17 [defns.move.ctor] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-23</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses GB-51</b></p> +<p> +This definition of move-constructor is redundant and +confusing now that the term constructor is defined by the +core language in subclause 12.8p3. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-10-24 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Accepting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3142.html">n3142</a> provides a superior resolution. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010 Batavia: resolved as NAD Editorial by adopting paper <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3142.html">n3142</a>. +]</i></p> + +<p> +Original proposed resolution preserved for reference: +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +Strike subclause 17.3.14, [defns.move.ctor] +</p> + +<blockquote><del> +<b>17.3.14 [defns.move.ctor]</b><br> +move constructor a constructor which accepts only an rvalue argument of the type being constructed and might modify the argument as a side effect during construction. +</del></blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Resolved by paper <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3142.html">n3142</a>. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1357"></a>1357. [FCD] Library bitmask types to not satisfy the bimask type requirements</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17.5.2.1.3 [bitmask.types] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#bitmask.types">issues</a> in [bitmask.types].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses GB-53</b></p> +<p> +The bitmask types defined in 27.5.2 and 28.5 contradict +the bitmask type requirements in 17.5.2.1.3, and have +missing or incorrectly defined operators. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Resolution proposed by ballot comment +]</i></p> + +<p> +See Appendix 1 - Additional Details +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010 - Rapperswil +]</i></p> + +<p> +The paper <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3110.html">n3110</a> +was made available during the meeting to resolve this comment, but withdrawn from formal motions +to give others time to review the document. There was no technical objection, and it is expected +that this paper will go forward at the next meeting. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +See <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3110.html">n3110</a>. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1360"></a>1360. [FCD] Add <tt><atomic></tt> to free-standing implementations</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17.6.1.3 [compliance] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-24</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#compliance">issues</a> in [compliance].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses GB-57</b></p> +<p> +The atomic operations facility is closely tied to clause 1 +and the memory model. It is not easily supplied as an +after-market extension, and should be trivial to implement +of a single-threaded serial machine. The consequence of +not having this facility will be poor interoperability with +future C++ libraries that memory model concerns +seriously, and attempt to treat them in a portable way. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Resolved in Rapperswil by a motion to directly apply the words from the ballot comment in N3102. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Add <tt><atomic></tt> to table 15, headers required for a +free-standing implementation. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1362"></a>1362. [FCD] Description of binding to rvalue-references should use the new 'xvalue' vocabulary</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 17.6.3.9 [res.on.arguments] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-24</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#res.on.arguments">issues</a> in [res.on.arguments].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses US-82</b></p> +<p> +17.6.3.9 [res.on.arguments] p.1. b.3: The second Note can benefit by adopting recent nomenclature. +</p> + + +<p><i>[ +Resolution proposed by the ballot comment: +]</i></p> + +<p> +Rephrase the Note in terms of xvalue. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Pre-Batavia: +]</i></p> + +<p> +Walter Brown provides wording. +</p> + +<p><i>[Batavia: Immediate]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p> +Amend the note in 17.6.3.9 [res.on.arguments] p1 bullet 3. +</p> +<blockquote> +[ <i>Note</i>: If a program casts an lvalue to an <del>rvalue</del><ins>xvalue</ins> while passing that lvalue to a library function (e.g. by calling the function with the argument <tt>move(x)</tt>), the program is effectively asking that function to treat that lvalue as a temporary. The implementation is free to optimize away aliasing checks which might be needed if the argument was anlvalue. <i>—endnote</i>] +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1363"></a>1363. [FCD] <tt>offsetof</tt> should be marked <tt>noexcept</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.2 [support.types] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-24</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#support.types">issues</a> in [support.types].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses GB-68</b></p> +<p> +There is no reason for the offsetof macro to invoke +potentially throwing operations, so the result of +noexcept(offsetof(type,member-designator)) should be +true. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Resolved in Rapperswil by a motion to directly apply the words from the ballot comment in N3102. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Add to the end of 18.2p4:</p> +<blockquote><ins> +No operation invoked by the offsetof macro shall +throw an exception, and +<tt>noexcept(offsetof(type,member-designator))</tt> shall +be true.</ins> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1365"></a>1365. [FCD] Thread-safety of handler functions</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.6.2 [alloc.errors] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses GB-71</b></p> +<p> +The thread safety of <tt>std::set_new_handler()</tt>, +<tt>std::set_unexpected()</tt>, <tt>std::set_terminate()</tt>, is +unspecified making the the functions impossible to use in a thread +safe manner. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Resolution proposed by ballot comment: +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +The thread safety guarantees for the functions +must be specified and new interfaces should be +provided to make it possible to query and install +handlers in a thread safe way. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-10-31 Daniel comments: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +The proposed resolution of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3122.html">n3122</a> +partially addresses this request. This issue is related to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1366">1366</a>. +</blockquote> + + +<p><i>[ +2010-Batavia: +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +Resolved by adopting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3189.html">n3189</a>. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Resolved in Batavia by accepting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3189.html">n3189</a>. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1366"></a>1366. [FCD] New-handler and data races</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.6.1.4 [new.delete.dataraces] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> DIN <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-29</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses DE-14</b></p> +<p> +It is unclear how a user replacement function can +simultaneously satisfy the race-free conditions imposed in +this clause and query the new-handler in case of a failed +allocation with the only available, mutating interface +<tt>std::set_new_handler</tt>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Resolution proposed by ballot comment: +]</i></p> + +<p> +Offer a non-mutating interface to query the current new-handler. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-10-24 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Accepting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3122.html">n3122</a> would solve this issue. +This issue is related to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1365">1365</a>. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-Batavia: +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +Resolved by adopting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3189.html">n3189</a>. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Resolved in Batavia by accepting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3189.html">n3189</a>. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1367"></a>1367. [FCD] Deprecate library support for checking dynamic exception specifications</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> D.13 [exception.unexpected] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-24</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses GB-72</b></p> +<p> +Dynamic exception specifications are deprecated, so +clause 18.8.2 that describes library support for this facility +should move to Annex D, with the exception of the +<tt>bad_exception</tt> class which is retained to indicate other +failures in the exception dispatch mechanism (e.g. calling +<tt>current_exception()</tt>). +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Resolved in Rapperswil by a motion to directly apply the words from the ballot comment in N3102. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +With the exception of 18.8.2.1 [bad.exception], +move clause 18.8.2 diectly to Annex D. +[bad.exception] should simply become the new +18.8.2. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1368"></a>1368. [FCD] Thread safety of <tt>std::uncaught_exception()</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.8.4 [uncaught] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-24</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses GB-73</b></p> +<p> +The thread safety <tt>std::uncaught_exception()</tt> and the +result of the function when multiple threads throw +exceptions at the same time are unspecified. To make the +function safe to use in the presence of exceptions in +multiple threads the specification needs to be updated. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Resolution proposed by ballot comment +]</i></p> + +<p> +Update this clause to support safe calls from +multiple threads without placing synchronization +requirements on the user. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010 Batavia Concurrency group provides a Proposed Resolution +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change 18.8.4 [uncaught] p. 1 as follows:</p> +<p> +<i>Returns</i>: <tt>true</tt> after <ins> the current thread has initialized </ins><del>initializing</del> + an exception object (15.1) until a handler for the exception (including <tt>unexpected()</tt> or <tt>terminate()</tt>) + is activated (15.3). [ <i>Note</i>: This includes stack unwinding (15.2). — <i>end note</i> ] +</p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1370"></a>1370. [FCD] <tt>throw_with_nested</tt> should not use perfect forwarding</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 18.8.6 [except.nested] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-24</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#except.nested">issues</a> in [except.nested].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses US-84</b></p> +<p> +The <tt>throw_with_nested</tt> specification passes in its argument as +<tt>T&&</tt> (perfect forwarding pattern), but then discusses +requirements on <tt>T</tt> without taking into account that <tt>T</tt> +may be an lvalue-reference type. It is also not clear in the spec that +<tt>t</tt> is intended to be perfectly forwarded. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Resolution proposed by ballot comment +]</i></p> + +<p> +Patch [except.nested] p6-7 to match the intent with regards to +requirements on <tt>T</tt> and the use of +<tt>std::forward<T>(t)</tt>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-10-24 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Accepting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3144.html">n3144</a> would solve this issue. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[2010-11-10 Batavia: LWG accepts Howard's updated wording with +corrected boo boos reported by Sebastian Gesemann and Pete Becker, +which is approved for Immediate adoption this meeting.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p><i>Change 18.8.7 nested_exception [except.nested] as indicated:</i></p> +<blockquote> + <pre>[[noreturn]] template <class T> void throw_with_nested(T&& t); +</pre> + <blockquote> + <p><ins>Let <tt>U</tt> be <tt>remove_reference<T>::type</tt> </ins></p> + <p>6 <i>Requires:</i> <tt><del>T</del> <ins>U</ins></tt> shall be <tt> + CopyConstructible</tt>. </p> + <p>7 <i>Throws:</i> If <tt><del>T</del> <ins>U</ins></tt> is a non-union + class type not derived from <tt>nested_exception</tt>, an exception of + unspecified type that is publicly derived from both <tt><del>T</del> <ins>U</ins></tt> + and <tt>nested_exception</tt> <ins>and constructed from <tt>std::forward<T>(t)</tt></ins>, + otherwise <ins>throws</ins> <tt><ins>std::forward<T>(</ins>t<ins>)</ins></tt>. + </p> + </blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1372"></a>1372. [FCD] Adopt recommended practice for standard error categories</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 19.5.1.5 [syserr.errcat.objects] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-19</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses GB-76</b></p> +<p> +The C++0x FCD recommends, in a note (see 19.5.1.1/1), that users +create a single <tt>error_category</tt> object for each user defined error +category and specifies <tt>error_category</tt> equality comparsions based on +equality of addresses (19.5.1.3). The Draft apparently ignores this +when specifying standard error category objects in section 19.5.1.5, +by allowing the <tt>generic_category()</tt> and <tt>system_category()</tt> +functions to return distinct objects for each invocation. +</p> +<p><i>[ +Resolved in Rapperswil by a motion to directly apply the words from the ballot comment in N3102. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Append a new sentence to 19.5.1.5 [syserr.errcat.objects]/1, and append +the same sentence to 19.5.1.5/3. +</p> +<blockquote><ins> +All calls of this function return references to the same object. +</ins></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1377"></a>1377. [FCD] The revised <tt>forward</tt> is not compatible with access-control</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.3 [utility] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#utility">issues</a> in [utility].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses US-90</b></p> +<p> +In n3090, at variance with previous iterations of the idea +discussed in papers and incorporated in WDs, +<tt>std::forward</tt> is constrained via <tt>std::is_convertible</tt>, +thus is not robust wrt access control. This causes problems in +normal uses as implementation detail of member +functions. For example, the following snippet leads to a +compile time failure, whereas that was not the case for an +implementation along the lines of n2835 (using <tt>enable_if</tt>s +instead of concepts for the constraining, of course) +</p> +<pre>#include <utility> +struct Base { Base(Base&&); }; + +struct Derived + : private Base +{ + Derived(Derived&& d) + : Base(std::forward<Base>(d)) { } +}; +</pre> +<p> +In other terms, LWG 1054 can be resolved in a better +way, the present status is not acceptable. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-10-24 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Accepting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3143.html">n3143</a> would solve this issue. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Resolved as NAD Editorial by paper <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3143.html">n3143</a>. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1378"></a>1378. [FCD] <tt>pair</tt> and <tt>tuple</tt> have too many conversions</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.3.5 [pairs] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> DIN <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-26</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#pairs">issues</a> in [pairs].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses DE-15</b></p> +<p> +Several function templates of <tt>pair</tt> and <tt>tuple</tt> allow for too +many implicit conversions, for example: +</p> +<pre>#include <tuple> +std::tuple<char*> p(0); // Error? + +struct A { explicit A(int){} }; +A a = 1; // Error +std::tuple<A> ta = std::make_tuple(1); // OK? +</pre> + +<p><i>[ +Resolution proposed by ballot comment +]</i></p> + +<p> +Consider to add wording to constrain these function templates. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-10-24 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Accepting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3140.html">n3140</a> would solve this issue. +</blockquote> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +See <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3140.html">n3140</a>. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1379"></a>1379. [FCD] <tt>pair</tt> copy-assignment not consistent for references</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.3.5.2 [pairs.pair] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-26</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#pairs.pair">issues</a> in [pairs.pair].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses US-95</b></p> +<p> +Copy-assignment for <tt>pair</tt> is defaulted and does not work +for pairs with reference members. This is inconsistent with +conversion-assignment, which deliberately succeeds even +if one or both elements are reference types, just as for +<tt>tuple</tt>. The copy-assignment operator should be +consistent with the conversion-assignment operator and +with <tt>tuple</tt>'s assignment operators. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-10-24 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Accepting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3140.html">n3140</a> would provide a superior resolution, +because <tt>pair</tt> does not depend on the semantic requirements of <tt>CopyAssignable</tt>. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + +<p> +Resolved by adopting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3140.html">n3140</a>. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Add to <tt>pair</tt> synopsis: +<blockquote> +<tt>pair& operator=(const pair& p);</tt> +</blockquote> +<p> +Add before paragraph 9: +</p> +<blockquote> +<tt>pair& operator=(const pair& p);</tt> +<blockquote> +<p> +<i>Requires</i>: <tt>T1</tt> and <tt>T2</tt> shall satisfy the +requirements of <tt>CopyAssignable</tt>. +</p> +<p> +<i>Effects</i>: Assigns <tt>p.first</tt> to <tt>first</tt> and <tt>p.second</tt> to +<tt>second</tt>. +<i>Returns</i>: <tt>*this</tt>. +</p> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1380"></a>1380. [FCD] <tt>pair</tt> and <tt>tuple</tt> of references need to better specify move-semantics</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.3.5 [pairs] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> DIN <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-26</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#pairs">issues</a> in [pairs].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses DE-16</b></p> +<p> +Several <tt>pair</tt> and <tt>tuple</tt> functions in regard to move +operations are incorrectly specified if the member types +are references, because the result of a <tt>std::move</tt> cannot +be assigned to lvalue-references. In this context the usage +of the requirement sets <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> and +<tt>CopyConstructible</tt> also doesn't make sense, because +non-const lvalue-references cannot satisfy these requirements. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Resolution proposed by ballot comment +]</i></p> + +<p> +Replace the usage of <tt>std::move</tt> by that of +<tt>std::forward</tt> and replace <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> and +<tt>CopyConstructible</tt> requirements by other requirements. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-10-24 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Accepting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3140.html">n3140</a> would solve this issue. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-11 Batavia: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Resolved by adopting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3140.html">n3140</a>. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +See <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3140.html">n3140</a>. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1381"></a>1381. [FCD] Ballot Comment GB-85</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> X [pair.range] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-19</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses GB-85</b></p> +<p> +While <tt>std::pair</tt> may happen to hold a pair of iterators +forming a valid range, this is more likely a coincidence +than a feature guaranteed by the semantics of the <tt>pair</tt> +template. A distinct range-type should be supplied to +enable the new for-loop syntax rather than overloading an +existing type with a different semantic. +</p> + +<p> +If a replacement facility is required for C++0x, +consider n2995. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Resolved in Rapperswil by a motion to directly apply the words from the ballot comment in N3102. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Strike 20.3.5.4 and the matching declarations in +20.3 header synopsis. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1382"></a>1382. [FCD] <tt>pair</tt> and <tt>tuple</tt> constructors should <tt>forward</tt> arguments</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.3.5 [pairs] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-26</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#pairs">issues</a> in [pairs].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses US-96</b></p> +<p> +<tt>pair</tt> and <tt>tuple</tt> constructors and assignment operators use +<tt>std::move</tt> when they should use <tt>std::forward</tt>. This +causes lvalue references to be erroneously converted to +rvalue references. Related requirements clauses are also +wrong. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Resolution proposed by ballot comment +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +See Appendix 1 - Additional Details +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-10-24 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Accepting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3140.html">n3140</a> would solve this issue. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + +<p> +Resolved by adopting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3140.html">n3140</a>. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +See <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3140.html">n3140</a>. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1383"></a>1383. [FCD] Inconsistent defaulted move/copy members in <tt>pair</tt> and <tt>tuple</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.3.5 [pairs] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-26</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#pairs">issues</a> in [pairs].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses US-97</b></p> +<p> +<tt>pair</tt>'s class definition in N3092 20.3.5.2 [pairs.pair] +contains "<tt>pair(const pair&) = default;</tt>" and +"<tt>pair& operator=(pair&& p);</tt>". The latter is described by +20.3.5.2 [pairs.pair] p.12-13. +</p> +"<tt>pair(const pair&) = default;</tt>" is a user-declared explicitly defaulted +copy constructor. According to 12.8 [class.copy]/10, this inhibits +the implicitly-declared move constructor. <tt>pair</tt> should be move constructible. +(12.8 [class.copy]/7 explains that "<tt>pair(pair<U, V>&& p)</tt>" +will never be instantiated to move <tt>pair<T1, T2></tt> to <tt>pair<T1, T2></tt>.)<br> +"<tt>pair& operator=(pair&& p);</tt>" is a user-provided move +assignment operator (according to 8.4.2 [dcl.fct.def.default]/4: "A +special member function is user-provided if it is user-declared and not explicitly defaulted +on its first declaration."). According to 12.8 [class.copy]/20, this inhibits +the implicitly-declared copy assignment operator. <tt>pair</tt> +should be copy assignable, and was in C++98/03. (Again, +12.8 [class.copy]/7 explains that "<tt>operator=(const pair<U, V>& p)</tt>" +will never be instantiated to copy <tt>pair<T1, T2></tt> to <tt>pair<T1, T2></tt>.)<br> +Additionally, "<tt>pair& operator=(pair&& p);</tt>" is +unconditionally defined, whereas according to 12.8 [class.copy]/25, +defaulted copy/move assignment operators are defined as +deleted in several situations, such as when non-static data +members of reference type are present. +<p> +If "<tt>pair(const pair&) = default;</tt>" and "<tt>pair& operator=(pair&& p);</tt>" +were removed from <tt>pair</tt>'s class definition in 20.3.5.2 [pairs.pair] and from +20.3.5.2 [pairs.pair]/12-13, <tt>pair</tt> would +receive implicitly-declared copy/move constructors and +copy/move assignment operators, and 12.8 [class.copy]/25 would +apply. The implicitly-declared copy/move constructors +would be trivial when <tt>T1</tt> and <tt>T2</tt> have trivial copy/move +constructors, according to 12.8 [class.copy]/13, and similarly for the +assignment operators, according to12.8 [class.copy]/27. Notes could +be added as a reminder that these functions would be +implicitly-declared, but such notes would not be necessary +(the Standard Library specification already assumes a +high level of familiarity with the Core Language, and +casual readers will simply assume that <tt>pair</tt> is copyable +and movable). +</p><p> +Alternatively, <tt>pair</tt> could be given explicitly-defaulted +copy/move constructors and copy/move assignment +operators. This is a matter of style. +</p><p> +<tt>tuple</tt> is also affected. <tt>tuple</tt>'s class definition in 20.4 [tuple] contains: +</p><pre>tuple(const tuple&) = default; +tuple(tuple&&); +tuple& operator=(const tuple&); +tuple& operator=(tuple&&); +</pre> +They should all be removed or all be explicitly-defaulted, +to be consistent with <tt>pair</tt>. Additionally, 20.4.2.1 [tuple.cnstr]/8-9 specifies the +behavior of an explicitly defaulted function, which is currently inconsistent with +<tt>pair</tt>. + +<p><i>[ +Resolution proposed by ballot comment: +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +Either remove "<tt>pair(const pair&) = default;</tt>" and +"<tt>pair& operator=(pair&& p);</tt>" from <tt>pair</tt>'s class +definition in 20.3.5.2 [pairs.pair] and from 20.3.5.2 [pairs.pair] p.12-13, or +give pair explicitly-defaulted copy/move constructors and copy/move assignment operators.<br> +Change <tt>tuple</tt> to match. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-10-24 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Accepting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3140.html">n3140</a> would solve this issue: +The move/copy constructor will be defaulted, but the corresponding assignment operators need a non-default implementation +because they are supposed to work for references as well. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +See <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3140.html">n3140</a>. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1384"></a>1384. [FCD] Ballot Comment US-98</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.4.2.4 [tuple.creation] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-04</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#tuple.creation">issues</a> in [tuple.creation].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses US-98</b></p> +<p> +pack_arguments is poorly named. It does not reflect the +fact that it is a tuple creation function and that it forwards +arguments. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Resolved in Rapperswil by a motion to directly apply the words from the ballot comment in N3102. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Rename pack_arguments to forward_as_tuple +throughout the standard. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1386"></a>1386. FCD Ballot Comment US-99</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.4.2.4 [tuple.creation] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-04</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#tuple.creation">issues</a> in [tuple.creation].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses US-99</b></p> +<p> +pack_arguments is overly complex. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Resolved in Rapperswil by a motion to directly apply the words from the ballot comment in N3102. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +This issue resulted from a lack of understanding of +how references are forwarded. The definition of +pack_arguments should be simply:<br> +template <class... Types> +tuple<<del>A</del>Types<ins>&&</ins>> +pack_arguments(Types&&...t);<br> +<del>Types:Let Ti be each type in Types....</del><br> +Effects: ...<br> +Returns:<br> +tuple<<del>A</del>Types<ins>&&</ins>...>(std::forward<Types>(t)...)<br> +The synopsis should also change to reflect this +simpler signature. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1387"></a>1387. [FCD] Ballot Comment GB-87</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> X [tuple.range] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-24</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses GB-87</b></p> +<p> +There is no compelling reason to assume a +heterogeneous tuple of two elements holds a pair of +iterators forming a valid range. Unlike std::pair, there are +no functions in the standard library using this as a return +type with a valid range, so there is even less reason to try +to adapt this type for the new for-loop syntax. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Resolved in Rapperswil by a motion to directly apply the words from the ballot comment in N3102. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Strike 20.4.2.10 and the matching declarations in +the header synopsis in 20.4. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1388"></a>1388. FCD Ballot Comment US-100</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.6.1 [ratio.ratio] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-04</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#ratio.ratio">issues</a> in [ratio.ratio].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses US-100</b></p> +<p> +LWG 1281 was discussed in Pittsburgh, and the decision +there was to accept the typedef as proposed and move to +Review. Unfortunately the issue was accidentally applied +to the FCD, and incorrectly. The FCD version of the +typedef refers to ratio<N, D>, but the typedef is intended +to refer to ratio<num, den> which in general is not the +same type. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Resolved in Rapperswil by a motion to directly apply the words from the ballot comment in N3102. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Accept the current proposed wording of LWG +1281 which adds:<br> +typedef ratio<num, den> type; + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1389"></a>1389. [FCD] Compile-time rational arithmetic and overflow</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.6.2 [ratio.arithmetic] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-26</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#ratio.arithmetic">issues</a> in [ratio.arithmetic].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses GB-89</b></p> +<p> +The alias representations of the <tt>ratio</tt> arithmetic templates +do not allow implementations to avoid overflow, since they +explicitly specify the form of the aliased template +instantiation. For example +<tt>ratio_multiply</tt>, <tt>ratio<2, LLONG_MAX></tt> is <em>required</em> to +alias <tt>ratio<2*LLONG_MAX, LLONG_MAX*2></tt>, which +overflows, so is ill-formed. However, this is trivially equal +to <tt>ratio<1, 1></tt>. It also contradicts the opening statement of +20.6.2 [ratio.arithmetic] p. 1 "implementations may use other algorithms to +compute these values". +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-10-25 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Accepting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3131.html">n3131</a> would solve this issue. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[Batavia: Resoved by accepting +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3210.html">n3210</a>.]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Change the wording in 20.6.2 [ratio.arithmetic] p. 2-5 as follows: +<p> +</p><blockquote><pre>template <class R1, class R2> using ratio_add = <em>see below</em>; +</pre><blockquote> +2 The type <tt>ratio_add<R1, R2></tt> shall be a synonym for <del><tt>ratio<T1, T2></tt></del> +<ins><tt>ratio<U, V></tt> such that <tt>ratio<U, V>::num</tt> and <tt>ratio<U, V>::den</tt> +are the same as the corresponding members of <tt>ratio<T1, T2></tt> would be in the absence of +arithmetic overflow</ins> where <tt>T1</tt> has the value <tt>R1::num * R2::den + R2::num * R1::den</tt> +and <tt>T2</tt> has the value <tt>R1::den * R2::den</tt>. <ins>If the required values of <tt>ratio<U, V>::num</tt> +and <tt>ratio<U, V>::den</tt> cannot be represented in <tt>intmax_t</tt> then the program is ill-formed.</ins> +</blockquote></blockquote> +<blockquote><pre>template <class R1, class R2> using ratio_subtract = <em>see below</em>; +</pre><blockquote> +3 The type <tt>ratio_subtract<R1, R2></tt> shall be a synonym for <del><tt>ratio<T1, T2></tt></del> +<ins><tt>ratio<U, V></tt> such that <tt>ratio<U, V>::num</tt> and <tt>ratio<U, V>::den</tt> +are the same as the corresponding members of <tt>ratio<T1, T2></tt> would be in the absence of +arithmetic overflow</ins> where <tt>T1</tt> has the value <tt>R1::num * R2::den - R2::num * R1::den</tt> +and <tt>T2</tt> has the value <tt>R1::den * R2::den</tt>. <ins>If the required values of <tt>ratio<U, V>::num</tt> +and <tt>ratio<U, V>::den</tt> cannot be represented in <tt>intmax_t</tt> then the program is ill-formed.</ins> +</blockquote></blockquote> +<blockquote><pre>template <class R1, class R2> using ratio_multiply = <em>see below</em>; +</pre><blockquote> +4 The type <tt>ratio_multiply<R1, R2></tt> shall be a synonym for <del><tt>ratio<T1, T2></tt></del> +<ins><tt>ratio<U, V></tt> such that <tt>ratio<U, V>::num</tt> and <tt>ratio<U, V>::den</tt> +are the same as the corresponding members of <tt>ratio<T1, T2></tt> would be in the absence of +arithmetic overflow</ins> where <tt>T1</tt> has the value <tt>R1::num * R2::num</tt> and <tt>T2</tt> +has the value <tt>R1::den * R2::den</tt>. <ins>If the required values of <tt>ratio<U, V>::num</tt> +and <tt>ratio<U, V>::den</tt> cannot be represented in <tt>intmax_t</tt> then the program is ill-formed.</ins> +</blockquote></blockquote> +<blockquote><pre>template <class R1, class R2> using ratio_divide = <em>see below</em>; +</pre><blockquote> +5 The type <tt>ratio_divide<R1, R2></tt> shall be a synonym for <del><tt>ratio<T1, T2></tt></del> +<ins><tt>ratio<U, V></tt> such that <tt>ratio<U, V>::num</tt> and <tt>ratio<U, V>::den</tt> +are the same as the corresponding members of <tt>ratio<T1, T2></tt> would be in the absence of +arithmetic overflow</ins> where <tt>T1</tt> has the value <tt>R1::num * R2::den</tt> and <tt>T2</tt> +has the value <tt>R1::den * R2::num</tt>. <ins>If the required values of <tt>ratio<U, V>::num</tt> +and <tt>ratio<U, V>::den</tt> cannot be represented in <tt>intmax_t</tt> then the program is ill-formed.</ins> +</blockquote></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1390"></a>1390. [FCD] Limit speculative compilation for constructible/convertible traits</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.7 [meta] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> DIN <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#meta">issues</a> in [meta].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses DE-17</b></p> +<p> +Speculative compilation for <tt>std::is_constructible</tt> and +<tt>std::is_convertible</tt> should be limited, similar to the core +language (see 14.8.2 paragraph 8). +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-10-24 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Accepting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3142.html">n3142</a> would solve this issue. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Resolved by paper <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3142.html">n3142</a>. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1391"></a>1391. [FCD] constructible/convertible traits and access control</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.7 [meta] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> DIN <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#meta">issues</a> in [meta].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses DE-18</b></p> +<p> +Several type traits require compiler support, e.g. +<tt>std::is_constructible</tt> or <tt>std::is_convertible</tt>. +Their current specification seems to imply, that the corresponding +test expressions should be well-formed, even in absense of access: +</p> +<pre>class X { X(int){} }; +constexpr bool test = std::is_constructible<X, int>::value; +</pre> +<p> +The specification does not clarify the context of this test +and because it already goes beyond normal language +rules, it's hard to argue by means of normal language +rules what the context and outcome of the test should be. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Resolution proposed by ballot comment +]</i></p> + +<p> +Specify that <tt>std::is_constructible</tt> and +<tt>std::is_convertible</tt> will return <tt>true</tt> only for +public constructors/conversion functions. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-10-24 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Accepting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3142.html">n3142</a> would solve this issue. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Resolved by paper <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3142.html">n3142</a>. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1392"></a>1392. [FCD] <tt>result_of</tt> should support pointer-to-data-member</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.7.4 [meta.unary] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#meta.unary">issues</a> in [meta.unary].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses US-102</b></p> +<p> +Despite Library Issue 520's ("<tt>result_of</tt> and pointers to +data members") resolution of CD1, the FCD's <tt>result_of</tt> +supports neither pointers to member functions nor +pointers to data members. It should. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Resolution proposed by ballot comment +]</i></p> + +<p> +Ensure <tt>result_of</tt> supports pointers to member +functions and pointers to data members. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-10-24 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Accepting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3123.html">n3123</a> would solve this issue. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Resolved by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3123.html">n3123</a>. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1393"></a>1393. [FCD] Trivial traits imply noexcept</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.7.4.3 [meta.unary.prop] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#meta.unary.prop">issues</a> in [meta.unary.prop].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses GB-92</b></p> +<p> +Trivial functions implicitly declare a <tt>noexcept</tt> exception +specification, so the references to <tt>has_trivial_*</tt> traits in the +<tt>has_nothrow_*</tt> traits are redundant, and should be struck for clarity. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Resolution proposed by ballot comment +]</i></p> + +<p> +For each of the <tt>has_nothrow_<i>something</i></tt> traits, +remove all references to the matching +<tt>has_trivial_<i>something</i></tt> traits. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-10-24 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Accepting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3142.html">n3142</a> would solve this issue. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Resolved by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3142.html">n3142</a>. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1394"></a>1394. [FCD] Ballot Comment DE-19</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.7.4.3 [meta.unary.prop] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> DIN <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-19</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#meta.unary.prop">issues</a> in [meta.unary.prop].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses DE-19</b></p> +<p> +The fundamental trait is_constructible reports false +positives, e.g. +</p> +<pre>is_constructible<char*, void*>::value +</pre> +evaluates to true, even though a corresponding variable +initialization would be ill-formed. + +<p><i>[ +Resolved in Rapperswil by paper N3047. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Remove all false positives from the domain of +is_constructible. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1397"></a>1397. [FCD] Deprecate '98 binders</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8 [function.objects] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-26</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#function.objects">issues</a> in [function.objects].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses GB-95</b></p> +<p> +The adaptable function protocol supported by +<tt>unary_function</tt>/<tt>binary_function</tt> has been superceded by +lambda expressions and <tt>std::bind</tt>. Despite the name, the +protocol is not very adaptable as it requires intrusive +support in the adaptable types, rather than offering an +external traits-like adaption mechanism. This protocol and +related support functions should be deprecated, and we +should not make onerous requirements for the +specification to support this protocol for callable types +introduced in this standard revision, including those +adopted from TR1. It is expected that high-quality +implementations will provide such support, but we should +not have to write robust standard specifications mixing this +restricted support with more general components such as +<tt>function</tt>, <tt>bind</tt> and <tt>reference_wrapper</tt>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Resolution proposed by ballot comment +]</i></p> + +<p> +Move clauses 20.8.3, 20.8.9, 20.8.11 and 20.8.12 +to Annex D. +</p> +<p> +Remove the requirements to conditionally derive from +<tt>unary</tt>/<tt>binary_function</tt> from <tt>function</tt>, +<tt>reference_wrapper</tt>, and the results of calling <tt>mem_fn</tt> +and <tt>bind</tt>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-10-24 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Accepting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3145.html">n3145</a> would solve this issue. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Resolved by paper <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3198.html">N3198</a>. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1399"></a>1399. [FCD] <tt>function</tt> does not need an <tt>explicit</tt> default constructor</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8.14.2 [func.wrap.func] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Japan <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-24</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#func.wrap.func">issues</a> in [func.wrap.func].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses JP-3</b></p> +<p> +<tt>explicit</tt> default contructor is defined in <tt>std::function</tt>. +Although it is allowed according to 12.3.1, it seems +unnecessary to qualify the constructor as <tt>explicit</tt>. +If it is <tt>explicit</tt>, there will be a limitation in <tt>initializer_list</tt>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Resolved in Rapperswil by a motion to directly apply the words from the ballot comment in N3102. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Remove <tt>explicit</tt>. +<pre>namespace std { +template<class> class function; +// undefined +template<class R, class... ArgTypes> +class function<R(ArgTypes...)> +: public unary_function<T1, R> +// iff sizeof...(ArgTypes) == 1 and ArgTypes contains T1 +: public binary_function<T1, T2, R> +// iff sizeof...(ArgTypes) == 2 and ArgTypes contains T1 andT2 +{ +public:typedef R result_type; +// 20.8.14.2.1, construct/copy/destroy: + <del>explicit</del> function(); +</pre> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1400"></a>1400. FCD <tt>function</tt> does not need an <tt>explicit</tt> default constructor</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8.14.2.1 [func.wrap.func.con] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Japan <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-24</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#func.wrap.func.con">issues</a> in [func.wrap.func.con].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses JP-4</b></p> +<p> +Really does the <tt>function</tt> require that default constructor is <tt>explicit</tt>? +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Resolved in Rapperswil by a motion to directly apply the words from the ballot comment in N3102. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Remove explicit. +<pre>function(); +template <class A> +function(allocator_arg_t, const A& a); +</pre> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1402"></a>1402. [FCD] <tt>nullptr</tt> constructors for smart pointers should be <tt>constexpr</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9 [memory] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-24</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#memory">issues</a> in [memory].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses GB-100</b></p> + +The <tt>unique_ptr</tt> and <tt>shared_ptr</tt> constructors taking +<tt>nullptr_t</tt> delegate to a <tt>constexpr</tt> constructor, and could be +<tt>constexpr</tt> themselves. + +<p><i>[ +Resolved in Rapperswil by a motion to directly apply the words from the ballot comment in N3102. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +In the 20.9.10.2 [unique.ptr.single] synopsis add +"constexpr" to unique_ptr(nullptr_t).<br> +In the 20.9.10.3 [unique.ptr.runtime] synopsis add +"constexpr" to unique_ptr(nullptr_t).<br> +In the 20.9.11.2 [util.smartptr.shared] synopsis +add "constexpr" to shared_ptr(nullptr_t). + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1403"></a>1403. [FCD] Inconsistent definitions for <tt>allocator_arg</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.1 [allocator.tag] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Japan <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-24</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses JP-85</b></p> +<p> +There are inconsistent definitions for <tt>allocator_arg</tt>. +In 20.9 [memory] paragraph 1, +</p> +<pre>constexpr allocator_arg_t allocator_arg = allocator_arg_t(); +</pre> +and in 20.9.1, +<pre>const allocator_arg_t allocator_arg = allocator_arg_t(); +</pre> + +<p><i>[ +Resolved in Rapperswil by a motion to directly apply the words from the ballot comment in N3102. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Change "const" to "constexpr" in 20.9.1 as +follows. +<pre>constexpr allocator_arg_t allocator_arg = allocator_arg_t(); +</pre> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1404"></a>1404. [FCD] <tt>pointer_traits</tt> should have a <tt>size_type</tt> member</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.3 [pointer.traits] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-23</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses US-106</b></p> +<p> +<tt>pointer_traits</tt> should have a <tt>size_type</tt> member for completeness. +</p> +<p> +Add <tt>typedef <i>see below</i> size_type;</tt> to the generic +<tt>pointer_traits</tt> template and <tt>typedef size_t +size_type;</tt> to <tt>pointer_traits<T*></tt>. Use +<tt>pointer_traits::size_type</tt> and +<tt>pointer_traits::difference_type</tt> as the defaults for +<tt>allocator_traits::size_type</tt> and +<tt>allocator_traits::difference_type</tt>. +</p> +<p> +See Appendix 1 - Additional Details +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Post-Rapperswil, Pablo provided wording: +]</i></p> + + +<p> +The original ballot comment reads simply: "<tt>pointer_traits</tt> should have a +<tt>size_type</tt> for completeness." The additional details reveal, however, +that the desire for a <tt>size_type</tt> is actually driven by the needs +of <tt>allocator_traits</tt>. The <tt>allocator_traits</tt> template should get its +default <tt>difference_type</tt> from <tt>pointer_traits</tt> but if it did, +it should get its <tt>size_type</tt> from the same source. Unfortunately, +there is no obvious meaning for <tt>size_type</tt> in <tt>pointer_traits</tt>. +</p> +<p> +Alisdair suggested, however, that the natural relationship between +<tt>difference_type</tt> and <tt>size_type</tt> can be expressed simply by the +<tt>std::make_unsigned<T></tt> metafunction. Using this metafunction, +we can easily define <tt>size_type</tt> for <tt>allocator_traits</tt> without +artificially adding <tt>size_type</tt> to <tt>pointer_traits</tt>. +</p> + +<blockquote> +Moved to Tentatively Ready after 6 positive votes on c++std-lib. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +In [allocator.requirements], Table 42, change two rows as follows: +</p> +<blockquote> +<table border="1"> + <tbody><tr> + <td><tt>X::size_type</tt></td> + <td>unsigned integral type</td> + <td>a type that can represent the size of the largest object in the + allocation model</td> + <td><tt> + <del>size_t</del> + <ins>make_unsigned<X::difference_type>::type</ins> + </tt></td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td><tt>X::difference_type</tt></td> + <td>signed integral type</td> + <td>a type that can represent the difference between any two pointers in + the allocation model</td> + <td><tt> + <del>ptrdiff_t</del> + <ins>pointer_traits<X::pointer>::difference_type</ins> + </tt></td> + </tr> +</tbody></table> +</blockquote> +<p> +In [allocator.traits.types], Change the definition of difference_type and +size_type as follows: +</p> +<blockquote> + <tt>typedef</tt> <i>see below</i> <tt>difference_type;</tt> + <blockquote> + <i>Type:</i> <tt>Alloc::difference_type</tt> if such a type exists, + else <tt><del>ptrdiff_t</del> + <ins>pointer_traits<pointer>::difference_type</ins></tt>. + </blockquote> + + <tt>typedef</tt> <i>see below</i> <tt>size_type;</tt> + <blockquote> + <i>Type:</i> <tt>Alloc::size_type</tt> if such a type exists, + else <tt><del>size_t</del> + <ins>make_unsigned<difference_type>::type</ins></tt>. + </blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1405"></a>1405. [FCD] Ballot Comment US-107</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.10 [allocator.adaptor] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-19</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#allocator.adaptor">issues</a> in [allocator.adaptor].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses US-107</b></p> + +scoped_allocator_adaptor should have its own header. + +<p><i>[ +Resolved in Rapperswil by a motion to directly apply the words from the ballot comment in N3102. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +See Appendix 1 - Additional Details + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1407"></a>1407. [FCD] Synch <tt>shared_ptr</tt> constructors taking movable types</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.10.2.1 [util.smartptr.shared.const] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-19</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#util.smartptr.shared.const">issues</a> in [util.smartptr.shared.const].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses US-108</b></p> + +<tt>shared_ptr</tt> should have the same policy for constructing +from <tt>auto_ptr</tt> as <tt>unique_ptr</tt>. Currently it does not. + +<p><i>[ +Resolved in Rapperswil by paper N3109. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Add “template <class Y> explicit +shared_ptr(auto_ptr<Y>&); to +[util.smartptr.shared.const] (and to the synopsis). + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1409"></a>1409. [FCD] Specify whether <tt>monotonic_clock</tt> is a distinct type or a typedef</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> X [time.clock.monotonic] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-26</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#time.clock.monotonic">issues</a> in [time.clock.monotonic].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses US-111</b></p> +<p> +What it means for <tt>monotonic_clock</tt> to be a synonym is +undefined. If it may or may not be a typedef, then certain +classes of programs become unportable. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Resolution proposed in ballot comment: +]</i></p> + +<p> +Require that it be a distinct class type. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-11-01 Daniel comments: +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +Paper <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3128.html">n3128</a> addresses +this issue by replacing <tt>monotonic_clock</tt> with <tt>steady_clock</tt>, which is not a typedef. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +This is resolved by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3191.html">n3191</a>. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1410"></a>1410. [FCD] Add a feature-detect macro for <tt>monotonic_clock</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> X [time.clock.monotonic] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-26</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#time.clock.monotonic">issues</a> in [time.clock.monotonic].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1411">1411</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses GB-107, DE-20</b></p> +<p> +1.4 [intro.compliance] p.9 states that which conditionally +supported constructs are available should be provided in the +documentation for the implementation. This doesn't help programmers trying +to write portable code, as they must then rely on +implementation-specific means to determine the +availability of such constructs. In particular, the presence +or absence of <tt>std::chrono::monotonic_clock</tt> may require +different code paths to be selected. This is the only +conditionally-supported library facility, and differs from the +conditionally-supported language facilities in that it has +standard-defined semantics rather than implementation-defined +semantics. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Resolution proposed in ballot comment: +]</i></p> + +<p> +Provide feature test macro for determining the +presence of <tt>std::chrono::monotonic_clock</tt>. Add +<tt>_STDCPP_HAS_MONOTONIC_CLOCK</tt> to the +<tt><chrono></tt> header, which is defined if +<tt>monotonic_clock</tt> is present, and not defined if it is +not present. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-11-01 Daniel comments: +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +Paper <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3128.html">n3128</a> addresses +this issue by replacing <tt>monotonic_clock</tt> with <tt>steady_clock</tt>, which is not conditionally supported, +so there is no need to detect it. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +This is resolved by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3191.html">n3191</a>. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1412"></a>1412. [FCD] Make monotonic clocks mandatory</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> X [time.clock.monotonic] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Switzerland <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-26</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#time.clock.monotonic">issues</a> in [time.clock.monotonic].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses CH-21</b></p> +<p> +Monotonic clocks are generally easy to provide on all +systems and are implicitely required by some of the library +facilities anyway. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-11-01 Daniel comments: +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +Paper <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3128.html">n3128</a> addresses +this issue by replacing <tt>monotonic_clock</tt> with <tt>steady_clock</tt>, which is mandatory. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-11-13 Batavia meeting: +]</i></p> + +<p> +This is resolved by adopting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3191.html">n3191</a>. +The original resolution is preserved for reference: +</p> +<blockquote> +<p>Make monotonic clocks mandatory.</p> +<p>Strike X [time.clock.monotonic] p.2</p> +<blockquote> +<tt>2</tt> <del>The class <tt>monotonic_clock</tt> is conditionally supported.</del> +</blockquote> + +<p>Change 30.2.4 [thread.req.timing] p.2 accordingly</p> +<blockquote> +The member functions whose names end in <tt>_for</tt> take an argument that +specifies a relative time. Implementations should use a monotonic clock to +measure time for these functions. <del>[ <em>Note</em>: Implementations are not +required to use a monotonic clock because such a clock may not be available. +— <em>end note</em> ]</del> +</blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +This is resolved by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3191.html">n3191</a>. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1414"></a>1414. [FCD] Fixing remaining dead links to <tt>POS_T</tt> and <tt>OFF_T</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 21.2.3.2 [char.traits.specializations.char16_t] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-24</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1444">1444</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses GB-109, GB-123</b></p> + +<p> +It is not clear what the specification means for +u16streampos, u32streampos or wstreampos when they +refer to the requirements for POS_T in 21.2.2, as there +are no longer any such requirements. Similarly the annex +D.7 refers to the requirements of type POS_T in 27.3 that +no longer exist either. +</p> +<p> +Clarify the meaning of all cross-reference to the +removed type POS_T. +</p> + + +<p><i>[ +Post-Rapperswil, Daniel provides the wording. +]</i></p> + + +<p> +When preparing the wording for this issue I first thought about adding both <tt>u16streampos</tt> and <tt>u32streampos</tt> +to the [iostream.forward] header <tt><iosfwd></tt> synopsis similar to <tt>streampos</tt> and <tt>wstreampos</tt>, +but decided not to do so, because the IO library does not yet actively support the <tt>char16_t</tt> and <tt>char32_t</tt> +character types. Adding those would misleadingly imply that they would be part of the iostreams. Also, the addition +would make them also similarly equal to a typedef to <tt>fpos<mbstate_t></tt>, as for <tt>streampos</tt> and +<tt>wstreampos</tt>, so there is no loss for users that would like to use the proper <tt>fpos</tt> instantiation for +these character types. +</p> +<p> +Additionally the way of referencing was chosen to follow the style suggested by NB comment +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3118.html#GB108">GB 108</a>. +</p> + +<blockquote> +Moved to Tentatively Ready with proposed wording after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +<i>The following wording changes are against N3126.</i> +</p> + +<ol> +<li>Change [char.traits.specializations.char16_t]/1 as indicated: +<blockquote><p> +1 - The type <tt>u16streampos</tt> shall be an implementation-defined type that satisfies the requirements +for <del><tt>POS_T</tt> in 21.2.2</del><ins><tt>pos_type</tt> in [iostreams.limits.pos]</ins>. +</p></blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change [char.traits.specializations.char32_t]/1 as indicated: +<blockquote><p> +1 - The type <tt>u32streampos</tt> shall be an implementation-defined type that satisfies the requirements +for <del><tt>POS_T</tt> in 21.2.2</del><ins><tt>pos_type</tt> in [iostreams.limits.pos]</ins>. +</p></blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change [char.traits.specializations.wchar.t]/2 as indicated: +<blockquote><p> +2 - The type <tt>wstreampos</tt> shall be an implementation-defined type that satisfies the requirements +for <del><tt>POS_T</tt> in 21.2.2</del><ins><tt>pos_type</tt> in [iostreams.limits.pos]</ins>. +</p></blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change [fpos.operations], Table 124 — Position type requirements as indicated: +<blockquote><p> +</p><table border="1"> +<caption>Table 124 — Position type requirements</caption> + +<tbody> +<tr> +<th>Expression</th> +<th>Return type</th> +<th><tt>...</tt></th> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td><tt>...</tt></td> +<td><tt>...</tt></td> +<td><tt>...</tt></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><tt>O(p)</tt></td> +<td><del><tt>OFF_T</tt></del><ins><tt>streamoff</tt></ins></td> +<td>...</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><tt>...</tt></td> +<td><tt>...</tt></td> +<td><tt>...</tt></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><tt>o = p - q</tt></td> +<td><del><tt>OFF_T</tt></del><ins><tt>streamoff</tt></ins></td> +<td><tt>...</tt></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><tt>streamsize(o)</tt><br><tt>O(sz)</tt></td> +<td><tt>streamsize</tt><br><del><tt>OFF_T</tt></del><ins><tt>streamoff</tt></ins></td> +<td><tt>...</tt></td> +</tr> + +</tbody></table> +<p></p></blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change [depr.ios.members]/1 as indicated: +<p> +</p><blockquote><pre>namespace std { + class ios_base { + public: + typedef T1 io_state; + typedef T2 open_mode; + typedef T3 seek_dir; + typedef <del>OFF_T</del><ins><em>implementation-defined</em></ins> streamoff; + typedef <del>POS_T</del><ins><em>implementation-defined</em></ins> streampos; + // remainder unchanged + }; +} +</pre></blockquote> +<p></p> +</li> +<li>Change [depr.ios.members]/5+6 as indicated: +<blockquote><p> +5 - The type <tt>streamoff</tt> is an implementation-defined type that satisfies the requirements +of <del>type <tt>OFF_T</tt> (27.5.1)</del><ins><tt>off_type</tt> in [iostreams.limits.pos]</ins>. +</p> +<p> +6 - The type <tt>streampos</tt> is an implementation-defined type that satisfies the requirements +of <del>type <tt>POS_T</tt> (27.3)</del><ins><tt>pos_type</tt> in [iostreams.limits.pos]</ins>. +</p></blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1416"></a>1416. [FCD] <tt>forward_list::erase_after</tt> should not be allowed to throw</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2 [container.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> DIN <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-19</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#container.requirements">issues</a> in [container.requirements].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses DE-21</b></p> + +23.2.1/11 provides a general no-throw guarantee for +erase() container functions, exceptions from this are +explicitly mentioned for individual containers. Because of +its different name, forward_list's erase_after() function is +not ruled by this but should so. + +<p><i>[ +Resolved in Rapperswil by a motion to directly apply the words from the ballot comment in N3102. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Add a "<i>Throws</i>: Nothing" clause to both +<tt>erase_after</tt> overloads in 23.3.3.4, [forwardlist.modifiers]. +</p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1417"></a>1417. [FCD] <tt>front</tt>/<tt>back</tt> on a zero-sized +<tt>array</tt> should be undefined</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.3.1.7 [array.zero] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-26</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses GB-112</b></p> +<p> +Should the effect of calling <tt>front</tt>/<tt>back</tt> on a zero-sized +<tt>array</tt> really be implementation defined i.e. require the +implementor to define behaviour? +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Resolved in Rapperswil by a motion to directly apply the words from the ballot comment in N3102. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Change "implementation defined" to "undefined" + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1423"></a>1423. [FCD] Ballot Comment JP-6</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.6.1 [map] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Japan <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#map">issues</a> in [map].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses JP-6</b></p> + +Constructor accepting an allocator as a single parameter +should be qualified as explicit. +<pre>namespace std { +template <class Key, class T, class Compare = +less<Key>, +class Allocator = allocator<pair<const Key, T> > > +class map { +public: +... +map(const Allocator&); +</pre> + +<p><i>[ +Resolved in Rapperswil by a motion to directly apply the words from the ballot comment in N3102. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Add explicit. +<pre>namespace std { +template <class Key, class T, class Compare = +less<Key>, +class Allocator = allocator<pair<const Key, T> > > +class map { +public: +... +explicit map(const Allocator&); +</pre> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1424"></a>1424. [FCD] Ballot Comment JP-7</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.6.2 [multimap] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Japan <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +Constructor accepting an allocator as a single parameter +should be qualified as explicit. + +<p><i>[ +Resolved in Rapperswil by a motion to directly apply the words from the ballot comment in N3102. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Add explicit. +<pre>namespace std { +template <class Key, class T, class Compare = +less<Key>, +class Allocator = allocator<pair<const Key, T> > > +class multimap { +public: +... +explicit multimap(const Allocator&); +</pre> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1425"></a>1425. [FCD] Ballot Comment JP-8</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.6.3 [set] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Japan <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#set">issues</a> in [set].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses JP-8</b></p> +Constructor accepting an allocator as a single parameter +should be qualified as explicit. + +<p><i>[ +Resolved in Rapperswil by a motion to directly apply the words from the ballot comment in N3102. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Add explicit. +<pre>namespace std { +template <class Key, class Compare = less<Key>, +class Allocator = allocator<Key> > +class set { +public: +... +explicit set(const Allocator&); +</pre> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1426"></a>1426. [FCD] Ballot Comment JP-9</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.6.4 [multiset] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Japan <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses JP-9</b></p> + +Constructor accepting an allocator as a single parameter +should be qualified as explicit. + +<p><i>[ +Resolved in Rapperswil by a motion to directly apply the words from the ballot comment in N3102. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Add explicit. +<pre>namespace std { +template <class Key, class Compare = less<Key>, +class Allocator = allocator<Key> > +class multiset { +public: +... +explicit multiset(const Allocator&); +</pre> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1427"></a>1427. [FCD] Ballot Comment JP-10</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.7.1 [unord.map] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Japan <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#unord.map">issues</a> in [unord.map].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses JP-10</b></p> + +Constructor accepting an allocator as a single parameter +should be qualified as explicit. + +<p><i>[ +Resolved in Rapperswil by a motion to directly apply the words from the ballot comment in N3102. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Add explicit. +<pre>namespace std { +template <class Key, +template <class Key, +class T, +class Hash = hash<Key>, +class Pred = std::equal_to<Key>, +class Alloc = std::allocator<std::pair<const Key, +T> > > +class unordered_map +{ +public: +... +explicit unordered_map(const Allocator&); +</pre> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1428"></a>1428. [FCD] Ballot Comment JP-11</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.7.2 [unord.multimap] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Japan <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses JP-11</b></p> + +Constructor accepting an allocator as a single parameter +should be qualified as explicit. + +<p><i>[ +Resolved in Rapperswil by a motion to directly apply the words from the ballot comment in N3102. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Add explicit. +<pre>namespace std { +template <class Key, +class T, +class Hash = hash<Key>, +class Pred = std::equal_to<Key>, +class Alloc = std::allocator<std::pair<const Key, +T> > > +class unordered_multimap +{ +public: +... +explicit unordered_multimap(const Allocator&); +</pre> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1429"></a>1429. [FCD] Ballot Comment JP-12</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.7.3 [unord.set] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Japan <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses JP-12</b></p> + +Constructor accepting an allocator as a single parameter +should be qualified as explicit. + +<p><i>[ +Resolved in Rapperswil by a motion to directly apply the words from the ballot comment in N3102. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Add explicit. +<pre>namespace std { +template <class Key, +class Hash = hash<Key>, +class Pred = std::equal_to<Key>, +class Alloc = std::allocator<Key> > +class unordered_set +{ +public: +... +explicit unordered_set(const Allocator&); +</pre> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1430"></a>1430. [FCD] Ballot Comment JP-13</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.7.4 [unord.multiset] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Japan <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-23</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses JP-13</b></p> + +Constructor accepting an allocator as a single parameter +should be qualified as explicit. + +<p><i>[ +Resolved in Rapperswil by a motion to directly apply the words from the ballot comment in N3102. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Add explicit. +<pre>namespace std { +template <class Key, +class Hash = hash<Key>, +class Pred = std::equal_to<Key>, +class Alloc = std::allocator<Key> > +class unordered_multiset +{ +public: +... +explicit unordered_multiset(const Allocator&); +</pre> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1431"></a>1431. [FCD] Ballot Comment US-120</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.2.12 [alg.is_permutation] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-04</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses US-120</b></p> + +is_permutation is underspecified for anything but the +simple case where both ranges have the same value type +and the comparison function is an equivalence relation. + +<p><i>[ +Resolved in Rapperswil by a motion to directly apply the words from the ballot comment in N3102. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Restrict is_permutation to the case where it is well +specified. See Appendix 1 - Additional Details + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1432"></a>1432. [FCD] random_shuffle signatures</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 25.3.12 [alg.random.shuffle] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-24</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#alg.random.shuffle">issues</a> in [alg.random.shuffle].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1433">1433</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p><b>Addresses US-121, GB-119</b></p> + +<p> +<tt>random_shuffle</tt> and <tt>shuffle</tt> should be consistent in how +they accept their source of randomness: either both by +rvalue reference or both by lvalue reference. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Post-Rapperswil, Daniel provided wording +]</i></p> + + +<p> +The signatures of the <tt>shuffle</tt> and <tt>random_shuffle</tt> algorithms are different +in regard to the support of rvalues and lvalues of the provided generator: +</p> + +<p> +</p><blockquote><pre>template<class RandomAccessIterator, class RandomNumberGenerator> +void random_shuffle(RandomAccessIterator first, +RandomAccessIterator last, +RandomNumberGenerator<b>&&</b> rand); +</pre></blockquote> +<p></p> + +<p> +</p><blockquote><pre>template<class RandomAccessIterator, class UniformRandomNumberGenerator> +void shuffle(RandomAccessIterator first, +RandomAccessIterator last, +UniformRandomNumberGenerator<b>&</b> g); +</pre></blockquote> +<p></p> + +<p> +The first form uses the perfect forwarding signature and that change compared to +<tt>C++03</tt> was done intentionally as shown in the first rvalue proposal +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2004/n1690.html#Improved%20random_shuffle">papers</a>. +</p> + +<p> +While it is true, that random generators are excellent examples of stateful +functors, there still exist good reasons to support rvalues as arguments: +</p> + +<p> +</p><ol> +<li>If one of the shuffle algorithms is called with the intention to shuffle items with a reproducible ordering + from a given generator class, it makes sense to create a generator exactly at the call point. +</li> +<li>Other algorithms with similar need for stateful functors (like <tt>std::generate</tt> and <tt>std::generate_n</tt>) + accept both rvalues and lvalues as well. +</li> +<li>Given the deduction rules for perfect forwarding it is hard for a user to produce code that does the wrong thing +unintentionally. Any lvalue generator will deduce an lvalue-reference and behave as in <tt>C++03</tt>. In the specific +cases, where rvalues are provided, the argument will be accepted instead of being rejected. +</li> +</ol> +<p></p> + +<p> +Arguments have been raised that accepting rvalues is error-prone or even fundamentally wrong. The author of this +proposal disagrees with that position for two additional reasons: +</p> + +<p> +</p><ol> +<li>Enforcing lvalues as arguments won't prevent user code to enforce what they +want. So given +<blockquote><pre>my_generator get_generator(int size); +</pre></blockquote> +instead of writing +<blockquote><pre>std::vector<int> v = ...; +std::shuffle(v.begin(), v.end(), get_generator(v.size())); +</pre></blockquote> +they will just write +<blockquote><pre>std::vector<int> v = ...; +auto gen = get_generator(v.size()); +std::shuffle(v.begin(), v.end(), gen); +</pre></blockquote> +and feel annoyed about the need for it. +</li> +<li>Generators may be copyable and movable, and random number engines are <em>required</em> to be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> +and this is obviously a generally useful property for such objects. It is also useful and sometimes necessary to start a +generator with exactly a specific seed again and again and thus to provide a new generator (or a copy) for each call. The +<tt>CopyConstructible</tt> requirements allow providing rvalues of generators and thus this idiom must be useful as well. +Therefore preventing <tt>[random_]shuffle</tt> to accept rvalues is an unnecessary restriction which doesn't prevent any +user-error, if there would exist one. +</li> +</ol> +<p></p> + +<p> +Thus this proposal recommends to make both <tt>shuffle</tt> functions consistent and perfectly forward-able. +</p> + +<blockquote> +Moved to Tentatively Ready after 6 positive votes on c++std-lib. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<ol> +<li>Change [algorithms.general], header <tt><algorithm></tt> synopsis as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template<class RandomAccessIterator, class UniformRandomNumberGenerator> +void shuffle(RandomAccessIterator first, RandomAccessIterator last, +UniformRandomNumberGenerator&<ins>&</ins> rand); +</pre></blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change the prototype description of [alg.random.shuffle] as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template<class RandomAccessIterator, class UniformRandomNumberGenerator> +void shuffle(RandomAccessIterator first, RandomAccessIterator last, +UniformRandomNumberGenerator&<ins>&</ins> rand); +</pre></blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1435"></a>1435. [FCD] Unclear returns specifications for C99 complex number functions</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.4.7 [complex.value.ops] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-24</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#complex.value.ops">issues</a> in [complex.value.ops].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses GB-120</b></p> + +The complex number functions added for compatibility +with the C99 standard library are defined purely as a +cross-reference, with no hint of what they should return. +This is distinct from the style of documentation for the +functions in the earlier standard. In the case of the +inverse-trigonometric and hyperbolic functions, a +reasonable guess of the functionality may be made from +the name, this is not true of the cproj function, which +apparently returns the projection on the Reimann Sphere. +A single line description of each function, associated with +the cross-reference, will greatly improve clarity. + +<p><i>[2010-11-06 Beman provides proposed resolution wording.]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010 Batavia: The working group concurred with the issue's Proposed Resolution +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p><i>Change 26.4.7 complex value operations [complex.value.ops] as indicated:</i></p> +<blockquote> + <p><tt>template<class T> complex<T> proj(const complex<T>& x);</tt></p> + <blockquote> + <p><ins><i>Returns:</i> the projection of <tt>x</tt> onto the Riemann + sphere.</ins></p> + <p><del><i>Effects:</i></del> <ins><i>Remarks:</i></ins> Behaves the same as the C function <tt>cproj</tt>, + defined in 7.3.9.4.</p> + </blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>Change 26.4.8 complex transcendentals [complex.transcendentals] as indicated:</i></p> +<blockquote> + <p><tt>template<class T> complex<T> acos(const complex<T>& x);</tt></p> + <blockquote> + <p><ins><i>Returns:</i> the complex arc cosine of <tt>x</tt>.</ins></p> + <p><del><i>Effects:</i></del> <ins><i>Remarks:</i></ins> Behaves the same as the C function <tt>cacos</tt>, + defined in 7.3.5.1.</p> + </blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>Change 26.4.8 complex transcendentals [complex.transcendentals] as indicated:</i></p> +<blockquote> + <p><tt>template<class T> complex<T> asin(const complex<T>& x);</tt></p> + <blockquote> + <p><ins><i>Returns:</i> the complex arc sine of <tt>x</tt>.</ins></p> + <p><del><i>Effects:</i></del> <ins><i>Remarks:</i></ins> Behaves the same as the C function <tt>casin</tt>, + defined in 7.3.5.2.</p> + </blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>Change 26.4.8 complex transcendentals [complex.transcendentals] as indicated:</i></p> +<blockquote> + <p><tt>template<class T> complex<T> atan(const complex<T>& x);</tt></p> + <blockquote> + <p><ins><i>Returns:</i> the complex arc tangent of <tt>x</tt>.</ins></p> + <p><del><i>Effects:</i></del> <ins><i>Remarks:</i></ins> Behaves the same as the C function <tt>catan</tt>, + defined in 7.3.5.3.</p> + </blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>Change 26.4.8 complex transcendentals [complex.transcendentals] as indicated:</i></p> +<blockquote> + <p><tt>template<class T> complex<T> acosh(const complex<T>& x);</tt></p> + <blockquote> + <p><ins><i>Returns:</i> the complex arc hyperbolic cosine of + <tt>x</tt>.</ins></p> + <p><del><i>Effects:</i></del> <ins><i>Remarks:</i></ins> Behaves the same as the C function <tt>cacosh</tt>, + defined in 7.3.6.1.</p> + </blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>Change 26.4.8 complex transcendentals [complex.transcendentals] as indicated:</i></p> +<blockquote> + <p><tt>template<class T> complex<T> asinh(const complex<T>& x);</tt></p> + <blockquote> + <p><ins><i>Returns:</i> the complex arc hyperbolic sine of <tt> + x</tt>.</ins></p> + <p><del><i>Effects:</i></del> <ins><i>Remarks:</i></ins> Behaves the same as the C function <tt>casinh</tt>, + defined in 7.3.6.2.</p> + </blockquote> +</blockquote> + +<p><i>Change 26.4.8 complex transcendentals [complex.transcendentals] as indicated:</i></p> +<blockquote> + <p><tt>template<class T> complex<T> atanh(const complex<T>& x);</tt></p> + <blockquote> + <p><ins><i>Returns:</i> the complex arc hyperbolic tangent of + <tt>x</tt>.</ins></p> + <p><del><i>Effects:</i></del> <ins><i>Remarks:</i></ins> Behaves the same as the C function <tt>catanh</tt>, + defined in 7.3.6.2.</p> + </blockquote> +</blockquote> + + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1436"></a>1436. [FCD] Random number engine constructor concerns</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.3 [rand.eng] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-24</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#rand.eng">issues</a> in [rand.eng].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses GB-121</b></p> + +All the random number engine types in this clause have a +constructor taking an unsigned integer type, and a +constructor template for seed sequences. This means that +an attempt to create a random number engine seeded by +an integer literal must remember to add the appropriate +unsigned suffix to the literal, as a signed integer will +attempt to use the seed sequence template, yielding +undefined behaviour, as per 26.5.1.1p1a. It would be +helpful if at least these anticipated cases produced a +defined behaviour, either an erroneous program with +diagnostic, or a conversion to unsigned int forwarding to +the appropriate constructor. + +<p><i>[ +2010-11-03 Daniel comments and provides a proposed resolution: +]</i></p> + + +<p> +I suggest to apply a similar solution as recently suggested for <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1234">1234</a>. +It is basically a requirement for an implementation to constrain the template. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-11-04 Howard suggests to use <tt>!is_convertible<Sseq, result_type>::value</tt> +as minimum requirement instead of the originally proposed <tt>!is_scalar<Sseq>::value</tt>. +This would allow for a user-defined type <tt>BigNum</tt>, that is convertible to <tt>result_type</tt>, +to be used as argument for a seed instead of a seed sequence. The wording has been updated to +reflect this suggestion. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010 Batavia: There were some initial concerns regarding the portability and reproducibility of results +when seeded with a negative signed value, but these concerns were allayed after discussion. Thus, after +reviewing the issue, the working group concurred with the issue's Proposed Resolution. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Add the following paragraph at the end of 26.5.3 [rand.eng]: +<blockquote> +<blockquote> +5 Each template specified in this section [rand.eng] requires one or more relationships, involving the value(s) of +its non-type template parameter(s), to hold. A program instantiating any of these templates is ill-formed if +any such required relationship fails to hold. +</blockquote> + +<blockquote> +<ins>? For every random number engine and for every random number engine adaptor <tt>X</tt> defined in this sub-clause +[rand.eng] and in sub-clause [rand.adapt]:</ins> +<ul> +<li><ins>If the constructor</ins> +<blockquote><pre><ins>template<class Sseq> explicit X(Sseq& q);</ins> +</pre></blockquote> +<ins>is called with a type <tt>Sseq</tt> that does not qualify as a seed sequence, then this constructor +shall not participate in overload resolution. +</ins> +</li> +<li><ins>If the member function</ins> +<blockquote><pre><ins>template<class Sseq> void seed(Sseq& q);</ins> +</pre></blockquote> +<ins>is called with a type <tt>Sseq</tt> that does not qualify as a seed sequence, then this function +shall not participate in overload resolution. +</ins> +</li> +</ul> +<ins>The extent to which an implementation determines that a type cannot be a seed sequence is unspecified, +except that as a minimum a type shall not qualify as seed sequence, if it is implicitly convertible +to <tt>X::result_type</tt>.</ins> +</blockquote> + +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1437"></a>1437. [FCD] Mersenne twister meaningless for word sizes less than two</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.3.2 [rand.eng.mers] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-24</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#rand.eng.mers">issues</a> in [rand.eng.mers].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses US-124</b></p> + +The Mersenne twister algorithm is meaningless for word +sizes less than two, as there are then insufficient bits +available to be “twisted”. + +<p><i>[ +Resolution proposed by ballot comment: +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +Insert the following among the relations that are required to hold: <tt>2u < w</tt>. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010 Batavia: The working group concurred with the issue's Proposed Resolution +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Change 26.5.3.2 [rand.eng.mers] p. 4 as indicated: +<p> +</p><blockquote> +4 The following relations shall hold: <tt>0 < m</tt>, <tt>m <= n</tt>, <ins><tt>2u < w</tt>,</ins> +<tt>r <= w</tt>, <tt>u <= w</tt>, <tt>s <= w</tt>, <tt>t <= w</tt>, +<tt>l <= w</tt>, <tt>w <= numeric_limits<UIntType>::digits</tt>, +<tt>a <= (1u<<w) - 1u</tt>, <tt>b <= (1u<<w) - 1u</tt>, +<tt>c <= (1u<<w) - 1u</tt>, <tt>d <= (1u<<w) - 1u</tt>, +and <tt>f <= (1u<<w) - 1u</tt>. +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1439"></a>1439. [FCD] Return from <tt>densities()</tt> functions?</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.8.5.2 [rand.dist.samp.pconst] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-24</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#rand.dist.samp.pconst">issues</a> in [rand.dist.samp.pconst].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses US-134</b></p> + +These two distributions have a member function called +<tt>densities()</tt> which returns a <tt>vector<double></tt>. The +distribution is templated on <tt>RealType</tt>. The distribution +also has another member called <tt>intervals()</tt> which returns +a <tt>vector<RealType></tt>. Why doesn't densities return +<tt>vector<RealType></tt> as well? If <tt>RealType</tt> is <tt>long double</tt>, +the computed densities property isn't being computed to +the precision the client desires. If <tt>RealType</tt> is <tt>float</tt>, the +densities vector is taking up twice as much space as the client desires. + +<p><i>[ +Resolution proposed by ballot comment: +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +Change the piecewise constant and linear +distributions to hold / return the densities in a +<tt>vector<result_type></tt>. +<p> +If this is not done, at least correct 26.5.8.5.2 [rand.dist.samp.pconst] p. 13 which describes +the return of densities as a <tt>vector<result_type></tt>. +</p></blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Batavia 2010: After reviewing this issue, the working group concurred with the first of the +suggestions proposed by the NB comment: "Change the piecewise constant and linear distributions +to hold / return the densities in a vector. " +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<ol> +<li>Change 26.5.8.5.2 [rand.dist.samp.pconst] p. 2, class template <tt>piecewise_constant_distribution</tt> synopsis +and the prototype description 26.5.8.5.2 [rand.dist.samp.pconst] before p. 13 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>vector<<del>double</del><ins>result_type</ins>> densities() const; +</pre></blockquote> +</li> + +<li>Change 26.5.8.5.3 [rand.dist.samp.plinear] p. 2, class template <tt>piecewise_linear_distribution</tt> synopsis +and the prototype description 26.5.8.5.3 [rand.dist.samp.plinear] before p. 13 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>vector<<del>double</del><ins>result_type</ins>> densities() const; +</pre></blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1440"></a>1440. [FCD] Incorrect specification for rand.dist.samp.plinear</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.8.5.3 [rand.dist.samp.plinear] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-24</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses US-135</b></p> + +This paragraph says: Let bk = xmin+k·δ for k = 0,...,n, +and wk = fw(bk +δ) for k = 0,...,n. +However I believe that fw(bk) would be far more desirable. +I strongly suspect that this is nothing but a type-o. + +<p><i>[ +Resolution proposed by ballot comment: +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +Change p. 10 to read:<br> +Let bk = xmin+k·δ for k = 0,...,n, and wk = fw(bk) +for k = 0,...,n. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-11-02 Daniel translates into a proposed resolution +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +2010 Batavia: The working group concurred with the issue's Proposed Resolution +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Change 26.5.8.5.3 [rand.dist.samp.plinear] p. 10 as indicated: +<blockquote> +10 <em>Effects</em>: Constructs a <tt>piecewise_linear_distribution</tt> object with parameters taken or calculated +from the following values: Let <tt><em>b<sub>k</sub></em> = xmin+<em>k</em>·δ</tt> for +<tt><em>k</em> = 0, . . . , <em>n</em></tt>, and <tt><em>w<sub>k</sub></em> = fw(<em>b</em><sub><em>k</em></sub><del> +δ</del>)</tt> +for <tt><em>k</em> = 0, . . . , <em>n</em></tt>.</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1441"></a>1441. [FCD] Floating-point test functions are incorrectly specified</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.8 [c.math] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-04</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#c.math">issues</a> in [c.math].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses US-136</b></p> + +Floating-point test functions are incorrectly specified. + +<p><i>[ +Resolved in Rapperswil by a motion to directly apply the words from the ballot comment in N3102. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +See Appendix 1 - Additional Details + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1445"></a>1445. [FCD] Several iostreams member functions incorrectly specified</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7 [iostream.format] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS/PJ Plauger <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-26</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#iostream.format">issues</a> in [iostream.format].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses US-137</b></p> + +Several iostreams member functions are incorrectly +specified. + +<p><i>[ +Resolution proposed by ballot comment: +]</i></p> + +<p> +See Appendix 1 - Additional Details +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-10-24 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Accepting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3168.htm">n3168</a> would solve this issue. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Addressed by paper <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3168.htm">n3168</a>. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1447"></a>1447. [FCD] Request to resolve issue LWG 1328</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7 [iostream.format] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-26</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#iostream.format">issues</a> in [iostream.format].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses US-139</b></p> + +Resolve issue LWG 1328 one way or the other, but +preferably in the direction outlined in the proposed +resolution, which, however, is not complete as-is: in any +case, the sentry must not set ok_ = false if is.good() == +false, otherwise istream::seekg, being an unformatted +input function, does not take any action because the +sentry object returns false when converted to type bool. +Thus, it remains impossible to seek away from end of file. + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Addressed by paper <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3168.htm">n3168</a>. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1449"></a>1449. [FCD] Incomplete specification of header <tt><cinttypes></tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 27.8.2 [istringstream] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Canada <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-24</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses CA-4</b></p> + +Subclause 27.9.2 [c.files] specifies that <cinttypes> has +declarations for abs() and div(); however, the signatures +are not present in this subclause. The signatures +proposed under TR1 ([tr.c99.inttypes]) are not present in +FCD (unless if intmax_t happened to be long long). It is +unclear as to which, if any of the abs() and div() functions +in [c.math] are meant to be declared by <cinttypes>. This +subclause mentions imaxabs() and imaxdiv(). These +functions, among other things, are not specified in FCD to +be the functions from Subclause 7.8 of the C Standard. +Finally, <cinttypes> is not specified in FCD to include +<cstdint> (whereas <inttypes.h> includes <stdint.h> in C). + +<p><i>[ +Post-Rapperswil, Daniel provides wording +]</i></p> + + +<p> +Subclause [c.files] specifies that <tt><cinttypes></tt> has declarations for <tt>abs()</tt> and <tt>div()</tt>; +however, the signatures are not present in this subclause. The signatures proposed under TR1 ([tr.c99.inttypes]) are not +present in FCD (unless if <tt>intmax_t</tt> happened to be <tt>long long</tt>). It is unclear as to which, if any of the +<tt>abs()</tt> and <tt>div()</tt> functions in [c.math] are meant to be declared by <tt><cinttypes></tt>. This +subclause mentions <tt>imaxabs()</tt> and <tt>imaxdiv()</tt>. These functions, among other things, are not specified in +FCD to be the functions from subclause 7.8 of the <tt>C</tt> Standard. Finally, <tt><cinttypes></tt> is not specified +in FCD to include <tt><cstdint></tt> (whereas <tt><inttypes.h></tt> includes <tt><stdint.h></tt> in <tt>C</tt>). +</p> + +<blockquote> +Moved to Tentatively Ready with proposed wording after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +<i>The wording refers to N3126.</i> +</p> +<ol> +<li>Add the following series of new paragraphs following [c.files] p.1: +<blockquote> +Table 132 describes header <tt><cinttypes></tt>. [<em>Note</em>: The macros defined by <tt><cinttypes></tt> are provided unconditionally. +In particular, the symbol <tt>__STDC_FORMAT_MACROS</tt>, mentioned in footnote 182 of the <tt>C</tt> standard, plays no role in <tt>C++</tt>. +— <em>end note</em> ] +<p> +<ins>2 - The contents of header <tt><cinttypes></tt> are the same as the Standard <tt>C</tt> library header <tt><inttypes.h></tt>, +with the following changes:</ins> +</p> +<p> +<ins>3 - The header <tt><cinttypes></tt> includes the header <tt><cstdint></tt> instead of <tt><stdint.h></tt>.</ins> +</p> +<p> +<ins>4 - If and only if the type <tt>intmax_t</tt> designates an extended integer type ([basic.fundamental]), the following function +signatures are added: +</ins></p><blockquote><pre><ins>intmax_t abs(intmax_t);</ins> +<ins>imaxdiv_t div(intmax_t, intmax_t);</ins> +</pre></blockquote> +<ins>which shall have the same semantics as the function signatures <tt>intmax_t imaxabs(intmax_t)</tt> and +<tt>imaxdiv_t imaxdiv(intmax_t, intmax_t)</tt>, respectively.</ins> + +<p></p> +</blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1453"></a>1453. [FCD] Default constructed match_results behavior for certain operations </h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 28.10.4 [re.results.acc] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-26</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#re.results.acc">issues</a> in [re.results.acc].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses GB-126</b></p> + +It's unclear how match_results should behave if it has +been default-constructed. The sub_match objects +returned by operator[], prefix and suffix cannot point to the +end of the sequence that was searched if no search was +done. The iterators held by unmatched sub_match objects +might be singular. + +<p><i>[ +Resolution proposed by ballot comment: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Add to match_results::operator[], +match_results::prefix and match_results::suffix:<br> +Requires: !empty() +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-10-24 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Accepting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3158.html">n3158</a> would solve this issue. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Addressed by paper <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3158.html">n3158</a>. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1455"></a>1455. [FCD] C language compatibility for atomics</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 29 [atomics] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Switzerland <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-26</p> +<p><b>View other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index-open.html#atomics">active issues</a> in [atomics].</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#atomics">issues</a> in [atomics].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1454">1454</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses CH-22, GB-128</b></p> +<p> +WG14 currently plans to introduce atomic facilities that are +intended to be compatible with the facilities of clause 29. +They should be compatible. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Resolution proposed by ballot comment +]</i></p> + +<p> +Make sure the headers in clause 29 are defined in +a way that is compatible with the planned C +standard. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010 Batavia +]</i></p> + +<p> +Resolved by adoption of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3193.html">n3193</a>. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Solved by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3193.html">n3193</a>. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1462"></a>1462. [FCD] Ambiguous value assignment to <tt>atomic_bool</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 29.5.1 [atomics.types.integral] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-26</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#atomics.types.integral">issues</a> in [atomics.types.integral].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1463">1463</a></p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses GB-132, US-157</b></p> + +The <tt>atomic_<em>itype</em></tt> types and <tt>atomic_address</tt> have two +overloads of <tt>operator=</tt>; one is <tt>volatile</tt> qualified, and the +other is not. <tt>atomic_bool</tt> only has the <tt>volatile</tt> qualified +version: +<pre><blockquote> +bool operator=(bool) volatile; +</blockquote></pre> +On a non-<tt>volatile</tt>-qualified object this is ambiguous with +the deleted copy-assignment operator +<pre><blockquote> +atomic_bool& operator=(atomic_bool const&) = delete; +</blockquote></pre> +due to the need for a single standard conversion in each +case when assigning a bool to an <tt>atomic_bool</tt> as in: +<pre><blockquote> +atomic_bool b; +b = true; +</blockquote></pre> +The conversions are: +<pre><blockquote> +atomic_bool& → atomic_bool volatile& +</blockquote></pre> + vs +<pre><blockquote> +bool → atomic_bool +</blockquote></pre> + +<p><i>[ +Proposed resolution as of NB comment: +]</i></p> + + +<p> +Change 29.5.1 [atomics.types.integral] as indicated: + +</p><blockquote><pre>namespace std { + typedef struct atomic_bool { + [..] + bool operator=(bool) volatile; + <ins>bool operator=(bool);</ins> + } atomic_bool; + [..] +} +</pre></blockquote> +<p></p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-10-27 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Accepting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3164.html">n3164</a> would solve this issue +by replacing <tt>atomic_bool</tt> by <tt>atomic<bool></tt>. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010 Batavia +]</i></p> + +<p> +Resolved by adoption of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3193.html">n3193</a>. +</p> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Solved by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3193.html">n3193</a>. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1464"></a>1464. [FCD] Underspecified typedefs for atomic integral types</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 29.5.1 [atomics.types.integral] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-26</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#atomics.types.integral">issues</a> in [atomics.types.integral].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses US-160</b></p> + +The last sentence of 29.5.1 [atomics.types.integral] p.1 says: +<blockquote><p> +Table 143 shows typedefs to atomic integral classes and the corresponding <tt><cstdint></tt> typedefs. +</p></blockquote> +That's nice, but nothing says these are supposed to be part of the implementation, and +they are not listed in the synopsis. + +<p><i>[ +Proposed resolution as of NB comment +]</i></p> + + +<p> +</p><ol> +<li>Remove Table 143 — Atomics for standard typedef types. +<p> +</p> +</li> +<li>Change 29.5.1 [atomics.types.integral] p.1 as indicated: +<blockquote><p> +1 The name <tt>atomic_<em>itype</em></tt> and the functions operating on it in the preceding synopsis are placeholders for a +set of classes and functions. Throughout the preceding synopsis, <tt>atomic_<em>itype</em></tt> should be replaced by each +of the class names in Table 142 and integral should be replaced by the integral type corresponding to the +class name. <del>Table 143 shows typedefs to atomic integral classes and the corresponding <tt><cstdint></tt> typedefs.</del> +</p></blockquote> +</li> +</ol> +<p></p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-10-27 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Accepting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3164.html">n3164</a> would solve this issue. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + +<p> +Resolved by adopting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3193.html">n3193</a>. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Solved by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3193.html">n3193</a>. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1465"></a>1465. [FCD] Missing arithmetic operators for <tt>atomic_address</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 29.5.2 [atomics.types.address] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-26</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#atomics.types.address">issues</a> in [atomics.types.address].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses US-161</b></p> + +<tt>atomic_address</tt> has <tt>operator+=</tt> and <tt>operator-=</tt>, but no +<tt>operator++</tt> or <tt>operator--</tt>. The template specialization +<tt>atomic<Ty*></tt> has all of them. + +<p><i>[ +2010-10-27 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Accepting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3164.html">n3164</a> would solve this issue by +replacing <tt>atomic_address</tt> by <tt>atomic<void*></tt>. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Resolved in Batavia by accepting +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3193.html">n3193</a>. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Change 29.5.2 [atomics.types.address], class <tt>atomic_address</tt> synopsis, as indicated: +</p><blockquote><pre>namespace std { + typedef struct atomic_address { + [..] + void* operator=(const void*) volatile; + void* operator=(const void*); + <ins>void* operator++(int) volatile;</ins> + <ins>void* operator++(int);</ins> + <ins>void* operator--(int) volatile;</ins> + <ins>void* operator--(int);</ins> + <ins>void* operator++() volatile;</ins> + <ins>void* operator++();</ins> + <ins>void* operator--() volatile;</ins> + <ins>void* operator--();</ins> + void* operator+=(ptrdiff_t) volatile; + void* operator+=(ptrdiff_t); + void* operator-=(ptrdiff_t) volatile; + void* operator-=(ptrdiff_t); + } atomic_address; + [..] +} +</pre></blockquote> +<p></p> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1466"></a>1466. [FCD] Silent <tt>const</tt> breakage by <tt>compare_exchange_*</tt> member functions</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 29.5.2 [atomics.types.address] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-26</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#atomics.types.address">issues</a> in [atomics.types.address].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses US-162</b></p> + +The <tt>compare_exchange_weak</tt> and <tt>compare_exchange_strong</tt> member functions that take +<tt>const void*</tt> arguments lead to a silent removal of <tt>const</tt>, because the <tt>load</tt> +member function and other acessors return the stored value as a <tt>void*</tt>. + +<p><i>[ +Proposed resolution as of NB comment: +]</i></p> + + +<p> +Change 29.5.2 [atomics.types.address], class <tt>atomic_address</tt> synopsis, as indicated: + +</p><blockquote><pre>namespace std { + typedef struct atomic_address { + [..] + <del>bool compare_exchange_weak(const void*&, const void*, + memory_order, memory_order) volatile;</del> + <del>bool compare_exchange_weak(const void*&, const void*, + memory_order, memory_order);</del> + <del>bool compare_exchange_strong(const void*&, const void*, + memory_order, memory_order) volatile;</del> + <del>bool compare_exchange_strong(const void*&, const void*, + memory_order, memory_order);</del> + <del>bool compare_exchange_weak(const void*&, const void*, + memory_order = memory_order_seq_cst) volatile;</del> + <del>bool compare_exchange_weak(const void*&, const void*, + memory_order = memory_order_seq_cst);</del> + <del>bool compare_exchange_strong(const void*&, const void*, + memory_order = memory_order_seq_cst) volatile;</del> + <del>bool compare_exchange_strong(const void*&, const void*, + memory_order = memory_order_seq_cst);</del> + [..] + } atomic_address; + [..] +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p></p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-10-27 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Accepting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3164.html">n3164</a> +would solve this issue by replacing <tt>atomic_address</tt> by <tt>atomic<void*></tt>. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Resolved in Batavia by accepting +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3193.html">n3193</a>. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Solved by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3193.html">n3193</a>. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1467"></a>1467. [FCD] Deriving <tt>atomic<T*></tt> from <tt>atomic_address</tt> breaks type safety</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 29.5.2 [atomics.types.address] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-26</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#atomics.types.address">issues</a> in [atomics.types.address].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses US-163</b></p> + +Requiring <tt>atomic<T*></tt> to be derived from <tt>atomic_address</tt> breaks type safety: +<blockquote><pre>atomic<double*> ip; +char ch; +atomic_store(&ip, &ch); +*ip.load() = 3.14159; +</pre></blockquote> +The last line overwrites <tt>ch</tt> with a value of type <tt>double</tt>. + +<p><i>[ +2010-10-27 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Resolving this issue will also solve <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1469">1469</a> +</p> +Accepting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3164.html">n3164</a> would solve this issue by +removing <tt>atomic_address</tt>. +</blockquote> +<p><i>[ +Resolved in Batavia by accepting +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3193.html">n3193</a>. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<ol> +<li>Change 29.5 [atomics.types.generic], class template specialization <tt>atomic<T*></tt> synopsis, as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>namespace std { + template <class T> struct atomic<T*> <del>: atomic_address</del> { + [..] + }; + [..] +} +</pre></blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 29.5 [atomics.types.generic] p. 4 as indicated: +<p></p><blockquote> +4 There are pointer partial specializations on the <tt>atomic</tt> class template. <del>These specializations shall be publicly +derived from <tt>atomic_address</tt>.</del> The unit of addition/subtraction for these specializations shall be the size +of the referenced type. These specializations shall have trivial default constructors and trivial destructors. +</blockquote><p></p> +</li> +</ol> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1468"></a>1468. [FCD] <tt>atomic_address::compare_exchange_*</tt> member functions should match <tt>atomic_compare_exchange_*</tt> free functions</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 29.5.2 [atomics.types.address] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-26</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#atomics.types.address">issues</a> in [atomics.types.address].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses US-164</b></p> + +<tt>atomic_address</tt> has member functions <tt>compare_exchange_weak</tt> and +<tt>compare_exchange_strong</tt> that take arguments of type <tt>const void*</tt>, +in addition to the <tt>void*</tt> versions. If these member functions survive, +there should be corresponding free functions. + +<p><i>[ +2010-10-27 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Accepting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3164.html">n3164</a> would solve this issue +differently by removing the overloads with <tt>const void*</tt> arguments, because they break type-safety. +</blockquote> +<p><i>[ +Resolved in Batavia by accepting +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3193.html">n3193</a>. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Extend the synopsis around <tt>atomic_address</tt> in 29.5.2 [atomics.types.address] +as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>namespace std { + [..] + bool atomic_compare_exchange_weak(volatile atomic_address*, void**, void*); + bool atomic_compare_exchange_weak(atomic_address*, void**, void*); + bool atomic_compare_exchange_strong(volatile atomic_address*, void**, void*); + bool atomic_compare_exchange_strong(atomic_address*, void**, void*); + bool atomic_compare_exchange_weak_explicit(volatile atomic_address*, void**, void*, + memory_order, memory_order); + bool atomic_compare_exchange_weak_explicit(atomic_address*, void**, void*, + memory_order, memory_order); + bool atomic_compare_exchange_strong_explicit(volatile atomic_address*, void**, void*, + memory_order, memory_order); + bool atomic_compare_exchange_strong_explicit(atomic_address*, void**, void*, + memory_order, memory_order); + <ins>bool atomic_compare_exchange_weak(volatile atomic_address*, const void**, const void*);</ins> + <ins>bool atomic_compare_exchange_weak(atomic_address*, const void**, const void*);</ins> + <ins>bool atomic_compare_exchange_strong(volatile atomic_address*, const void**, const void*);</ins> + <ins>bool atomic_compare_exchange_strong(atomic_address*, const void**, const void*);</ins> + <ins>bool atomic_compare_exchange_weak_explicit(volatile atomic_address*, const void**, const void*, + memory_order, memory_order);</ins> + <ins>bool atomic_compare_exchange_weak_explicit(atomic_address*, const void**, const void*, + memory_order, memory_order);</ins> + <ins>bool atomic_compare_exchange_strong_explicit(volatile atomic_address*, const void**, const void*, + memory_order, memory_order);</ins> + <ins>bool atomic_compare_exchange_strong_explicit(volatile atomic_address*, const void**, const void*, + memory_order, memory_order);</ins> + <ins>bool atomic_compare_exchange_strong_explicit(atomic_address*, const void**, const void*, + memory_order, memory_order);</ins> + [..] +} +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1469"></a>1469. [FCD] <tt>atomic<T*></tt> inheritance from <tt>atomic_address</tt> breaks type safety</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 29.5 [atomics.types.generic] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-26</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#atomics.types.generic">issues</a> in [atomics.types.generic].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses GB-133</b></p> + +The free functions that operate on <tt>atomic_address</tt> can be +used to store a pointer to an unrelated type in an <tt>atomic<T*></tt> +without a cast. e.g. +<blockquote><pre>int i; +atomic<int*> ai(&i); +string s; +atomic_store(&ai,&s); +</pre></blockquote> +Overload the <tt>atomic_store</tt>, <tt>atomic_exchange</tt> and +<tt>atomic_compare_exchange_[weak/strong]</tt> operations for +<tt>atomic<T*></tt> to allow storing only pointers to <tt>T</tt>. + +<p><i>[ +2010-10-27 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<p> +Resolving this issue will also solve <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1467">1467</a> +</p> +Accepting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3164.html">n3164</a> would solve this issue by +removing <tt>atomic_address</tt>. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[Resolved in Batavia by accepting +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3193.html">n3193</a>. +]</i></p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p>Add the following overloads to 29.5 [atomics.types.generic], the synopsis around the specialization +<tt>atomic<T*></tt>, as indicated: +</p><blockquote><pre>namespace std { + [..] + template <class T> struct atomic<T*> : atomic_address { + [..] + }; + + <ins>template<typename T></ins> + <ins>void atomic_store(atomic<T*>&,T*);</ins> + <ins>template<typename T></ins> + <ins>void atomic_store(atomic<T*>&,void*) = delete;</ins> + <ins>template<typename T></ins> + <ins>void atomic_store_explicit(atomic<T*>&,T*,memory_order);</ins> + <ins>template<typename T></ins> + <ins>void atomic_store_explicit(atomic<T*>&,void*,memory_order) = delete;</ins> + <ins>template<typename T></ins> + <ins>T* atomic_exchange(atomic<T*>&,T*);</ins> + <ins>template<typename T></ins> + <ins>T* atomic_exchange(atomic<T*>&,void*) = delete;</ins> + <ins>template<typename T></ins> + <ins>T* atomic_exchange_explicit(atomic<T*>&,T*,memory_order);</ins> + <ins>template<typename T></ins> + <ins>T* atomic_exchange_explicit(atomic<T*>&,void*,memory_order) = delete;</ins> + <ins>template<typename T></ins> + <ins>T* atomic_compare_exchange_weak(atomic<T*>&,T**,T*);</ins> + <ins>template<typename T></ins> + <ins>T* atomic_compare_exchange_weak(atomic<T*>&,void**,void*) = delete;</ins> + <ins>template<typename T></ins> + <ins>T* atomic_compare_exchange_weak_explicit(atomic<T*>&,T**,T*,memory_order);</ins> + <ins>template<typename T></ins> + <ins>T* atomic_compare_exchange_weak_explicit(atomic<T*>&,void**,void*,memory_order) = delete;</ins> + <ins>template<typename T></ins> + <ins>T* atomic_compare_exchange_strong(atomic<T*>&,T**,T*);</ins> + <ins>template<typename T></ins> + <ins>T* atomic_compare_exchange_strong(atomic<T*>&,void**,void*) = delete;</ins> + <ins>template<typename T></ins> + <ins>T* atomic_compare_exchange_strong_explicit(atomic<T*>&,T**,T*,memory_order);</ins> + <ins>template<typename T></ins> + <ins>T* atomic_compare_exchange_strong_explicit(atomic<T*>&,void**,void*,memory_order) = delete;</ins> + +} +</pre></blockquote> +<p></p> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1481"></a>1481. [FCD] Missing Lockable requirements</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30.2 [thread.req] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-26</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses GB-138</b></p> + +The FCD combines the requirements for lockable objects +with those for the standard mutex objects. These should +be separate. This is LWG issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1268">1268</a>. + +<p><i>[ +Resolution proposed by ballot comment: +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +See attached Appendix 1 - Additional Details +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-11-01 Daniel comments: +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +Paper <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3130.html">n3130</a> addresses +this issue. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Resolved by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3197.html">n3197</a>. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1482"></a>1482. [FCD] Timeout operations are under-specified</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30.2.4 [thread.req.timing] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-26</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#thread.req.timing">issues</a> in [thread.req.timing].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses US-181</b></p> + +The timeout operations are under-specified. + +<p><i>[ +Resolution proposed by ballot comment: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Define precise semantics for <tt>timeout_until</tt> and <tt>timeout_for</tt>. See +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3141.pdf">n3141</a> page 193 - Appendix 1 - Additional Details +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-11-01 Daniel comments: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Accepting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3128.html">n3128</a> would solve this issue. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Resolved by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3128.html">n3191</a>. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1490"></a>1490. [FCD] Mutex requirements too stringent</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30.4.1 [thread.mutex.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Switzerland <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-26</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#thread.mutex.requirements">issues</a> in [thread.mutex.requirements].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses CH-27</b></p> + +The mutex requirements force <tt>try_lock</tt> to be +<tt>noexcept(true)</tt>. However, where they are used by the +generic algorithms, those relax this requirement and say +that <tt>try_lock</tt> may throw. This means the requirement is +too stringent, also a non-throwing <tt>try_lock</tt> does not allow +for a diagnostic such as <tt>system_error</tt> that <tt>lock()</tt> +will give us. + +<p><i>[ +Resolution proposed by ballot comment: +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +delete p18, adjust 30.4.4 p1 and p4 accordingly +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-11-01 Daniel comments: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Accepting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3130.html">n3130</a> would solve this issue. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Resolved by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3197.html">n3197</a>. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1491"></a>1491. [FCD] <tt>try_lock</tt> does not guarantee forward progress</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30.4.1 [thread.mutex.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#thread.mutex.requirements">issues</a> in [thread.mutex.requirements].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses US-186</b></p> + +<tt>try_lock</tt> does not provide a guarantee of forward progress +because it is allowed to spuriously fail. + +<p><i>[ +Resolution proposed by ballot comment: +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +The standard mutex types must not fail spuriously +in <tt>try_lock</tt>. See <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3141.pdf">n3141</a> page 205 - Appendix 1 - Additional Details +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-11-01 Daniel comments: +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +Paper <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3152.html">n3152</a> addresses +this issue. +</blockquote> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Resolved by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3209.html">n3209</a>. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1492"></a>1492. [FCD] Mutex requirements should not be bound to threads</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30.4.1 [thread.mutex.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-26</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#thread.mutex.requirements">issues</a> in [thread.mutex.requirements].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses US-188</b></p> + +Mutex requirements should not be bound to threads + +<p><i>[ +Resolution proposed by ballot comment: +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +See Appendix 1 of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3141.pdf">n3141</a> - Additional Details, p. 208. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-10-24 Daniel adds: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Accepting <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3130.html">n3130</a> would solve this issue. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Resolved by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3197.html">n3197</a>. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1498"></a>1498. [FCD] Unclear specification for [thread.condition]</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30.5 [thread.condition] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Switzerland <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-29</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#thread.condition">issues</a> in [thread.condition].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses CH-29</b></p> + +It is unclear if a spurious wake-up during the loop and reentering +of the blocked state due to a repeated execution +of the loop will adjust the timer of the blocking with the +respect to the previously specified rel_time value. + +<p><i>[ +Resolution proposed by ballot comment: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Make it clear (e.g. by a note) that when reexecuting +the loop the waiting time when blocked +will be adjusted with respect to the elapsed time of +the previous loop executions. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-08-13 Peter Sommerlad comments and provides wording: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Problem: It is unclear if a spurious wake-up during the loop and re-entering of the blocked state due +to a repeated execution of the loop will adjust the timer of the blocking with the respect to the +previously specified <tt>rel_time</tt> value. +<p> +Proposed Resolution from CH29: +</p><p> +Make it clear (e.g. by a note) that when re-executing the loop the waiting time when blocked will be +adjusted with respect to the elapsed time of the previous loop executions. +</p><p> +Discussion in Rapperswil: +</p><p> +Assuming the introduction of a mandatory <tt>steady_clock</tt> proposed by US-181 to the FCD the +specification of <tt>condition_variable::wait_for</tt> can be defined in terms of <tt>wait_until</tt> +using the <tt>steady_clock</tt>. This is also interleaving with US-181, because that touches the +same paragraph (30.5.1 p 25, p34 and 30.5.2 p 20, p 28 in n3092.pdf) +</p><p> +(The "as if" in the proposed solutions should be confirmed by the standardization terminology experts) +</p></blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-11 Batavia: Resolved by applying <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3191.html">n3191</a> +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +<ol> +<li>Change 30.5.1 [thread.condition.condvar] paragraph 25, <tt>wait_for</tt> <i>Effects</i> as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class Rep, class Period> +cv_status wait_for(unique_lock<mutex>& lock, + const chrono::duration<Rep, Period>& rel_time); +</pre></blockquote> +<blockquote> +[..] +<p> +25 <i>Effects</i>: <ins>as if</ins> +</p><blockquote><pre><ins>return wait_until(lock, chrono::steady_clock::now() + rel_time);</ins> +</pre></blockquote> +<ul> +<li><del>Atomically calls <tt>lock.unlock()</tt> and blocks on <tt>*this</tt>.</del> +</li> +<li><del>When unblocked, calls <tt>lock.lock()</tt> (possibly blocking on the lock), then returns.</del> +</li> +<li><del>The function will unblock when signaled by a call to <tt>notify_one()</tt> or a call to <tt>notify_all()</tt>, +by the elapsed time <tt>rel_time</tt> passing (30.2.4), or spuriously.</del> +</li> +<li><del>If the function exits via an exception, <tt>lock.lock()</tt> shall be called prior to exiting the function scope.</del> +</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 30.5.1 [thread.condition.condvar] paragraph 34, <tt>wait_for</tt> with predicate <i>Effects</i> as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class Rep, class Period, class Predicate> +bool wait_for(unique_lock<mutex>& lock, + const chrono::duration<Rep, Period>& rel_time, + Predicate pred); +</pre></blockquote> +<blockquote> +[..] +<p> +34 <i>Effects</i>: <ins>as if</ins> +</p><blockquote><pre><ins>return wait_until(lock, chrono::steady_clock::now() + rel_time, std::move(pred));</ins> +</pre></blockquote> +<ul> +<li><del>Executes a loop: Within the loop the function first evaluates <tt>pred()</tt> and exits the loop if the +result is <tt>true</tt>. +</del></li> + +<li><del>Atomically calls <tt>lock.unlock()</tt> and blocks on <tt>*this</tt>. +</del></li> + +<li><del>When unblocked, calls <tt>lock.lock()</tt> (possibly blocking on the lock). +</del></li> + +<li><del>The function will unblock when signaled by a call to <tt>notify_one()</tt> or a call to <tt>notify_all()</tt>, +by the elapsed time <tt>rel_time</tt> passing (30.2.4), or spuriously. +</del></li> + +<li><del>If the function exits via an exception, <tt>lock.lock()</tt> shall be called prior to exiting the function +scope. +</del></li> + +<li><del>The loop terminates when <tt>pred()</tt> returns <tt>true</tt> or when the time duration specified by <tt>rel_time</tt> +has elapsed. +</del></li> + +</ul> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li>Change 30.5.2 [thread.condition.condvarany] paragraph 20, <tt>wait_for</tt> <i>Effects</i> as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class Lock, class Rep, class Period> +cv_status wait_for(Lock& lock, const chrono::duration<Rep, Period>& rel_time); +</pre></blockquote> +<blockquote> +20 <i>Effects</i>: <ins>as if</ins> +<blockquote><pre><ins>return wait_until(lock, chrono::steady_clock::now() + rel_time);</ins> +</pre></blockquote> +<ul> +<li><del>Atomically calls <tt>lock.unlock()</tt> and blocks on <tt>*this</tt>. +</del></li> + +<li><del>When unblocked, calls <tt>lock.lock()</tt> (possibly blocking on the lock), then returns. +</del></li> + +<li><del>The function will unblock when signaled by a call to <tt>notify_one()</tt> or a call to <tt>notify_all()</tt>, +by the elapsed time <tt>rel_time</tt> passing (30.2.4), or spuriously. +</del></li> + +<li><del>If the function exits via an exception, <tt>lock.unlock()</tt> shall be called prior to exiting the function +scope. +</del></li> +</ul> +</blockquote> +</li> + +<li>Change 30.5.2 [thread.condition.condvarany] paragraph 28, <tt>wait_for</tt> with predicate <i>Effects</i> as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template <class Lock, class Rep, class Period, class Predicate> +bool wait_for(Lock& lock, const chrono::duration<Rep, Period>& rel_time, Predicate pred); +</pre></blockquote> +<blockquote> +28 <i>Effects</i>: <ins>as if</ins> +<blockquote><pre><ins>return wait_until(lock, chrono::steady_clock::now() + rel_time, std::move(pred));</ins> +</pre></blockquote> +<ul> +<li><del>Executes a loop: Within the loop the function first evaluates <tt>pred()</tt> and exits the loop if the +result is <tt>true</tt>. +</del></li> + +<li><del>Atomically calls <tt>lock.unlock()</tt> and blocks on <tt>*this</tt>. +</del></li> + +<li><del>When unblocked, calls <tt>lock.lock()</tt> (possibly blocking on the lock). +</del></li> + +<li><del>The function will unblock when signaled by a call to <tt>notify_one()</tt> or a call to <tt>notify_all()</tt>, +by the elapsed time <tt>rel_time</tt> passing (30.2.4), or spuriously. +</del></li> + +<li><del>If the function exits via an exception, <tt>lock.unlock()</tt> shall be called prior to exiting the function +scope. +</del></li> + +<li><del>The loop terminates when <tt>pred()</tt> returns <tt>true</tt> or when the time duration specified by <tt>rel_time</tt> +has elapsed. +</del></li> +</ul> +</blockquote> +</li> + +</ol> + +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Resolved by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3191.html">n3191</a>. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1501"></a>1501. [FCD] spec for managing associated asynchronous +state has problems</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30.6 [futures] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-26</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#futures">issues</a> in [futures].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses US-194</b></p> + +The specification for managing associated asynchronous +state is confusing, sometimes omitted, and redundantly +specified. + +<p><i>[ +Resolution proposed by ballot comment: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Define terms-of-art for releasing, making ready, +and abandoning an associated asynchronous +state. Use those terms where appropriate. See +Appendix 1 - Additional Details +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Resolved in Batavia by accepting +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3192.html">n3192</a>. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1508"></a>1508. [FCD] Rename <tt>packaged_task::operator bool()</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30.6.10 [futures.task] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-26</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#futures.task">issues</a> in [futures.task].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses US-201</b></p> +<p> +<tt>packaged_task</tt> provides <tt>operator bool()</tt> to check whether +an object has an associated asynchronous state. The various <tt>future</tt> +types provide a member function <tt>valid()</tt> that does the same thing. +The names of these members should be the same. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Resolution proposed by ballot comment: +]</i></p> + +<blockquote> +Replaced the name <tt>packaged_task::operator bool()</tt> with <tt>packaged_task::valid()</tt> in the synopsis +(30.6.10 [futures.task]/2) and the member function specification (before 30.6.10.1 [futures.task.members]/15). +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +2010-11-02 Daniel translates proposed wording changes into a proper proposed resolution +and verified that no other places implicitly take advantage of <tt>packaged_task</tt> +conversion to bool. +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[Resolved in Batavia by accepting +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3194.html">n3194</a>. +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<ol> +<li>Change 30.6.10 [futures.task]/2, class template <tt>packaged_task</tt> synopsis as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>template<class R, class... ArgTypes> +class packaged_task<R(ArgTypes...)> { +public: + typedef R result_type; + [..] + <del>explicit operator</del> bool <ins>valid</ins>() const; + [..] +}; +</pre></blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 30.6.10 [futures.task] before p. 15 as indicated: +<blockquote><pre><del>explicit operator</del> bool <ins>valid</ins>() const; +</pre><blockquote> +15 <em>Returns</em>: true only if <tt>*this</tt> has an associated asynchronous state. +<p> +16 <em>Throws</em>: nothing. +</p></blockquote></blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1513"></a>1513. [FCD] 'launch' enum too restrictive</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30.6 [futures] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Switzerland <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-26</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#futures">issues</a> in [futures].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses CH-36</b></p> + +Providing only three different possible values for the enum +<tt>launch</tt> and saying that <tt>launch::any</tt> means either +<tt>launch::sync</tt> or <tt>launch::async</tt> is very restricting. This +hinders future implementors to provide clever +infrastructures that can simply by used by a call to +<tt>async(launch::any,...)</tt>. Also there is no hook for an +implementation to provide additional alternatives to <tt>launch</tt> +enumeration and no useful means to combine those (i.e. +interpret them like flags). We believe something like +<tt>async(launch::sync | launch::async, ...)</tt> should be allowed +and can become especially useful if one could say also +something like <tt>async(launch::any & ~launch::sync, ....)</tt> +respectively. This flexibility might limit the features usable +in the function called through <tt>async()</tt>, but it will allow a +path to effortless profit from improved hardware/software +without complicating the programming model when just +using <tt>async(launch::any,...)</tt> + +<p><i>[ +Resolution proposed by ballot comment: +]</i></p> + +<p> +Change in 30.6.1 [futures.overview] 'enum class launch' to allow +further implementation defined values and provide +the following bit-operators on the launch values +(<tt>operator|</tt>, <tt>operator&</tt>, <tt>operator~</tt> delivering a +<tt>launch</tt> value). +</p><p> +Note: a possible implementation might use an +unsigned value to represent the <tt>launch</tt> enums, +but we shouldn't limit the standard to just 32 or 64 +available bits in that case and also should keep +the launch enums in their own enum namespace. +</p><p> +Change [future.async] p3 according to the +changes to <tt>enum launch</tt>. change --<tt>launch::any</tt> to +"the implementation may choose any of the +policies it provides." Note: this can mean that an +implementation may restrict the called function to +take all required information by copy in case it will +be called in a different address space, or even, on +a different processor type. To ensure that a call is +either performed like <tt>launch::async</tt> or +<tt>launch::sync</tt> describe one should call +<tt>async(launch::sync|launch::async,...)</tt> +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010-11-02 Daniel comments: +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +The new paper <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3113.html">n3113</a> provides concrete wording. +</blockquote> + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Resolved by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3188.html">n3188</a>. + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1516"></a>1516. [FCD] No specification for which header contains <tt>auto_ptr</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> D.12 [depr.auto.ptr] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-23</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p><b>Addresses GB-142</b></p> +<p> +<tt>auto_ptr</tt> does not appear in the <tt><memory></tt> synopsis and +[depr.auto.ptr] doesn't say which header declares it. +Conversely, the deprecated binders <tt>bind1st</tt> etc. are in the +<tt><functional></tt> synopsis, this is inconsistent +</p> +<p> +Either <tt>auto_ptr</tt> should be declared in the +<tt><memory></tt> synopsis, or the deprecated binders +should be removed from the <tt><functional></tt> synopsis +and appendix D should say which header declares +the binders and <tt>auto_ptr</tt>. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Post-Rapperswil +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p>Add the following lines to the synopsis of header <tt><memory></tt> +in [memory]/1:<br></p> +<blockquote> +<pre><ins>// [depr.auto.ptr], Class auto_ptr (deprecated): +template <class X> class auto_ptr;<br></ins> +</pre></blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1517"></a>1517. default_delete's default constructor should be trivial</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.9.1.2 [unique.ptr.dltr.dflt] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2010-09-12 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#unique.ptr.dltr.dflt">issues</a> in [unique.ptr.dltr.dflt].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The current working draft does specify the default c'tor of <tt>default_delete</tt> in a manner +to guarantee static initialization for default-constructed objects of static storage duration +as a consequence of the acceptance of the proposal <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2976.html">n2976</a> +but this paper overlooked the fact that the suggested declaration does not ensure that the type +will be a trivial type. The type <tt>default_delete</tt> was always considered as a simple wrapper for +calling <tt>delete</tt> or <tt>delete[]</tt>, respectivly and should be a trivial type. +</p> +<p> +In agreement with the new settled core language rules this easy to realize by just changing the declaration to +</p><blockquote><pre>constexpr default_delete()<ins> = default</ins>; +</pre></blockquote><p></p> +<p> +This proposal also automatically solves the problem, that the semantics of the default constructor of the +partial specialization <tt>default_delete<T[]></tt> is not specified at all. By defaulting its default constructor +as well, the semantics are well-defined. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Post-Rapperswil +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p><i>The following wording changes are against N3126.</i></p> + +<ol> +<li>Change the synopsis of the primary template definition of <tt>default_delete</tt> in [unique.ptr.dltr.dflt] as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>namespace std { + template <class T> struct default_delete { + constexpr default_delete()<ins> = default</ins>; + template <class U> default_delete(const default_delete<U>&); + void operator()(T*) const; + }; +} +</pre></blockquote> +</li> +<li> +Remove the prototype specification of the <tt>default_delete</tt> default constructor in [unique.ptr.dltr.dflt]/1. This +brings it in harmony with the style used in the partial specialization <tt>default_delete<T[]></tt>. Since there are +neither implied nor explicit members, there is no possibility to misinterpret what the constructor does: +<blockquote><pre><del>constexpr default_delete();</del> +</pre><blockquote> +<del>1 <em>Effects</em>: Default constructs a <tt>default_delete</tt> object.</del> +</blockquote></blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change the synopsis of the partial specialization of <tt>default_delete</tt> in [unique.ptr.dltr.dflt1] as indicated: +<blockquote><pre>namespace std { + template <class T> struct default_delete<T[]> { + constexpr default_delete()<ins> = default</ins>; + void operator()(T*) const; + template <class U> void operator()(U*) const = delete; + }; +}</pre></blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1518"></a>1518. Waiting for deferred functions</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 30.6 [futures] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Alberto Ganesh Barbati <b>Opened:</b> 2010-09-14 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-24</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#futures">issues</a> in [futures].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p>The current WP N3126 contains ambiguous statements about the +behaviour of functions <tt>wait_for</tt>/<tt>wait_until</tt> in +case the future refers to a deferred function. Moreover, I believe +it describes a disputable intent, different from the one contained +in the original async proposals, that may have been introduced +inadvertently during the "async cleanup" that occurred recently. +Consider the following case:</p> +<blockquote> +<pre>int f(); +future<int> x = async(launch::deferred, f); +future_status s = x.wait_for(chrono::milliseconds(100)); +</pre></blockquote> +<p>This example raises two questions:</p> +<ol> +<li>is <tt>f</tt> invoked?</li> +<li>what is the value of <tt>s</tt>?</li> +</ol> +<p>According to the current WP, the answer to question 1 is yes, +because 30.6.9/3 says "The first call to a function waiting for the +associated asynchronous state created by this async call to become +ready shall invoke the deferred function in the thread that called +the waiting function". The answer to question 2, however, is not as +clear. According to 30.6.6/23, s should be +<tt>future_status::deferred</tt> because <tt>x</tt> refers to a +deferred function that is not running, but it should also be +<tt>future_status::ready</tt> because after executing <tt>f</tt> +(and we saw that <tt>f</tt> is always executed) the state becomes +ready. By the way, the expression "deferred function that is not +running" is very unfortunate in itself, because it may apply to +both the case where the function hasn't yet started, as well as the +case where it was executed and completed.</p> +<p>While we clearly have a defect in the WP answering to question +2, it is my opinion that the answer to question 1 is wrong, which +is even worse. Consider that the execution of the function +<tt>f</tt> can take an arbitrarily long time. Having +<tt>wait_for()</tt> invoke <tt>f</tt> is a potential violation of +the reasonable expectation that the execution of +<tt>x.wait_for(chrono::milliseconds(100))</tt> shall take <u>at most</u> +100 milliseconds plus a delay dependent on the quality of implementation +and the quality of management (as described in paper N3128). +In fact, previous versions of the WP +clearly specified that only function <tt>wait()</tt> is required to +execute the deferred function, while <tt>wait_for()</tt> and +<tt>wait_until()</tt> shouldn't.</p> +<p>The proposed resolution captures the intent that +<tt>wait_for()</tt> and <tt>wait_until()</tt> should never attempt +to invoke the deferred function. In other words, the P/R provides +the following answers to the two questions above:</p> +<ol> +<li>no</li> +<li><tt>future_status::deferred</tt></li> +</ol> +<p>In order to simplify the wording, the definition of <i>deferred +function</i> has been tweaked so that the function is no longer +considered deferred once its evaluation has started, as suggested +by Howard.</p> +<p>Discussions in the reflector questioned whether +<tt>wait_for()</tt> and <tt>wait_until()</tt> should return +immediately or actually wait hoping for a second thread to execute +the deferred function. I believe that waiting could be useful only +in a very specific scenario but detrimental in the general case and +would introduce another source of ambiguity: should +<tt>wait_for()</tt> return <tt>future_status::deferred</tt> or +<tt>future_status::timeout</tt> after the wait? Therefore the P/R +specifies that <tt>wait_for</tt>/<tt>wait_until</tt> shall return +immediately, which is simpler, easier to explain and more useful in +the general case.</p> + +<p><i>[ +Post-Rapperswil +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p>The proposed wording changes are relative to the Final Committee Draft, +N3126.</p> +<p><b>Note to the editor:</b> the proposed wording is meant not be in conflict +with any change proposed by paper N3128 "C++ Timeout Specification". +Ellipsis are deliberately used to avoid any unintended overlapping.</p> +<ol> +<li> +<p>In [futures.unique_future] 30.6.6/22:</p> +<p>Effects: <ins>none if the associated asynchronous state contains +a deferred function (30.6.9), otherwise</ins> blocks until the +associated asynchronous state is ready or [...].</p> +</li> +<li> +<p>In [futures.unique_future] 30.6.6/23 first bullet:</p> +<p>— future_status::deferred if the associated asynchronous +state contains a deferred function <del>that is not +running</del>.</p> +</li> +<li> +<p>In [futures.unique_future] 30.6.6/25:</p> +<p>Effects: <ins>none if the associated asynchronous state contains +a deferred function (30.6.9), otherwise</ins> blocks until the +associated asynchronous state is ready or [...].</p> +</li> +<li> +<p>In [futures.unique_future] 30.6.6/26 first bullet:</p> +<p>— future_status::deferred if the associated asynchronous +state contains a deferred function <del>that is not +running</del>.</p> +</li> +<li> +<p>In [futures.shared_future] 30.6.7/27</p> +<p>Effects: <ins>none if the associated asynchronous state contains +a deferred function (30.6.9), otherwise</ins> blocks until the +associated asynchronous state is ready or [...].</p> +</li> +<li> +<p>In [futures.unique_future] 30.6.7/28 first bullet:</p> +<p>— future_status::deferred if the associated asynchronous +state contains a deferred function <del>that is not +running</del>.</p> +</li> +<li> +<p>In [futures.shared_future] 30.6.6/30:</p> +<p>Effects: <ins>none if the associated asynchronous state contains +a deferred function (30.6.9), otherwise</ins> blocks until the +associated asynchronous state is ready or [...].</p> +</li> +<li> +<p>In [futures.unique_future] 30.6.7/31 first bullet:</p> +<p>— future_status::deferred if the associated asynchronous +state contains a deferred function <del>that is not +running</del>.</p> +</li> +<li> +<p>In [futures.atomic_future] 30.6.8/23</p> +<p>Effects: <ins>none if the associated asynchronous state contains +a deferred function (30.6.9), otherwise</ins> blocks until the +associated asynchronous state is ready or [...].</p> +</li> +<li> +<p>In [futures.unique_future] 30.6.8/24 first bullet:</p> +<p>— future_status::deferred if the associated asynchronous +state contains a deferred function <del>that is not +running</del>.</p> +</li> +<li> +<p>In [futures.atomic_future] 30.6.8/27:</p> +<p>Effects: <ins>none if the associated asynchronous state contains +a deferred function (30.6.9), otherwise</ins> blocks until the +associated asynchronous state is ready or [...].</p> +</li> +<li> +<p>In [futures.unique_future] 30.6.8/28 first bullet:</p> +<p>— future_status::deferred if the associated asynchronous +state contains a deferred function <del>that is not +running</del>.</p> +</li> +<li> +<p>In [futures.async] 30.6.9/3 second bullet:</p> +<p>[...] The first call to a function +<del>waiting</del><ins>requiring a non-timed wait</ins> for the +associated asynchronous state created by this async call to become +ready shall invoke the deferred function in the thread that called +the waiting function; <ins>once evaluation of <tt><i>INVOKE</i>(g, +xyz)</tt> begins, the function is no longer considered +deferred</ins> <del>all other calls waiting for the same associated +asynchronous state to become ready shall block until the deferred +function has completed</del>.</p> +</li> +</ol> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1519"></a>1519. bucketsize() const only for unordered set</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 23.7.1 [unord.map], 23.7.2 [unord.multimap], 23.7.4 [unord.multiset] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Nicolai Josuttis <b>Opened:</b> 2010-10-09 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-24</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#unord.map">issues</a> in [unord.map].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +While <tt>bucket_size()</tt> is const for <tt>unordered_set</tt>, for all other unordered containers it is not defined as +constant member function. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Post-Rapperswil +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p><i>The wording refers to N3126.</i></p> + +<ol> +<li>Change 23.7.1 Class template unordered_map [unord.map]/3, as indicated: +<blockquote><pre> namespace std { + template <class Key, + class T, + class Hash = hash<Key>, + class Pred = std::equal_to<Key>, + class Alloc = std::allocator<std::pair<const Key, T> > > + class unordered_map + { + public: + [..] + // bucket interface + size_type bucket_count() const; + size_type max_bucket_count() const; + size_type bucket_size(size_type n) <ins>const</ins>; + [..] +</pre></blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 23.7.2 Class template unordered_multimap [unord.multimap]/3, as indicated: +<blockquote><pre> namespace std { + template <class Key, + class T, + class Hash = hash<Key>, + class Pred = std::equal_to<Key>, + class Alloc = std::allocator<std::pair<const Key, T> > > + class unordered_multimap + { + public: + [..] + // bucket interface + size_type bucket_count() const; + size_type max_bucket_count() const; + size_type bucket_size(size_type n) <ins>const</ins>; + [..] +</pre></blockquote> +</li> +<li>Change 23.7.4 Class template unordered_multiset [unord.multiset]/3, as indicated: +<blockquote><pre> namespace std { + template <class Key, + class Hash = hash<Key>, + class Pred = std::equal_to<Key>, + class Alloc = std::allocator<Key> > + class unordered_multiset + { + public: + [..] + // bucket interface + size_type bucket_count() const; + size_type max_bucket_count() const; + size_type bucket_size(size_type n) <ins>const</ins>; + [..] +</pre></blockquote> +</li> +</ol> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1520"></a>1520. <tt>INVOKE</tt> on member data pointer with too many arguments</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8.2 [func.require] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2010-10-10 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-23</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#func.require">issues</a> in [func.require].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> + +<p> +20.8.2 [func.require] p1 says: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<p> +1 Define <tt><i>INVOKE</i>(f, t1, t2, ..., tN)</tt> as follows: +</p> + +<ul> +<li> +<tt>(t1.*f)(t2, ..., tN)</tt> when <tt>f</tt> is a pointer to a member function +of a class <tt>T</tt> and <tt>t1</tt> is an object of type <tt>T</tt> or a +reference to an object of type <tt>T</tt> or a reference to an object of a type +derived from <tt>T</tt>; +</li> +<li> +<tt>((*t1).*f)(t2, ..., tN)</tt> when <tt>f</tt> is a pointer to a member +function of a class <tt>T</tt> and <tt>t1</tt> is not one of the types described +in the previous item; +</li> +<li> +<tt>t1.*f</tt> when <tt>f</tt> is a pointer to member data of a class <tt>T</tt> +and <tt>t1</tt> is an object of type <tt>T</tt> or a reference to an object of +type <tt>T</tt> or a reference to an object of a type derived from <tt>T</tt>; +</li> +<li> +<tt>(*t1).*f</tt> when <tt>f</tt> is a pointer to member data of a class +<tt>T</tt> and <tt>t1</tt> is not one of the types described in the previous +item; +</li> +<li> +<tt>f(t1, t2, ..., tN)</tt> in all other cases. +</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + +<p> +The question is: What happens in the 3<sup><i>rd</i></sup> and +4<sup><i>th</i></sup> bullets when <tt>N > 1</tt>? +</p> + +<p> +Does the presence of <tt>t2, ..., tN</tt> get ignored, or does it make the +<tt><i>INVOKE</i></tt> ill formed? +</p> + +<p> +Here is sample code which presents the problem in a concrete example: +</p> + +<blockquote><pre>#include <functional> +#include <cassert> + +struct S { + char data; +}; + +typedef char S::*PMD; + +int main() +{ + S s; + PMD pmd = &S::data; + std::reference_wrapper<PMD> r(pmd); + r(s, 3.0) = 'a'; // well formed? + assert(s.data == 'a'); +} +</pre></blockquote> + +<p> +Without the "<tt>3.0</tt>" the example is well formed. +</p> +<p> +[Note: Daniel provided wording to make it explicit that the above example is ill-formed. — end note ] +</p> + +<p><i>[ +Post-Rapperswil +]</i></p> + + +<blockquote> +Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. +</blockquote> + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> + +<p><i>The wording refers to N3126.</i></p> + +<p> +Change 20.8.2 [func.require]/1 as indicated: +</p> +<blockquote> +<p> +1 Define <tt><i>INVOKE</i>(f, t1, t2, ..., tN)</tt> as follows: +</p> + +<ul> +<li> +... +</li> +<li> +... +</li> +<li> +<tt>t1.*f</tt> when <ins><tt>N == 1</tt> and</ins> <tt>f</tt> is a pointer to +member data of a class <tt>T</tt> and <tt>t1</tt> is an object of type +<tt>T</tt> or a reference to an object of type <tt>T</tt> or a reference to an +object of a type derived from <tt>T</tt>; +</li> +<li> +<tt>(*t1).*f</tt> when <ins><tt>N == 1</tt> and</ins> <tt>f</tt> is a pointer to +member data of a class <tt>T</tt> and <tt>t1</tt> is not one of the types +described in the previous item; +</li> +<li> +... +</li> +</ul> +</blockquote> + + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="1522"></a>1522. <tt>conj</tt> specification is now nonsense</h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 26.4.9 [cmplx.over] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#WP">WP</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> P.J. Plauger <b>Opened:</b> 2010-10-14 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-24</p> +<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#cmplx.over">issues</a> in [cmplx.over].</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#WP">WP</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +In Pittsburgh, we accepted the resolution of library issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1137">1137</a>, to add +a sentence 3 to [cmplx.over]: +</p> +<blockquote> +All the specified overloads shall have a return type which is the nested +<tt>value_type</tt> of the effectively cast arguments. +</blockquote> +<p> +This was already true for four of the six functions except <tt>conj</tt> and +<tt>proj</tt>. It is not completely unreasonable to make <tt>proj</tt> return +the real value only, but the IEC specification does call for an imaginary part +of -0 in some circumstances. The people who care about these distinctions really +care, and it <em>is</em> required by an international standard. +</p> +<p> +Making <tt>conj</tt> return just the real part breaks it horribly, however. It is +well understood in mathematics that <tt>conj(re + i*im)</tt> is <tt>(re - i*im)</tt>, +and it is widely used. The accepted new definition makes <tt>conj</tt> useful only +for pure real operations. This botch <em>absolutely must</em> be fixed. +</p> + +<p><i>[ +2010 Batavia: The working group concurred with the issue's Proposed Resolution +]</i></p> + + +<p><i>[ +Adopted at 2010-11 Batavia +]</i></p> + + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +<p> +Remove the recently added paragraph 3 from [cmplx.over]: +</p> +<blockquote> +<del>3 All the specified overloads shall have a return type which is the nested +<tt>value_type</tt> of the effectively cast arguments.</del> +</blockquote> + + + + + +<hr> +<h3><a name="2002"></a>2002. Class template <tt>match_results</tt> does not specify the semantics of <tt>operator==</tt></h3> +<p><b>Section:</b> 28.10.8 [re.results.nonmember] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> + <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Krügler <b>Opened:</b> 2010-10-24 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-26</p> +<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Resolved">Resolved</a> status.</p> +<p><b>Discussion:</b></p> +<p> +The <em>Returns</em> element of <tt>operator==</tt> says: +</p> + +<blockquote> +<tt>true</tt> only if the two objects refer to the same match +</blockquote> + +<p> +It is not really clear what this means: The current specification would allow for an +implementation to return <tt>true</tt>, only if the address values of <tt>m1</tt> and +<tt>m2</tt> are the same. While this approach is unproblematic in terms of used operations +this is also a bit unsatisfactory. With identity equality alone there seems to be no convincing +reason to provide this operator at all. It could for example also refer to an comparison based +on iterator values. In this case a user should better know that this will be done, because +there is no guarantee at all that inter-container comparison of iterators +is a feasible operation. This was a clear outcome of the resolution provided in +<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3066.html">N3066</a> +for LWG issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#446">446</a>. +It could also mean that a character-based comparison of the individual <tt>sub_match</tt> +elements should be done - this would be equivalent to applying <tt>operator==</tt> to +the subexpressions, prefix and suffix. +</p> + + + +<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p> +Addressed by paper <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3158.html">n3158</a>. + + + + + + + +</body></html>
\ No newline at end of file |